How does the cosmic background radiation help us measure expansion in cosmology?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter thetexan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cosmic background
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the role of cosmic background radiation (CMB) in measuring the expansion of the universe, exploring concepts related to redshift, the analogy of cosmic expansion, and the implications of these measurements in cosmology.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the CMB does not expand, providing a reference for measuring observed expansion.
  • Another participant counters that the CMB has already been significantly redshifted due to expansion, and its redshift continues to increase, albeit slowly over short timescales.
  • A different viewpoint explains that CMB photons are redshifted like other photons, and the CMB serves as a 'rest' frame for measuring the velocities of other celestial bodies by comparing their redshifts to that of the CMB.
  • One participant uses a raisin bread analogy to describe the expansion rate, suggesting that the distance represented by redshift may change over time due to the universe's expansion dynamics.
  • Another participant argues that a specific redshift value should consistently represent a fixed distance, referencing the current redshift of the CMB and its implications for distances in the universe.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of redshift and the role of the CMB in measuring cosmic expansion. There is no consensus on whether redshift values will represent different distances in the future or how the CMB should be interpreted in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of measuring distances and velocities in an expanding universe, with some assumptions about the constancy of redshift values and the implications of cosmic expansion remaining unresolved.

thetexan
Messages
269
Reaction score
13
I have embarked in trying to really do my homework and understand cosmology.
From what I understand one of the ways that we can measure expansion is the the cosmic background radiation doesn't expand thereby providing something to compare observed expansion to.

Have I got that wrong?

tex
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
thetexan said:
Have I got that wrong?

I think so. The CMB has already been redshifted enormously and is becoming more and more redshifted as we speak. It's just that the rate of expansion is low enough that we don't see a change in the redshift of anything, including the CMB, over the timescale of a century.

When we measure redshift, we compare the emission/absorption lines in the spectrum of the object to a non-redshifted source.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Fervent Freyja
Cosmic backround [CMB] photons are affected by expansion just like all other photons emitted by distant objects - it is diluted [redshifted] by expansion. The CMB is used as the 'rest' frame of the universe, as a matter of convenience. By measuring the redshift of photons emitted by various bodies scattered across the heavens and deducting the redshift of CMB photons from those same region of the sky, we can derive the apparent velocity of those bodies with respect to the CMB. Since the CMB has virtually the same redshift in every direction [except for a slight difference bow to stern in the direction the solar system travels through space] this method of comparison is very convenient.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Fervent Freyja
I must not be making myself clear I think...

Using the raisin bread loaf analogy...The expansion rate is the rate at which the raisins are getting farther apart. There will be a certain rate per a certain distance, say 1/2 inch per hour between two raisins 2 inches apart at the start while baking in the oven. In other words 1st hour 1/2 inch, 2nd hour another 1/2 inch (at the same starting distance). An accelerating rate would mean 1/2 inch 1st hour then 3/4 inch the second hour and so on for raisins at the same beginning distance.

In the real world, whatever constant is being used now to determine that a galaxy redshifted by 100 units represents a distance of 1000 distance units, will mean that in the future a redshift of 100 units will represent a different distance??

Maybe redshift doesn't factor in. 100 units of redshift will always represent a certain distance due to the speed of light constant. Galaxy X will accelerate (apparently) from us due to even constant expansion because of the raisin effect...the farther the galaxy the faster it moves away. But in an accelerating expansion that acceleration is accelerating? In other words ACTUAL additional acceleration on top of the APPARENT acceleration.

This year a galaxy at 13 billion light years distance will be moving away from us at 100 units of speed. Next year a galaxy at 13 billion light years distance will be moving away from us at 110 units of speed.
The year after that a galaxy at 13 billion lys will be moving away from us at 125 units of speed.

is that correct?

tex
 
Last edited:
thetexan said:
In the real world, whatever constant is being used now to determine that a galaxy redshifted by 100 units represents a distance of 1000 distance units, will mean that in the future a redshift of 100 units will represent a different distance??

Not as far as I understand it. It should still represent a distance of 1000 units. The CMB is currently redshifted by a factor of 1,092, meaning that the distance between ourselves and the surface of last scattering has also increased by a factor or 1,092. Given the distance to the surface of last scattering is currently around 46 billion light-years, that puts the distance to this surface, at the time the photons were emitted, at about 42 million light-years.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K