What Does the Maximum Proper Distance at z ~ 1.7 Mean in Cosmology?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Niles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cosmology
Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi all.

When looking at a graph that shows the proper distance at the time of emission as a function of the redshift z in a model-universe with only matter, the proper distance at time of emission has a maximum at about z ~ 1.7. What does this maximum mean?

I can see that light with a high redshift must come from a source, which was initially close to us, and similarly light with a small redshift also comes from close to us. But again, what about the in-between, i.e. the maximum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since it's distance at the time of emission, yes, small z comes from sources nearby in distance and time and large z comes from sources that are currently far away, but were close at the time of emission because the universe was so much smaller. I think that's what you are saying. So, sure, then there must be a maximum. I don't think that maximum has any particular significance.
 
Ok, thanks. I didn't suspect it having any meaning, but it's always nice to get a second-opinion.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top