How Does Space Expansion Affect the Velocity of Galaxies?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the effects of space expansion on galaxy velocities, specifically addressing the Milky Way (MW), galaxy A, and galaxy D. Participants clarify that the expansion of space does not imply galaxies are moving through space at speeds greater than light, but rather that the rate of expansion is characterized by the Hubble constant. The conversation emphasizes that recession velocity increases with distance, governed by Hubble's law, and that General Relativity (GR) adequately explains the dynamics of cosmic expansion and dark energy without necessitating modifications to the theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of General Relativity (GR)
  • Familiarity with Hubble's Law and the Hubble constant
  • Knowledge of cosmological concepts such as redshift and recession velocity
  • Basic grasp of the Friedmann equations and their implications
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Hubble's Law: Vrec = H0d
  • Explore the Friedmann equations and their solutions in cosmology
  • Investigate the role of dark energy in cosmic expansion and its relation to GR
  • Examine the cosmological constant and its significance in modern physics
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, and students of cosmology seeking to deepen their understanding of galaxy dynamics and the expansion of the universe.

  • #61
Ibix said:
so I'd be very suspicious of a blanket figure like that.
We can at least see if it's in the ballpark. The sun's disk is 7 x 10-5 steradians. Or 10-5 of the sky. It's 2000x hotter than the CMBR so it puts out 2000x as much energy per unit frequency per unit area, or in total 2%.

You definitely can see the sun in static, by looking at day vs. night. I don't think it's a factor of 2 - maybe 1.5, but I'm just spitballing. I am going to call it a factor of 2. And that takes our 2% down to 1%.

So it's not a crazy number. My estimate/guess is that it's a little high but not crazy high.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Ibix
Space news on Phys.org
  • #62
Boy did I goof. The CMBR actually carries more energy than the sun: 50x as much, not 1/50 as much.

Therefore the day-night effect on static is not due directly to the sun. It's got to be the ionosphere, either directly, or indirectly (e.g. RF signals from far away lightning or other TV stations/multipath).

I now wonder if the 1% is an underestimate. At 1% that means there is a source 5000x brighter than the sun in RF that isn't the CMBR. And it has to be very, very cold (about 1K).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #63
Delta2 said:
Ehm guys I don't have the background to fully grasp your replies but are you saying that GR even explains dark energy?
GR is a set of constraints. There are many states of the Universe that are consistent with these constraints. If your theory doesn't meet these constraints then doubt is darkly cast upon it. If your thesis does meet these constraints that's nice, but doesn't give any evidence that your idea is correct.

It appears to me they are saying that dark energy is consistent with GR.
 
  • #64
Vanadium 50 said:
What is this "static" of which you speak?
That I know not. But I heard tell of the mythical 'teevos' roaming the land in the days long past, when phones were rotary and news were made of paper. It was said that a teevo, if left to its own devices, would speak in 'static' to the befuddlement of onlookers.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50
  • #65
Something is confusing me

Bob is on Earth and Alice is one of those galaxies at the edge of the observable universe which is C or greater than C (post 13)

What does that do to their respective clocks?

You plug velocities in the time dilation equation at or above C and things get strange.
I am getting something wrong here- not sure what it it
 
  • #66
pinball1970 said:
You plug velocities in the time dilation equation at or above C and things get strange.
I am getting something wrong here- not sure what it it
You cannot use the time dilation formula from special relativity. The description of the expanding universe requires general relativity.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and pinball1970

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K