How is the redshift of gravitational wave events measured?

AI Thread Summary
LIGO reported a redshift of 0.6 < z < 1.3 for a gravitational wave event, but no electromagnetic radiation event was associated with it. The redshift determination relies on accurately measuring the pre-merger, chirp, and ring-down frequencies, alongside knowing the emitted frequency. The broad range of redshifts and masses is due to the degeneracy between redshift and black hole masses, making precise measurements challenging. A study by Messenger et al. discusses methods for determining redshift in gravitational waves, highlighting the limitations of current models. Independent redshift measurements could significantly enhance the accuracy of mass estimates for black holes involved in mergers.
Jorrie
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,255
Reaction score
143
LIGO reported the announced event with a redshift of 0.6 < z < 1.3. With no em radiation event reported
(AFAIK), does anyone know how they have determined the redshift?
I understand how they could measure the pre-merger, chirp and ring-down frequencies with good accuracy. In order to determine redshift one must also know the emitted frequency. What methods are available for GWs?

PS: I have found one paper so far (2014, Messenger et. al): http://journals.aps.org/prx/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevX.4.041004
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
This is in Section VI of their paper. PRL 116, 061102 (2016)
 
You may have noticed that the range of redshifts is really broad. Same with the range of masses. This is because the redshift is pretty highly degenerate with the masses of the two black holes. But it isn't perfectly degenerate.

Basically they slapped the whole model together and fit it to observations, and showed that the observations only fit within a limited range of redshift and mass.

If we had an independent measurement of the redshift of the merger, the mass could probably have been nailed down to much greater accuracy.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?
Back
Top