The measured red shift of the universe is correlated to the Doppler shift as extreme velocity stretches out the observed wavelength. Energy has two parameters, distance and time, the product which equal the speed of light. Can the red shift theoretically begin at the time aspects of energy? In other words, the Doppler shift stretches the wavelength to cause a coordinated change in frequency. Can a red shift also result by starting at the frequency of energy, thereby causing a coordinated change of wavelength?
For example, if a train approached and then passed by you, rapidly clanging a bell at a fast steady frequency, one will hear the pitch change due to the wavelength compressing and then stretching out. If the bell ringer gradually decreased his clanging frequency as he approached you, and then gradually increased it as he passed you by, just the right amount, you may not be able to notice any wavelength change due to the time shift in the frequency.
Alternately, if someone put a blindfold on, and the train was stationary, cyclic changes in the frequency could create an illusion that the train was in relative motion due to the pitch changes.
The question becomes, could anything cause a time or frequency shift leading to an observed red shift even if no motion was occurring?
Hi MDT,
QUOTE (MDT Posted on Aug 12 2005+ 01:02 AM)
The question becomes, could anything cause a time or frequency shift leading to an observed red shift even if no motion was occurring?
Yes... Gravity, it is absolutely equivalent to acceleration. It is possible that various geometries in space would lead to some illusions like "Einstein's Rings". Well... its real enough I suppose. The Universe is naturally expanding and drawing all things away from each other. It has been said that this process may continue in an otherwise "stationary" Universe pulling them eventually beyond a "horizon" that light can be expected to pass. So this phenomenon might be fueled by "dark energy" as well.
Cheers
Yes... Gravity, it is absolutely equivalent to acceleration. It is possible that various geometries in space would lead to some illusions like "Einstein's Rings". Well... its real enough I suppose. The Universe is naturally expanding and drawing all things away from each other. It has been said that this process may continue in an otherwise "stationary" Universe pulling them eventually beyond a "horizon" that light can be expected to pass. So this phenomenon might be fueled by "dark energy" as well.
Cheers
As a follow-up can light age with time into shorter frequency? The reason I ask this naive question is, if one looks at the evolution of the universe, the emitted energy started extremely hot, cooled and then got hot again as fusion and the like appeared. But of all this accumulated hot-cool background distribution, that should still be everywhere in the universe, what seems to be left is primarily microwave length radiation. It is almost like all the hottest aspects of this energy distribution curve aged or radiated itself into the coldness space, to end up with the narrow microwave frequency distribution.
In GR light does not go up or down in energy
in transition. Light's energy is conserved.
That's GR.
The gravitational redshift to light occures at
emission. Otherwise light starts off redshifted.
in transition. Light's energy is conserved.
That's GR.
The gravitational redshift to light occures at
emission. Otherwise light starts off redshifted.
Hi,
Since the gravitational red shift occurs at emission, might it not be possible for a gravitational blue shift to occur at detection. Might not light emitted outside a black hole be blue shifted as it approaches the event horizen.
z
Since the gravitational red shift occurs at emission, might it not be possible for a gravitational blue shift to occur at detection. Might not light emitted outside a black hole be blue shifted as it approaches the event horizen.
z
QUOTE (thezman+Aug 12 2005, 10:37 PM)
Hi,
Since the gravitational red shift occurs at emission, might it not be possible for a gravitational blue shift to occur at detection. Might not light emitted outside a black hole be blue shifted as it approaches the event horizen.
z
Black holes would boil. Certainly.
May I point out that the redshift at a so called
black hole event horizon would be infinite. GR
predicts the emission of energyless light there.
This is the failure. Hawking saw the singularity
as the problem. Right he was but he didn't go
far enough.
Energyless light predicted by GR!
GR predicts its own downfall.
Since the gravitational red shift occurs at emission, might it not be possible for a gravitational blue shift to occur at detection. Might not light emitted outside a black hole be blue shifted as it approaches the event horizen.
z
Black holes would boil. Certainly.
May I point out that the redshift at a so called
black hole event horizon would be infinite. GR
predicts the emission of energyless light there.
This is the failure. Hawking saw the singularity
as the problem. Right he was but he didn't go
far enough.
Energyless light predicted by GR!
GR predicts its own downfall.
Hi Thezman, MDT and Nick,
The shift in frequency is entirely due to the state of the frame of reference of emission and the state of the frame of reference of the absorber plus the intervening geometry of Spacetime. Observed effects are not "absolute" and really depend on the observer as well as the source. In a sense you will be right but in another sense you are wrong. Got you there haven't I? What I mean is unless the photons are involved in some kind of interaction at the event horizon (obviously there can be) you will not be seeing them from your frame of reference since all "observations" will be local. Photons are basically "invisible"... you cannot see them in "transit". It does not matter what theory or paradigm you are using this is always going to be the fact of the matter. If you were "hovering" on the edge of a Black Hole in "free fall" orbit, radio transmissions from Earth would all be Blue Shifted... Have a look at these older (non-streaming Quicktime Movies) links where a very young Roger Penrose discusses with Peter Ustinov the dynamics of this process...
New can of peas...
Just be a little patient to load the entire video each time.
Here is a similar short two videos on those planes flying about with atomic clocks inside confirming General Relativity in a Gravity Well...
Big Ben Video
Clocks in Plane Video
This last video shows what may be expected by a pair of time traveling twins, one of which hovers at the edge of a black hole...
Peter and Albert
There are very minor technical issues related to these TV presentations... I will leave you (and your sharp minds) to figure it out... He he he!
The "full" site is here...
Einsteins Universe
Your original question... Clearly the relative depth of the gravity wells relative to each other (the total system) will determine if the signals are red shifted or blue shifted relative to each other. That is ignoring any special theory considerations and also any rotating frame corrections (Sagnac Effect) and influences due to gravitational frame dragging. These are quite considerable when you deal with the extreme cases. Here are some pages on "some" of the GPS corrections necessary for use on Earth...
Relativity in the Global Positioning System
For added zest and challenge try this paper...
Relativistic Physics in Arbitrary Reference Frames - Mitskievich, Nikolai V
This paper fairly caused the tassel of my beanie to twitch excitedly but it is quite advanced. All those with a string theory "bent" should "have a look" too. Its a free download.
Cheers
QUOTE
Since the gravitational red shift occurs at emission, might it not be possible for a gravitational blue shift to occur at detection. Might not light emitted outside a black hole be blue shifted as it approaches the event horizon.
The shift in frequency is entirely due to the state of the frame of reference of emission and the state of the frame of reference of the absorber plus the intervening geometry of Spacetime. Observed effects are not "absolute" and really depend on the observer as well as the source. In a sense you will be right but in another sense you are wrong. Got you there haven't I? What I mean is unless the photons are involved in some kind of interaction at the event horizon (obviously there can be) you will not be seeing them from your frame of reference since all "observations" will be local. Photons are basically "invisible"... you cannot see them in "transit". It does not matter what theory or paradigm you are using this is always going to be the fact of the matter. If you were "hovering" on the edge of a Black Hole in "free fall" orbit, radio transmissions from Earth would all be Blue Shifted... Have a look at these older (non-streaming Quicktime Movies) links where a very young Roger Penrose discusses with Peter Ustinov the dynamics of this process...
New can of peas...
Just be a little patient to load the entire video each time.
Here is a similar short two videos on those planes flying about with atomic clocks inside confirming General Relativity in a Gravity Well...
Big Ben Video
Clocks in Plane Video
This last video shows what may be expected by a pair of time traveling twins, one of which hovers at the edge of a black hole...
Peter and Albert
There are very minor technical issues related to these TV presentations... I will leave you (and your sharp minds) to figure it out... He he he!
The "full" site is here...
Einsteins Universe
Your original question... Clearly the relative depth of the gravity wells relative to each other (the total system) will determine if the signals are red shifted or blue shifted relative to each other. That is ignoring any special theory considerations and also any rotating frame corrections (Sagnac Effect) and influences due to gravitational frame dragging. These are quite considerable when you deal with the extreme cases. Here are some pages on "some" of the GPS corrections necessary for use on Earth...
Relativity in the Global Positioning System
For added zest and challenge try this paper...
Relativistic Physics in Arbitrary Reference Frames - Mitskievich, Nikolai V
This paper fairly caused the tassel of my beanie to twitch excitedly but it is quite advanced. All those with a string theory "bent" should "have a look" too. Its a free download.
Cheers
I brought up the time shift of energy consideration, because I believe that the red shift data might be mis-interpretted due to our perception of time. The way I see it, the spectrum of increasing red shift data is a photo album of the universe, since the time the universe was a baby, all the way to the present. The most red shifted data, at the perimeter, reflected what happened at the beginning. These baby pictures were indeed a time of accelerating expansion. As we flip through the pages of time and look at closer phenomena, i.e., less red shifted phenomena, these are the toddler pics of the universe, etc.
What we see at the perimeter does not reflect what is happening today. Todays actual perimeter data will take 10-15 billion more years to reach us. It is very similar to looking at baby pictures of oneself. Most of us are no longer 15in tall, tipping the scales at 8 pounds 3 oz. and doubling our mass in one year, i.e., accelerating expansion.
Maybe the time shift that I intuitive see is probally based on how humans reference and interpret the red shift data between past and present rather than due to problems with the Doppler shift itself.
The obvious flaw with my scapbook analogy is the need to have some universe structures already present since almost the beginning. The only way this could occur is if the universe expanded discontinuously, right from the beginning. Ironically, a discontinuous expansion would account for the age anomoly data between the older superstucture age and universe's age. The contemporary continuum expansion models can not as easily accommodate this data.
The continuum expansion models take time for the universe structures to form and if one assumes this to be true, the current interpretation of the perimeter data is the only logical one; if it wasn't for that pesty superstructure age data requiring things forming much faster, almost from the beginning.
What we see at the perimeter does not reflect what is happening today. Todays actual perimeter data will take 10-15 billion more years to reach us. It is very similar to looking at baby pictures of oneself. Most of us are no longer 15in tall, tipping the scales at 8 pounds 3 oz. and doubling our mass in one year, i.e., accelerating expansion.
Maybe the time shift that I intuitive see is probally based on how humans reference and interpret the red shift data between past and present rather than due to problems with the Doppler shift itself.
The obvious flaw with my scapbook analogy is the need to have some universe structures already present since almost the beginning. The only way this could occur is if the universe expanded discontinuously, right from the beginning. Ironically, a discontinuous expansion would account for the age anomoly data between the older superstucture age and universe's age. The contemporary continuum expansion models can not as easily accommodate this data.
The continuum expansion models take time for the universe structures to form and if one assumes this to be true, the current interpretation of the perimeter data is the only logical one; if it wasn't for that pesty superstructure age data requiring things forming much faster, almost from the beginning.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.