We can define the relationship between ##z## and ##a(t_e)## as,(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

$$1+z=\frac {a(t_0)=1} {a(t_e)}$$

When we assume ##z=2##, it means that ##a(t_e)=\frac {1} {3}##

Is this means that universe was ##\frac {1} {3}## times smaller then now ?

If its the case then lets suppose ##z=6## which means universe was ##\frac {1} {7}## times smaller, but even in this case it doesnt seem a huge difference between ##z=2## and ##z=6##. But I think there should be a lot of difference.

I am not sure what am I missing.

Thanks

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Redshift and Scale factor

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads for Redshift Scale factor | Date |
---|---|

I Best way to filter NED redshift data | Oct 5, 2017 |

Cosmological Redshift distance to where it begins? | Mar 26, 2017 |

B Cosmological redshift | Mar 11, 2017 |

I Scale factor/redshift formula wrong at the end? | Jul 19, 2016 |

Maximum redshift - can it move light off the scale? | Dec 19, 2010 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**