Edwin Hubble discovery of redshift of distant galaxies make me wonder why is this phenomenon only occurs when object is further away, is it possible that redshift happens in short distance too such as a millimetre, nanometer etc? Is it more prominent the larger the distance or the flatter the spacetime curvature?
-
The amount of redshift is only dependent on the relative velocities between the two sources. The distance between them is irrelevant. – Sam Jan 10 '20 at 05:30
-
1Cosmological redshift between far distant galaxies can be due to expansion of space. Also gravitational redshift, and objects moving apart redshift https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift – Adrian Howard Jan 10 '20 at 06:01
1 Answers
I guess in principle, there may be an effect, though things can be tricky. Let me expand on how I understand this works:
Relativistic frequency shifts can be understood as a kinematic effect: Initial energy (which corresponds to frequency up to a factor of $h$) depends on the relative orientation of photon 4-momentum at time of emission and the 4-velocity of the emitter, and final energy depends on the relative orientation of photon 4-momentum at time of absorption and the 4-velocity of the absorber.
If spacetime is flat, there exist inertial frames where photon momentum is constant, so the shift will be completely determined by the relative velocity of emitter and absorber. This is the special-relativistic Doppler effect.
In curved spacetimes, there is no distance parallelism, so we can't just compare the velocities of emitter and absorber, and the momentum the photon will end up with will depend on the path taken as momentum is parallel transported along the trajectory.
In addition to this abstract analysis, in many cases we can also give heuristic explanations in terms of specific physical effects: For example, in gravitational fields photons will lose (or gain) energy climbing up (or falling down) a gravity well. In case of static spacetimes such as Schwarzschild spacetime, we can also explain this in terms of time dilation (observers at fixed Schwarzschild coordinates will measure different frequencies because their clocks tick differently).
We can make a similar argument for cosmological redshift: If we use conformal time and comoving distance as our coordinates, radial null geodesics will be manifestly straight lines, ie the time interval between two consecutive wave fronts measured by emitters and absorbers comoving with the Hubble flow will be the same. We then just have to convert the conformal time coordinate to the observers' eigentimes.
Note that generally, cosmological redshift is directly attributed to spatial expansion instead, ie as light waves getting stretched. This is a perfectly fine alternative point of view, as the scale factor enters the definition of conformal time in the right manner.
Now, on to your actual question: If we want to figure out the effect of spatial expansion on locally measured frequency shifts, we have to consider spacetime geometry along the photon trajectory. One possible model to consider is Schwarschild-de Sitter spacetime, a spherically symmetric mass in a universe domiated by dark energy. At the relevant scales, the effect of the cosmological constant will be overwhelmed by the gravitational effect, so even if we could in principle attribute part of the shifting to that, in practice, it can be safely ignored.
Things get more complicated in models that are somewhat more realistic, such as Swiss cheese cosmologies. Here, the cosmological constant won't have a direct effect on the metric within the holes, but I imagine may still affect things indirectly because the hole metric has to be matched to the FLRW metric at its edge via appropriate boundary conditions. I don't know enough about these models to say anything definitive here.
So in summary, I would answer that I would expect spatial expansion to indirectly affect frequency shifts at small distances in principle, but it only becomes relevant at large distances because the effect on local spacetime geometry is minor.
- 13,545
-
Hi thank you, I read it but I am afraid to ask why do we still think that most galaxies are moving away from us faster than the speed of light? why is it not ruled out? I think this is related to my question so I won't post a new one. – user6760 Jan 10 '20 at 14:18
-
There are different concepts of velocity. In general relativity, relative velocities are only defined at a particular point in spacetime, ie when objects pass each other. Then, there's what I'd call apparent relative velocity, which is what you get if you treat an arbitrary relativistic frequency shift as a Doppler shift. Conceptionally, you parallel transport the distant object's velocity vector along your line of sight so you can compare the vectors. There can be multiple apparent relative velocities, eg if gravitational lensing is involved and you see multiple images of the object. (cont.) – Christoph Jan 10 '20 at 15:25
-
Finally, there's the increase in distance between objects after you have foliated spacetime into space-like slices. For example, if you shoot two bullets in opposite directions with 0.9c each, from your perspective, their distance will grow at a rate of 1.8c, ie faster than the speed of light. That's arguably still a kind of velocity. Recession velocities in cosmology are like that, and not restricted to values below c. – Christoph Jan 10 '20 at 15:27