Undergrad Observed Redshift from Moving Source: Deriving the Result

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the derivation of observed redshift from a receding galaxy, emphasizing the relationship between peculiar motion and cosmological redshift. It highlights the need to understand the four-velocities of both the galaxy and the observer on Earth, with the equation for observed frequency being contingent on these velocities. The conversation also touches on the conservation of energy along the photon's path and the implications of static versus FRW spacetime on redshift calculations. Participants explore the mathematical framework necessary to derive the redshift formula, referencing specific equations and constraints. Overall, the thread delves into the complexities of redshift in the context of general relativity and cosmology.
ergospherical
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,100
Reaction score
1,387
If a galaxy is receding from us, then the 1+redshift observed on Earth is the product ##(1+z_{pec})(1+z_{cosm})## of the doppler redshift due to the peculiar motion of the galaxy and the cosmological redshift due to the FRW metric. It makes sense if we think about some intermediate observers (e.g. someone stationary w.r.t. hubble flow but at the same position instantaneously as the emitting galaxy, who measures the doppler part only). Could someone show me how to derive the result from the general definitions? i.e. the galaxy has some 4-velocity ##u_{gal} = (u_{gal}^t, u_{gal}^r, 0,0)##, and an observer attached to the galaxy measures\begin{align*}
\omega_{em} = u_{gal} \cdot p = u_{gal}^t p^t - \frac{a^2}{1-Kr^2} u_{gal}^r p^r
\end{align*}where ##p## is the photon 4-momn. And the earth observer measures ##\omega_{obs} = u_{earth}^t p^t##. The constraints are that both 4-velocities are normalised to ##u \cdot u = 1##, and ##p^t = E## is conserved along the photon's path. That isn't enough constraits to derive the result, I think?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
All we can observe in GR is expressed by local invariant quantities. Indeed the observed frequency of an electromagnetic wave is ##\omega=u \cdot k##, where ##u## is the four-velocity of the observer and ##k## the wave-four-vector of the em. wave. For more about electrodynamics in GR, see

https://itp.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/pf-faq/gr-edyn.pdf
 
ergospherical said:
##p^t = E## is conserved along the photon's path.
Are you sure? Remember cosmological redshift.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and vanhees71
In a static spacetime, i.e., if there are coordinates, for which the ##g_{\mu \nu}## are independent of the time coordinate, then ##p_t## is conserved along the "photon's" path.

Take Schwarzschild spacetime,
$$L=\frac{1}{2} [(1-2m/r) \dot{t}^2 - (1-2m/r)^{-1} \dot{r}^2 - r^2 (\dot{\vartheta}^2+\sin^2 \vartheta \dot{\varphi}^2).$$
For an observer "at rest", observing light from a source "at rest", indeed all you need to know is that
$$p_t=\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{t}}=(1-2m/r) \dot{t}.$$
From this you get
The four-velocity of the observer at rest is
$$u_{\text{obs}}^{\mu}=(1-2m/r_{\text{obs}})^{-1/2}(1,0,0,0).$$
Then
$$\omega_{\text{obs}}=p_t u_{\text{obs}}^t=p_t (1-2m/r_{\text{obs}})^{-1/2}.$$
For the frequency at the source you get
$$\omega_{\text{source}}=p_t u_{\text{source}}^t=(1-2m/r_{\text{source}})^{-1/2},$$
i.e.,
$$\omega_{\text{obs}}=\sqrt{\frac{1-2m/r_{\text{source}}}{1-2m/r_{\text{obs}}}} \omega_{\text{source}},$$
which describes (for ##r_{\text{source}}<r_{\text{obs}}##) the gravitational redshift.
 
vanhees71 said:
In a static spacetime
Which FRW spacetime is not.
 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K