How Is Redshift Calculated in Changing Epochs?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the rate of change of redshift (z) with respect to the present epoch (t0) using the relationship between redshift and the scale factor (a). The key equation presented is \(\frac{dz}{dt_{o}}=(1+z)H_{o}-H(z)\), which incorporates the Hubble parameter (H). Participants express confusion over the differentiation process and the role of time derivatives in the context of the Friedmann equation. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the relationship between the scale factor and redshift in cosmological calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Friedmann equation in cosmology
  • Familiarity with the Hubble parameter (H) and its significance
  • Basic knowledge of differentiation in calculus
  • Concept of scale factors in the context of cosmic expansion
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the redshift formula in cosmology
  • Learn about the relationship between scale factors and proper time intervals
  • Explore the implications of the Hubble parameter in cosmological models
  • Investigate advanced differentiation techniques applied to cosmological equations
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, and students studying cosmology who seek to deepen their understanding of redshift calculations and the dynamics of cosmic expansion.

ajclarke
Messages
34
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



The redshift of a galaxy is measured at the present epoch t0 and again at the infnitesimal future epoch t0 + δt0. Show that the rate of change of z with t0 is given by

\frac{dz}{dt_{o}}=(1+z)H_{o}-H(z)

Homework Equations



Hint - Start From:

\frac{\delta z}{\delta t_{o}}=\frac{\delta z}{\delta t_{o}}+\frac{\delta z}{\delta t}\frac{dt}{dt_{o}}

The Attempt at a Solution



Haven't a clue tbh. Don't even know where to begin :/
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How does redshift depend on the expansion parameter?
 
[PLAIN]http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/8478/screenshot20110130at114.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's the Friedmann equation, written in terms of the redshift using the fundamental relationship

z(t) = \frac{a(t_0)}{a(t)} -1.

This is the formula you need to derive the relationship in your OP.
 
I think I'm being dense here

z(t)=\frac{a(t_{0})}{a(t)}-1= \frac{H_{o}}{H(z)}-1

\frac{\delta z}{\delta t_{o}}= \frac{\delta}{\delta t_{o}}(\frac{H_{o}}{H(z)}-1)\frac{\delta}{\delta t}= \frac{\delta}{\delta t}(\frac{H_{o}}{H(z)}-1)

\frac{dt}{dt_{o}}

However there is no time involved in them. Ho and H(t) are just constants. I understand the principle that they are specific to time but I don't understand how to perform the differentiation to get the answer
 
Last edited:
The Hubble parameter is

H(t) = \frac{\dot{a}(t)}{a(t)},

so the RHS of your 1st line is incorrect. In your problem the time derivatives act on the scale factors. You only rewrite it in terms of H(z) as a last step.
 
That terminology has confused me somewhat. The \dot{a} is the scale factor at some unknown time and a alone is the scale factor at the present epoch?

Or the other way around?

I'll have a tinker. I still feel a bit lost. Maybe writing some stuff down will help me out some

Thanks =]
 
No, the dot means derivative. So

\dot{a}(t) = \frac{da(t)}{dt},

while

\dot{a}(t_0) = \frac{da(t_0)}{dt_0}.
 
So far I have:

z(t)=\frac{a(t_{o})}{a(t)}-1 = \frac{1}{a(t)}-1

Since a(to)=1 by definition,

Thus:

\frac{\delta z}{\delta t_{o}} = 0

\frac{\delta z}{\delta t}=-a(t)^-2

\frac{dt}{dt_{o}}

And now I am at another brick wall.
 
  • #10
ajclarke said:
So far I have:

z(t)=\frac{a(t_{o})}{a(t)}-1 = \frac{1}{a(t)}-1

Since a(to)=1 by definition,

You shouldn't try to set a(t_0)=1 when you're going to be varying things with respect to t_0.

Thus:

\frac{\delta z}{\delta t_{o}} = 0

\frac{\delta z}{\delta t}=-a(t)^-2

\frac{dt}{dt_{o}}

And now I am at another brick wall.

To compute dt/dt_0 you might go back to the derivation of the redshift formula to see how the proper time interval depends on the scale factor.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
9K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K