Relativistic Effects on our Observations of the Universe

AI Thread Summary
Observations of celestial bodies like the Sun, Deneb, and the M87 galaxy reveal that the information we receive about them is significantly delayed due to the finite speed of light, with the Sun's state being 8.2 minutes old and Deneb's state 1.4k years old. This delay complicates the modeling of the universe, especially when comparing objects at different distances and times, as all electromagnetic radiation is time-delayed. The discussion raises questions about how to accurately compute and visualize these delays, particularly in relation to redshift effects. There is speculation about whether unobserved "newly created matter" could be linked to dark matter, but the feasibility of observing such effects remains uncertain. The conversation emphasizes the complexities of understanding the universe given these relativistic constraints.
Ralph Spencer
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
While observing the Sun, which is 8 light-minutes 12 light-seconds away from us. We (by visible and invisible spectrum of the electromagnetic radiation) observe its state 8.20 minutes ago. Special relativity forbids any information to travel at speeds greater than that of light. This should apply to the information that a mass exists at a particular distance, which is mediated by gravitons. Thus, by all means, the information about Sun that we have is 8.2 minutes old.

If we apply this to Deneb, a star 1.4k light-years away from Earth, its state at a time 1.4k years will we see. Then to the M87 galaxy - 55 ± 1 Mly - its state at a time 55 ± 1M years ago.

How do we model the universe at present (for computations) when we have information that is older further the body away from us? More importantly, how can we compare two objects at different times?
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Correct! EM radiation emitted by all objects in the universe are time delayed due to the finite speed of light. The computation process is, as you surmised, complicated - and further complicated by redshift.
 
The computation process is, as you surmised, complicated - and further complicated by redshift.

I would like to have a basic idea of the concept. What would be the error graph when approximate data is extrapolated to such large values?

Maybe I'm thinking far ahead of my current knowledge (which I would rate as beginner), however, if the newly created matter is not accounted in this model, by any chance could our mysterious dark matter be what is created but cannot be observed because of the time delay, which, I could expect to get answer to even in my thread about https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2854997" , which I could relate to motion of the spin-2 and massless gravitons in "certain" conditions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ralph Spencer said:
I would like to have a basic idea of the concept. What would be the error graph when approximate data is extrapolated to such large values?

Maybe I'm thinking far ahead of my current knowledge (which I would rate as beginner), however, if the newly created matter is not accounted in this model, by any chance could our mysterious dark matter be what is created but cannot be observed because of the time delay, which, I could expect to get answer to even in my thread about https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2854997" , which I could relate to motion of the spin-2 and massless gravitons in "certain" conditions.


Exactly what "newly created matter" are you referring to?.

Even if we accepted the idea of such matter springing from nothing, we wouldn't see the effect it has on other objects any sooner than we would see it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top