Night skies in a contracting universe, would they look blue?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Gerinski
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the hypothetical scenario of a contracting universe and its implications for the appearance of night skies, particularly focusing on the blueshift of cosmological sources and the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). Participants examine the conditions under which the CMBR might appear differently and the effects of contraction on the visibility of distant objects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Debate/contested, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that in a contracting universe, cosmological sources would appear blueshifted, potentially leading to night skies that look blue or even ultraviolet, with the possibility of deadly radiation like X or gamma rays.
  • Others argue that if the universe had been contracting all along, the CMB would not exist, as it was emitted when the universe was hot and dense, suggesting that contraction must have been a recent phenomenon.
  • A participant questions the timeline of contraction, suggesting that it could have started billions of years ago, allowing for the formation of Earth.
  • There is a correction regarding the terminology of temperature units, emphasizing that "Kelvin" is the correct term without degrees.
  • Some participants clarify that the blueshift of the CMBR would not be observed until the contracting universe reaches a scale factor equal to or less than when the CMBR was emitted.
  • It is noted that only objects closer than a certain distance would be blueshifted, while more distant objects would remain redshifted.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the implications of the scale factor on the observation of blueshifting, seeking clarification on the relationship between contraction and the visibility of the CMBR.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express multiple competing views regarding the nature of the universe's contraction and its effects on the CMBR and the appearance of night skies. There is no consensus on the specifics of how contraction would influence observations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about the timeline of contraction, the dependence on the scale factor, and the implications of the CMBR's existence in a contracting universe. These aspects remain unresolved within the discussion.

Gerinski
Messages
322
Reaction score
15
We live in an expanding universe (at least in our epoch) so radiating sources in the cosmos look redshifted, the more the farther they are from us, with the limit being the CMBR which is redshifted to 3ºK when it was actually around 3000ºK when emitted.

Were we to live in a contracting universe, the cosmological sources would look blueshifted, with the limit being the CMBR with the highest blueshift. Does that mean the night skies would look blue, or even ultraviolet or even more, actually being deadly radiation such as X or gamma rays?

And in a related note, what would have to be the expansion or contraction rate at which the red / blueshifting would be actually zero, so we would see every cosmic source with its true frequency and the CMBR (the night skies) would look glowing with their actual 3000ºK colour as when it was emitted?
 
Space news on Phys.org
If the universe had been contracting all along, then there wouldn't be any CMB at all: the CMB was emitted when the plasma in the early universe cooled to become a transparent gas.

The only way contraction makes sense is if it was a recent thing. The universe would still have been expanding for most of its history. So the CMB would still be cold, and very far-away objects would still have high redshifts. It would only be the relatively nearby objects which emitted their light since the contraction began that would be blueshifted. Exactly how that blueshift changes with distance would depend upon how quickly the contraction accelerated.

In the far future, the CMB would become hot again, which would destroy all life everywhere.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis
Thanks. Yes of course I meant that such hypothetical contraction would have to have started at an age of the universe so that Earth could have still have formed to its present state, but I presume that Earth could have still formed even if the start of contraction happened a few billion years ago (just guessing).
 
Gerinski said:
3ºK
First off, there is no unit which is "degrees Kelvin", the unit is "Kelvin".

Gerinski said:
Were we to live in a contracting universe, the cosmological sources would look blueshifted, with the limit being the CMBR with the highest blueshift. Does that mean the night skies would look blue, or even ultraviolet or even more, actually being deadly radiation such as X or gamma rays?
There would be no CMBR. The CMBR originated in a time when the universe was hot and dense. If it contracted to a habitable state, it would not have been hot and dense earlier.

Gerinski said:
And in a related note, what would have to be the expansion or contraction rate at which the red / blueshifting would be actually zero, so we would see every cosmic source with its true frequency and the CMBR (the night skies) would look glowing with their actual 3000ºK colour as when it was emitted?
If you are talking about a universe that first expands and then contracts, the shift is not dependent on the expansion rate directly. It is proportional to the ratio of the scale factor of the universe now and the scale factor when the light was emitted.
 
Orodruin said:
If you are talking about a universe that first expands and then contracts, the shift is not dependent on the expansion rate directly. It is proportional to the ratio of the scale factor of the universe now and the scale factor when the light was emitted.
Thanks Orodruin. I'm afraid I do not understand fully. Do you mean that as long as the scale factor between present and the CMBR emission time was >0, we would not observe any CMBR blueshifting? So that in practice blueshifting of the CMBR would not be observed until the size of the contracting universe would be the same or less as when the CMBR was emitted? Sorry not sure if that's what you meant, thank you in advance for clarifying.
 
Gerinski said:
I'm afraid I do not understand fully. Do you mean that as long as the scale factor between present and the CMBR emission time was >0, we would not observe any CMBR blueshifting?
> 1. Otherwise correct.

Gerinski said:
So that in practice blueshifting of the CMBR would not be observed until the size of the contracting universe would be the same or less as when the CMBR was emitted?
Right.
 
If the universe had contracted in the past, only objects nearer than the turnaround age would be blueshifted. The really far away stuff would remain redshifted.
 
Chronos said:
If the universe had contracted in the past, only objects nearer than the turnaround age would be blueshifted. The really far away stuff would remain redshifted.
A bit further than that: nearer than when the scale factor was the same as it is now.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Orodruin
I assume we agree the universe would look very different than it does.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K