|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Trouble For Dark Energy Hypothesis?
[[ Meta-comment: This discussion started in sci.physics.research, but its "natural home" is in sci.astro.research. I've cross-posted this article to both newsgroups, and set the Followup-To: header so further discussion should be in s.a.r. ]] Gary Harnagel wrote: I'm having trouble picturing why we should see the CMBR at all. Since it's traveling at the speed of light but we're moving somewhat slower, shouldn't it have passed us long ago? I know, the FLWR metric must have something to do with it, but ... To try to answer Gary Harnagel's question: begin analogy Imagine an infinite static Euclidean universe (i.e., flat spacetime, no gravity involved) filled with (stationary) fog which both emits and scatters (visible) light, and consider a (stationary) observer in that fog. Now suppose that at a time which we will label t=0, two things happen: * all the fog suddenly condenses into larger water droplets, and * those water droplets no longer emit light. Since the scattering cross-section of large water droplets is vastly smaller than that of fog, the result is that at t0, the sea-of-droplets is mostly transparent to light (certainly much more transparent than the original fog was). In other words, at times t0 light basically travels in straight lines, with little scattering, emission, or absorption. What will our observer see at t=1 year? Since at t0 there is minimal scattering, emission, or absorption, we see that at t=1 year our observer will see (receive) those photons, and only those photons, which were (a) exactly 1 light-year away from her at t=0, and (b) travelling directly towards her at t=0. This holds in any direction our observer looks. In other words, at t=1 year our observer will see a uniform glow on her "sky". At t=2 years our observer will will see those photons, and only those photons, which were (a) exactly 2 light-years away from her at t=0, and (b) travelling directly towards her at t=0. This holds in any direction our observer looks. In other words, at t=2 year our observer will see a uniform glow on her "sky". But that glow is comprised of a *different set of photons, emitted at a different set of events* than was the glow she saw at t=1 year. Etc etc for any other time t0. end analogy As you can see, this analogy reproduces many of the features of the CMBR. It doesn't reproduce the CMBR's temperature -- for that you need a cosmological redshift between the last-scattering time (t=0 in the analogy, approximately 0.5 million years after the big bang in standard cosmology) and today. But the analogy does produce an all-sky uniform glow seen by all observers, even at far-future times. I hope this makes things a bit clearer (no pun intended). -- -- "Jonathan Thornburg [remove -animal to reply]" Dept of Astronomy & IUCSS, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA currently visiting Max-Plack-Institute fuer Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut), Potsdam-Golm, Germany "There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time." -- George Orwell, "1984" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The hypothesis about dark energy - Hypotesen angående mørk energi | Kall, Mogens | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 26th 17 04:28 AM |
does female dark energy and male dark energy make white light baby? | Arc Michael | Misc | 5 | March 17th 17 07:03 PM |
Dark Hypothesis Scenerui Part 3 | Lynndel Humphreys | Space Shuttle | 2 | April 6th 05 09:40 PM |
Dark Energy hypothesis, etc. | Raheman | Misc | 1 | April 6th 04 09:09 PM |
Dark Energy's shadow: Sloan Digital Sky Survey detects physical evidencefor Dark Energy (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | News | 0 | July 26th 03 07:21 PM |