Question on redshift/expanding universe

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter gamblej
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the relationship between the relative velocity of distant galaxies and the expansion of the universe. It is established that the relative velocity is indeed a function of both time and distance, modeled in cosmology through a global expansion rate denoted as H(t). As the universe expands, H(t) has decreased rapidly in the past but is now approaching a constant value, resulting in galaxies moving away from each other at increasing speeds. This phenomenon explains the observed acceleration of the universe's expansion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of cosmological principles, specifically homogeneity and isotropy.
  • Familiarity with the concept of the Hubble parameter, H(t).
  • Basic knowledge of the expansion of the universe and redshift.
  • Awareness of the implications of cosmic distances on light travel time.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Hubble parameter and its role in cosmology.
  • Study the implications of redshift in relation to cosmic expansion.
  • Explore the concepts of homogeneity and isotropy in the universe.
  • Investigate the effects of dark energy on the acceleration of the universe's expansion.
USEFUL FOR

Astronomy enthusiasts, physics students, and anyone interested in understanding the dynamics of cosmic expansion and the behavior of distant galaxies.

gamblej
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am not a physicist so I was wondering if it is possible to explain the following question to a layman.

My information on this is subject to the whims of pop-sci journalists so if the answer will go over my head, that's OK. I'm still curious.

The further a galaxy is from us, the more distant back in time its light was sent. So those near the visible horizon of our universe that are truly hauling *** were hauling *** away from us 10 billion years ago. What about today? Couldn't a distant galaxy's relative velocity be a function of time rather than distance? How do cosmologists decouple these factors to arrive at the correct result (that our universe's expansion is accelerating)?

Thanks for any insight you can provide! :)
 
Space news on Phys.org
gamblej said:
I am not a physicist so I was wondering if it is possible to explain the following question to a layman.

My information on this is subject to the whims of pop-sci journalists so if the answer will go over my head, that's OK. I'm still curious.

The further a galaxy is from us, the more distant back in time its light was sent. So those near the visible horizon of our universe that are truly hauling *** were hauling *** away from us 10 billion years ago. What about today? Couldn't a distant galaxy's relative velocity be a function of time rather than distance? How do cosmologists decouple these factors to arrive at the correct result (that our universe's expansion is accelerating)?

Thanks for any insight you can provide! :)
Yes, the relative velocity is both a function of time and distance. The way we model this in cosmology is we consider the universe to be homogeneous (the same everywhere) and isotropic (the same in every direction). If the universe is the same everywhere, then we can define a global expansion rate that depends upon time: H(t). If we take any two objects in the universe separated by some distance d, their relative velocity will be, on average, H(t) * d.

Over time what has happened is that early on, H(t) decreased very very rapidly, so that objects were originally moving away from one another at very high speed, but slowed down. More recently, H(t) has been approaching a constant value. This means that objects are now moving away from one another faster and faster with time (if H(t) approaches a constant, then as objects get further away, H(t) * d becomes larger, which means they move faster).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K