I Does expanding space cause cosmological redshift?

p78653
Messages
6
Reaction score
2
The cosmological redshift is generally assumed to be due to space expansion.

But if spacetime is locally flat Minkowskian then surely photon wavelength should not change?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
p78653 said:
The cosmological redshift is generally assumed to be due to space expansion.
No, it isn't "assumed" to be due to anything. It is calculated to be due to the spacetime geometry of the universe and the relationship of the worldlines of light rays to the worldlines of comoving observers.

p78653 said:
if spacetime is locally flat Minkowskian then surely photon wavelength should not change?
No, this is not correct. There is no such thing as "photon wavelength" independent of a particular observer measuring the photon, or more precisely "light ray" (since we are not talking about quantum physics here and "photon" is a quantum concept).
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron and PeroK
p78653 said:
But if spacetime is locally flat Minkowskian then surely photon wavelength should not change?
This statement is analogous to the claim that because the surface of the Earth is locally flat Euclidean great circle paths can't cross again. The key point is that "locally flat" is an approximation that is only exactly true over a region of zero size. Actually, curvature is negligible over a small region, but never totally absent.

In an ideal FLRW universe you and I could independently verify that we each see the CMB as isotropic. If we were megaparsecs apart then as soon as we could see each other we would be able to see redshift in each other. But if we were only a meter apart our redshift would be something like ##10^{-18}## - unmeasurably small. It'd be 140 million years before we were 1cm further apart (assuming us being over-dense can be neglected - in fact our gravitational attraction would overwhelm our expansion velocity on a timescale of fractions of a microsecond). It would be totally fine to ignore cosmological curvature over human time scales. Just as you don't bother accounting for the curvature of the Earth when you tile a floor, but you need to worry about it when planning a city.
 
  • Like
Likes cianfa72, Klystron and Vanadium 50
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top