Speed of Light Affecting Objects' Appearances?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effects of light travel time on the appearance of distant astronomical objects, specifically focusing on the Sombrero galaxy and the Sun. Participants explore how the speed of light and the relative motion of these objects might influence their observed shapes and positions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the time difference in light travel from different parts of a galaxy could affect its observed shape, questioning why this does not lead to visible distortion.
  • Others argue that for significant distortion to occur, the relative motion of different parts of the galaxy would need to be a substantial fraction of the speed of light, which is typically not the case for most astronomical objects.
  • A later reply suggests that overall motion towards or away from the observer would have little effect on shape, as accurate relative distances within a galaxy are difficult to determine.
  • One participant introduces the idea that sideways motion of a galaxy could lead to observable lag in the appearance of its edges, proposing a calculation to illustrate this effect.
  • Another participant discusses the Sun, calculating that light from the edge takes longer to reach us than light from the center, leading to a slight positional lag of sunspots, though not a change in shape.
  • Concerns are raised about the detectability of such effects, particularly in distant galaxies where redshift might play a role.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the influence of light travel time and relative motion on the appearance of astronomical objects. There is no consensus on the extent to which these factors affect observed shapes, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on assumptions about relative velocities and the challenges in measuring distances within galaxies. The discussion also highlights the complexity of interpreting redshift and its implications for visible shape.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in astrophysics, observational astronomy, and the effects of relativistic motion on the appearance of celestial objects may find this discussion relevant.

connorp
Messages
30
Reaction score
2
So this has been really bugging me over the past few days (and forgive me if the answer is so simple). Let's say we're observing the Sombrero galaxy. It is about 29 million ly away and 50 thousand ly in diameter. So we should be observing the "front" of it at what it looked like 29 million years ago, and the "back" of it 29.05 million years ago. Why doesn't this extra distance change the galaxy's shape? If, for example, the galaxy was moving directly away from us in a straight line (not that it is), wouldn't the galaxy be compressed? Hope this makes sense.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
connorp said:
So this has been really bugging me over the past few days (and forgive me if the answer is so simple). Let's say we're observing the Sombrero galaxy. It is about 29 million ly away and 50 thousand ly in diameter. So we should be observing the "front" of it at what it looked like 29 million years ago, and the "back" of it 29.05 million years ago. Why doesn't this extra distance change the galaxy's shape? If, for example, the galaxy was moving directly away from us in a straight line (not that it is), wouldn't the galaxy be compressed? Hope this makes sense.

Try a calculation!

It's true that there's a time difference between the back and the front. However, for this to affect the shape by some fraction, say 1%, you would need the difference in speed of the back and front to be that fraction of the speed of light. Most astronomical objects are moving many orders of magnitude more slowly than that.
 
I guessed something like this, but still am slightly confused. Anyway you could elaborate a bit more? Thank you.
 
I must admit that referring to "difference in speed" was too restrictive, but I was thinking of what might distort the shape in a visible way.

Overall motion towards or away from the observer would have little effect, as for galactic distances we normally have no direct way to determine accurate relative distances of stars within a galaxy along the same line of sight. What we would typically do is match up the appearance (including such aspects as relative velocity towards or away from the observer at the edges, deduced from redshift) with a common galaxy shape and deduce the approximate orientation from that appearance.

I think the most visible distortion would be if the galaxy as a whole was moving sideways relative to the line of sight from the observer, as that overall motion could be much faster than any relative motion (which would tend to make the galaxy come apart).

If the galaxy was for example overall moving sideways at speed v and was of diameter D then the time delay for light from the far side would be t = D/c so it would appear to be lagging behind by distance vt = vD/c = (v/c) D. This means that the fraction of the diameter by which the far side would be lagging behind the near side is v/c. For the far side to appear 1% behind its true position, the galaxy would have to be moving overall sideways at about 1% of the speed of light, that is at about 3000km/s (which is probably possible) but I do not think the effect of a 1% lag on the visible shape would be detectable.

For very distant galaxies, the effective recession velocity for a high redshift could in theory cause significant flattening in the direction away from the observer, but as we don't have any means of measuring the distance to individual stars in such galaxies, this would not affect the visible shape.
 
Great explanation. Thanks!
 
I calculate light from the edge of the sun takes about 2 seconds longer to get to us than light from the centre of the disc because the centre is nearer. So the position of the edge is 2 seconds "older" and should lag the position of the centre as it appears to us. It wouldn't make it look a different shape but a sun spot that is geometrically in the centre would appear very slightly out of position relative to the edges.

The sun takes 24 hours to "move" 360 degrees around the Earth so a central sun spot would appear (360*2)/(24*60*60) = 0.008 degrees out of position. Please check my reasoning and my sums!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K