The Doppler Effect: Near and Far Galaxies

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding how the Doppler Effect differentiates between nearby and distant galaxies. It highlights that the redshift of light from receding galaxies increases with distance, indicating that more distant galaxies are moving away faster due to the expansion of the universe. The concept of Hubble's Law is mentioned, which relates the redshift to the velocity and distance of galaxies. The user seeks clarification on how redshift measurements can be used to determine distances to galaxies. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the relationship between redshift, velocity, and distance in the context of cosmic expansion.
jerome951000
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I found a question in a Maltese physics past paper dealing with the doppler effect. I managed to figure out the part dealing with the effect of motion of the wave source, but i was asked this:

How does The Doppler Effect show us the difference between galaxies that are near and those that are far away?

I was familiar with the doppler effect and the motion of the source causing it, but i never knew that the distance could make a difference. Any help would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try a Google search on "Hubble expansion".
 
thanks that was really helpful. it said that the redshift acquired value of the velocity of the receding galaxies is proportional to their distance from earth. thanks again :-)
 
how are the distances between the Earth and other galaxies deciphered using the redshift acquired velocity since these two are proportional?
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top