Quick question on CMB anisotropy in Earth frame

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter WannabeNewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cmb Earth Frame
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mean occupation number and specific intensity of Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) photons as observed from the Earth frame, particularly focusing on the implications of Lorentz transformations and Doppler shifts. Participants explore discrepancies in results from different sources regarding the expressions for the mean occupation number.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the mean occupation number and specific intensity of CMB photons using blackbody formulas and discusses their transformation into the Earth frame considering Lorentz boosts.
  • The participant notes a discrepancy between their derived expression for the mean occupation number and that presented in a referenced paper, questioning where the error might lie.
  • Another participant suggests that the expressions appear similar at a glance but emphasizes the importance of carefully noting the frame notation in the referenced materials.
  • A third participant recommends an article on the physics of the intergalactic medium, indicating it may be useful for further research.
  • A later reply acknowledges the notation difference that was initially overlooked, expressing gratitude for the clarification and sharing enthusiasm for the recommended articles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express confusion regarding the differences in notation and results from various sources, indicating that there is no consensus on the correct interpretation of the mean occupation number in the context of the CMB.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific pages from papers that may contain differing interpretations or formulations of the mean occupation number, highlighting potential limitations in understanding due to notation differences.

WannabeNewton
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
5,850
Reaction score
553
Hi guys. Consider the mean occupation number and specific intensity of the CMB photons in the CMB frame as given by the blackbody formulas: ##\eta = \frac{1}{e^{h\nu/k_{B}T_0} - 1}## and ##I_{\nu} =\frac{2h\nu^3}{e^{h\nu/k_{B}T_0} - 1}## with ##T_0## the thermal bath temperature in the CMB frame and ##c = 1##.

Now we consider the Earth as a Lorentz frame moving relative to the CMB frame with some velocity ##v## relative to the ##x##-axis of the CMB frame and a telescope in the Earth frame oriented at some angle ##\theta##. Note that the mean occupation number can be put in the frame-independent form ##\eta = \frac{1}{e^{-p_{\mu}u^{\mu}/k_{B}T_0} - 1}## where ##u^{\mu}## is the 4-velocity of the CMB frame and ##p^{\mu}## the 4-momentum of the photons.

In the Earth frame, ##u^{\mu} = \gamma(1,-v)## and ##p^{\mu} = h(\nu', -\nu' \cos\theta, -\nu' \sin\theta)## so ##\eta = \frac{1}{e^{\gamma h\nu'(1 - v\cos\theta )/k_{B}T_0} - 1} = \frac{1}{e^{h\nu'/k_{B}T} - 1} ## where ##T = T_0 \frac{\sqrt{1-v^2}}{1 - v\cos\theta}##. Then the specific intensity in this frame would be ##I_{\nu'} = \frac{2h\nu'^3}{e^{h\nu'/k_{B}T} - 1}##. Here ##\nu = \gamma \nu' (1 - v\cos\theta)## so ##\nu' = \frac{\sqrt{1 - v^2}}{1 - v\cos\theta}\nu## is the doppler shifted frequency in the Earth frame.

However, in p.16 of http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~jeremy/heap.pdf, one is given the result ##\eta = \frac{1}{e^{h\nu/k_{B}T} - 1}## instead (the paper's ##\hat{T}_{\text{CMB}}## is the ##T## above) so where did I go wrong?

On the other hand in p.20 of http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~proko101/JildouBaarsmaCMB.pdf, one is given ##\eta = \frac{1}{e^{|p'|/k_{B}T} - 1} = \frac{1}{e^{h\nu'/k_{B}T} - 1}## (the paper's ##T'## is the ##T## above) which seems to agree with what I have so I'm confused.

Thanks in advance.
 
Space news on Phys.org
WannabeNewton said:
However, in p.16 of http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~jeremy/heap.pdf, one is given the result ##\eta = \frac{1}{e^{h\nu/k_{B}T} - 1}## instead (the paper's ##\hat{T}_{\text{CMB}}## is the ##T## above)

At a quick glance, it looks the same to me. Note carefully the notation for the frames given in the paragraph immediately after 1.29.
 
you might want to also check out this handy article

"Physics of the intergalactic medium." I'm still studying it myself as its fairly intense lol. However you may find it useful for your research

http://arxiv.org/abs/0711.3358

by the way nice articles I'll be adding them to my collection to study myself
 
Last edited:
George Jones said:
At a quick glance, it looks the same to me. Note carefully the notation for the frames given in the paragraph immediately after 1.29.

Oh haha I totally missed the difference in notation for the frames. Well that's embarrassing. Thanks George!

Mordred said:
you might want to also check out this handy article

"Physics of the intergalactic medium." I'm still studying it myself as its fairly intense lol. However you may find it useful for your research

http://arxiv.org/abs/0711.3358

by the way nice articles I'll be adding them to my collection to study myself

Awesome, thanks Mordred!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K