How to measure the tangential component of velocity of receding starsor quasars?

AI Thread Summary
Measuring the tangential component of velocity for receding stars or quasars is challenging. The redshift observed primarily indicates the radial component of velocity. For stars, proper motion can be assessed through methods like comparing images from different times or using high-resolution interferometry. However, measuring the tangential velocity of quasars is currently deemed virtually impossible due to their significant distances. Accurate measurement techniques remain limited for distant celestial objects.
aniketp
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Hi all,
How to measure the tangential component of velocity of receding starsor quasars?
I ask this because i think the velocity determined by observing the red shift will give only the radial component...won't
Thnx for replying...
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
You can't.
 
For stars their proper motion (not just radial) can be measured a few ways. If they move fast enough, comparing images from different epochs and looking for a change in position works. Interferometry, if high enough resolution, can also be used to measure the proper motion of stars. As for Quasars, I would say with current technology it's virtually impossible as they are much much too far away.
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
How does light maintain enough energy in the visible part of the spectrum for the naked eye to see in the night sky. Also, how did it start of in the visible frequency part of the spectrum. Was it, for example, photons being ejected at that frequency after high energy particle interaction. Or does the light become visible (spectrum) after hitting our atmosphere or space dust or something? EDIT: Actually I just thought. Maybe the EM starts off as very high energy (outside the visible...
Back
Top