Energy of photons and the red shift

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of redshift and its implications for photon energy as observed from different reference frames. An alien observer in a galaxy measures the frequency of light emitted from its center, while an Earth observer detects a redshifted frequency due to the galaxy's recession. This leads to the conclusion that the energy of photons appears to change based on the observer's frame of reference, raising questions about energy conservation. The conversation also touches on the cosmic background radiation and speculates on the fate of lost energy during redshift. Ultimately, the participants clarify that energy is conserved within consistent frames, even if its value differs between observers.
davidmroper
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Was just learning red shift for my A level final exam and thought about this:
Okay so I have a galaxy with a fixed amount of stars (for the duration of this thought experiment) producing a fixed power of light, which can be assumed to be from its centre. The galaxy is receding from the Earth at a given speed, and we on the Earth observe "red shift".
So, there's a little alien sitting on a planet on the edge of the galaxy, and he watches the light being produced, and records the frequency of light. We sit on Earth in an observatory, and record a "redder" frequency of light. SO, light leaves the galaxy, both observers disagree- which is fine of course, because they aren't observing under the same conditions, and since light is a wave, the observations are fine- the light has been red shifted, what's the problem?
So the Alien guy whips out his pocket gold leaf electroscope, charges up the plate, and shines the light from the centre of his galaxy on the metal plate- the gold leaf falls. The frequency of light from the galaxy is greater than the threshold frequency of the metal. Now we in the observatory, do the same. Our gold leaf doesn't fall- the light is red shifted, so the frequency is lower than the threshold frequency of the metal. Light is behaving as a PARTICLE, and hence, the energy of the particles must have changed spontaneously immediately after passing the alien physicist. So the energy of a photon is lower- in order for the power to remain the same, the number of photons must increase- and the photons must divide.

I assumed my reasoning for the last line there is wrong. So I went online and checked with some sites, and they talked about the idea of energy not being conserved in different reference frames - which doesn't really make sense to me at this moment in time. So any input would be appreciated :) The idea of the energy not being conserved, kind of made me ask where the hell does it go? The cosmic background radiation is red shifted, so would have lost a lot of its energy- where does that go? I was thinking that it might drive the expansion of the universe- you know, increasing its potential energy like a balloon expanding- but I don't really have enough physics knowledge (yet) to do anything more than speculate.

sorry for the long post- I've spent a day pondering when I should've been revising/ learning the course content :P

David.
 
Space news on Phys.org
davidmroper said:
So, there's a little alien sitting on a planet on the edge of the galaxy, ...

.. when couple of aliens he doesn't like fly past.

So the Alien guy whips out ...

.. a rifle and shoots them. The bullets leave the gun at 1000m/s. The first alien was traveling past at 100m/s and is killed. The second alien passed the shooter at 990m/s and is merely annoyed.

So I went online and checked with some sites, and they talked about the idea of energy not being conserved in different reference frames - which doesn't really make sense to me at this moment in time. So any input would be appreciated :)

I think you'll find they say the energy isn't the same in the two frames, just as the energy of the bullets, each fired at the same speed relative to the shooter, are not the same in the frames of the targets. In this example energy is conserved as long as you use anyone frame consistently. Conservation in the case of redshift is a harder topic ;-)
 
Ohhhhhhhhh...! I kinda get it now :) thanks
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top