Luminosity Distance: Finding the Connection

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Apashanka
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Luminosity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between luminosity distance and flux in cosmology, particularly in the context of light emitted from galaxies and its observation at different times. Participants explore equations relating to comoving distances, scale factors, and redshift, while seeking to clarify how these concepts interconnect.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants present equations relating emitted flux and observed flux, questioning how to derive luminosity distance from these relationships.
  • Others suggest that the relative scale factor between emission and observation is sufficient to understand the redshift and luminosity distance.
  • There is a discussion about the notation used for flux and whether it accurately represents the comoving frame.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the validity of the relationships between different distances and fluxes, particularly in relation to uniform photon gases versus light from individual galaxies.
  • Questions are raised about the scale factors at emission and observation, and how they relate to the definitions of redshift.
  • Participants discuss the need for integrals over expansion when computing luminosity distance, indicating the complexity of the relationships involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the relationships between the various distances and fluxes. Multiple competing views remain, particularly regarding the treatment of emitted versus observed flux and the implications for calculating luminosity distance.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the uniformity of photon gases and the specific conditions under which the equations apply. Some mathematical steps and definitions remain unresolved, contributing to the ongoing uncertainty.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying cosmology, particularly in understanding the complexities of distance measures and flux in the context of expanding universe models.

Apashanka
Messages
427
Reaction score
15
If photons are emmitted from a galaxy A at te to galaxy B (receives at present time a=1,t0) ,x being the comoving distance ,and current distance be dL
L(t0)=a(te)2L(te)
Flux(Φ0)=a(te)2L(te)/4πdL2
In comoving frame ∅=L(te)/4πx2
Is there any way to relate Φ and ∅ to find the luminousity distance dL??
 
Space news on Phys.org
kimbyd said:
Wikipedia has a good page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distance_measures_(cosmology)

I don't think you need to do anything special in the above case. The relative scale factor between the emission and observation is sufficient (this gives you the redshift).
My question is how to find the luminousity distance from the above two equations by relating them.
 
Last edited:
Apashanka said:
If photons are emmitted from a galaxy A at te to galaxy B (receives at present time a=1,t0) ,x being the comoving distance ,and current distance be dL
L(t0)=a(te)2L(te)
Flux(Φ0)=a(te)2L(te)/4πdL2
In comoving frame ∅=L(te)/4πx2
Is there any way to relate Φ and ∅ to find the luminousity distance dL??
Or the other way if ne be the no. density of photons at te then flux will be
Φ(te)=necE(te),
Φ(to)=noca(te)E(te)
where no is the no. density of photons at the observed time.=nea(te)3/a(t0)3
c is the speed of light.(constt. throughout the expansion)

Φ(te) is the same as in the comoving coordinate =∅ .
If a(to)=1(present time)
then Φ(to)=a(te)4necE(te)
,Φ(to)=a(te)4∅Is this the way that they are related ??,if so then from the quoted part above dL can be calculated which is dL=x/a(te)??
 
Last edited:
@Apashanka you have already been given a good answer and a reference by @kimbyd. You need to read the article linked to and then ask further questions if you are having trouble with something in that article, or you need to address questions specifically to what @kimbyd said in post #2 (pay particular attention to the last paragraph).
 
PeterDonis said:
@Apashanka you have already been given a good answer and a reference by @kimbyd. You need to read the article linked to and then ask further questions if you are having trouble with something in that article, or you need to address questions specifically to what @kimbyd said in post #2 (pay particular attention to the last paragraph).
Actually what I mean to say is that is the formula relating Φ(to) and ∅ valid so that dL comes out to be x/a(te) ??
As in the Wikipedia page @kimbyd has provided dL vs dA is given ,dL alone is not given as function of z
 
Apashanka said:
Actually what I mean to say is that is the formula relating Φ(to) and ∅ valid so that dL comes out to be x/a(te) ??
As in the Wikipedia page @kimbyd has provided dL vs dA is given ,dL alone is not given as function of z
What's the scale factor at emission?
What's the scale factor at observation?

That's all you need. That and the definition of redshift: ##z + 1 = 1/a##.
 
kimbyd said:
What's the scale factor at emission?
What's the scale factor at observation?

That's all you need. That and the definition of redshift: ##z + 1 = 1/a##.
Yes.
Is relation between Φ(to) and ∅ correct.??
Is so then dL will be x(1+z)
 
Apashanka said:
Yes.
Is relation between Φ(to) and ∅ correct.??
Is so then dL will be x(1+z)
It's hard for me to say because I'm a little unsure of your notation. But I think you're getting closer at least.
 
  • #10
kimbyd said:
It's hard for me to say because I'm a little unsure of your notation. But I think you're getting closer at least.
The arguments are this which I gave
Apashanka said:
Or the other way if ne be the no. density of photons at te then flux will be
Φ(te)=necE(te),
Φ(to)=noca(te)E(te)
where no is the no. density of photons at the observed time.=nea(te)3/a(t0)3
c is the speed of light.(constt. throughout the expansion)

Φ(te) is the same as in the comoving coordinate =∅ .
If a(to)=1(present time)
then Φ(to)=a(te)4necE(te)
,Φ(to)=a(te)4∅Is this the way that they are related ??,if so then from the quoted part above dL can be calculated which is dL=x/a(te)??
 
  • #11
Apashanka said:
The arguments are this which I gave
I'm still not sure what you mean by ∅. Usually this character refers to the empty set.

Is this supposed to refer to the comoving distance from us to the galaxy where the signal is observed?
 
  • #12
kimbyd said:
I'm still not sure what you mean by ∅. Usually this character refers to the empty set.

Is this supposed to refer to the comoving distance from us to the galaxy where the signal is observed?
No ∅ is the flux received by the observer in the co-moving frame.
If Φ(te) be the emmited flux at te by the emmiter ,observer in the comoving frame will receive the same , that's why Φ(te)=∅

I have mentioned this in post #10
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Apashanka said:
No ∅ is the flux received by the observer in the co-moving frame.
If Φ(te) be the emmited flux at te by the emmiter ,observer in the comoving frame will receive the same , that's why Φ(te)=∅

I have mentioned this in post #10
Okay. I read your statement as this was the co-moving coordinate.

Generally the emitted flux and observed flux are wildly different, but I think it's okay if you're talking about a uniform photon gas. In which case yes, the flux falls off as ##1/a^4## as time increases.

But it sounds like you're not referring to a uniform photon gas here (as in the CMB), but rather one galaxy's emitted light. In which case you have to take into account how much space the light spreads out into. This is why when computing the luminosity distance, an integral over the expansion is required.
 
  • #14
kimbyd said:
Okay. I read your statement as this was the co-moving coordinate.

Generally the emitted flux and observed flux are wildly different, but I think it's okay if you're talking about a uniform photon gas. In which case yes, the flux falls off as ##1/a^4## as time increases.

But it sounds like you're not referring to a uniform photon gas here (as in the CMB), but rather one galaxy's emitted light. In which case you have to take into account how much space the light spreads out into. This is why when computing the luminosity distance, an integral over the expansion is required.
Okay thanks
But sir will the relation between Φ(to) and ∅ remains same for uniform photon gas and for the case of light emmited from galaxy,??
 
  • #15
kimbyd said:
In which case you have to take into account how much space the light spreads out into. This is why when computing the luminosity distance, an integral over the expansion is required.
Will you give some suggestion regarding this
 
  • #16
One simple question ,the angular diameter distance dA=xa, and luminosity distance is dL=x/a(te),te is the emmision time.
For dL=(1+z)2dA ,whether a in the dA is a(te)??
x is the comoving distance.
z being the redshift corresponding to emmision time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
Replies
116
Views
25K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K