Relative velocity of Electromagnetic waves

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the relative velocity of a galaxy based on observed and source frequencies of electromagnetic waves emitted by oxygen atoms. The initial calculation yielded an incorrect answer of 3.3641 * 10^6 m/s, while the correct answer is 6.724 * 10^6 m/s. Participants point out a misunderstanding regarding the formula used, specifically the presence of a factor of 2 in the denominator. Clarifications indicate that the formula should not include this factor, and discrepancies in references to the formula are acknowledged. The conversation highlights the importance of accurate formula interpretation in astrophysical calculations.
Eng67
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I have a problem that I cannot get the correct answer.

An Astronomer observes electromagnetic waves emmitted by oxygen atoms in a distant galaxy that have a frequency of 5.71 *10^14 Hz. On earth, oxygen atoms emit waves that have a freq. of 5.841 *10^14. What is the relative velocity of the galaxy with respect to the astronomer on earth.

Vrel = [(F(observed) - F(Source))/(2*F(Source))] * c

Vrel = [(5.710*10^14 - 5.841*10^14)/(2*5.841*10^14)] * (3.00 *10^8)

answer = 3.3641 *10^6 m/s


What is wrong with my calculations?

The correct answer is 6.724 * 10^6 m/s

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Notice your answer is off by a factor of 1/2. Recheck the formula you used and you'll see there should be a 2 in the denominator.
 
By the way- your title, "Relative velocity of Electromagnetic waves", is very misleading! Obviously the velocity of electromagnetic waves (light) is, relative to anything, the speed of light, c. What you see different from another observer is the frequency which is what allows you to calculate the velocity of the source relative to you.
 
Vrel = [(F(observed) - F(Source))/(2*F(Source))] * c

This formula already has the 2 in the denominator. To get the correct answer, It would need to be 4*F(Source)?

I cannot find anything to support this.
 
Eng67 said:
Vrel = [(F(observed) - F(Source))/(2*F(Source))] * c
This formula already has the 2 in the denominator. To get the correct answer, It would need to be 4*F(Source)?
I cannot find anything to support this.
I mistyped, obviously I meant there shouldn't be a two in the denominator. Check your reference.
 
Thanks.

I finally found the correct reference for this formula. Many sources have this listed differently.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top