Manteo2h

2022-06-22

Does accelerating cosmological expansion increase beam spread?

In the standard textbook case, a transmitter of diameter $D$ can produce an electromagnetic beam of wavelength $\lambda $ that has spread angle $\theta =1.22\lambda /D$. But what happens in an expanding cosmology, especially one that accelerates so that there is an event horizon? Does $\theta $ increase with distance?

Obviously each photon will travel along a null geodesic and after conformal time $\tau $ have travelled $\chi =c\tau $ units of co-moving distance. The distance between the beam edges would in flat space be growing as $\delta =2c\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)\tau $. Now, co-moving coordinates are nice and behave well with conformal time, so I would be mildly confident that this distance is true as measured in co-moving coordinates.

But that means that in proper distance the beam diameter is multiplied by the scale factor, $a(t)\delta $ (where $t$ is the time corresponding to $\tau $), and hence $\theta $ increases. However, the distance to the origin in these coordinates has also increased to $a(t)(ct)$, so that seems to cancel the expansion - if we measure $\theta (t)$ globally by dividing the lengths.

But it seems that locally we should see the edges getting separated at an accelerating pace; after all, the local observers will see the emitter accelerating away from them, producing a wider and wider beam near their location since it was emitted further away. From this perspective as time goes by the beam ends up closer and closer to $\theta =\pi $ (and ever more red-shifted, which presumably keeps the total power across it constant).

Does this analysis work, or did I slip on one or more coordinate systems?

In the standard textbook case, a transmitter of diameter $D$ can produce an electromagnetic beam of wavelength $\lambda $ that has spread angle $\theta =1.22\lambda /D$. But what happens in an expanding cosmology, especially one that accelerates so that there is an event horizon? Does $\theta $ increase with distance?

Obviously each photon will travel along a null geodesic and after conformal time $\tau $ have travelled $\chi =c\tau $ units of co-moving distance. The distance between the beam edges would in flat space be growing as $\delta =2c\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)\tau $. Now, co-moving coordinates are nice and behave well with conformal time, so I would be mildly confident that this distance is true as measured in co-moving coordinates.

But that means that in proper distance the beam diameter is multiplied by the scale factor, $a(t)\delta $ (where $t$ is the time corresponding to $\tau $), and hence $\theta $ increases. However, the distance to the origin in these coordinates has also increased to $a(t)(ct)$, so that seems to cancel the expansion - if we measure $\theta (t)$ globally by dividing the lengths.

But it seems that locally we should see the edges getting separated at an accelerating pace; after all, the local observers will see the emitter accelerating away from them, producing a wider and wider beam near their location since it was emitted further away. From this perspective as time goes by the beam ends up closer and closer to $\theta =\pi $ (and ever more red-shifted, which presumably keeps the total power across it constant).

Does this analysis work, or did I slip on one or more coordinate systems?

mallol3i

Beginner2022-06-23Added 20 answers

The first part of the answer is very simple, and you've worked it out yourself already. At a comoving distance ${d}_{C}$, the comoving diameter of the beam is simply ${\delta}_{C}=1.22\lambda {d}_{C}/D$. If the beam is emitted at $t={t}_{0}$, then at time $t$ the proper diameter of the beam is:

$\delta =\frac{a(t)}{a({t}_{0})}{\delta}_{C}$

Now the slightly tricky part. Talking about the spread angle at the location of the observer doesn't really make sense - any reasonable treatment of the source by the observer considers it a point source (unless the detector is larger than the beam; good luck with that!), and I don't think there's any local measurement that can determine the spread angle. The only reasonable question I can think to ask is "what is the apparent angular size of the beam as it would be measured from the point of emission"${}^{1}$. This is a standard problem, and the answer is simply stated in terms of the angular diameter distance ${d}_{A}$ as ${\theta}_{\mathrm{a}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}}=\delta /{d}_{A}$. From here it's merely an exercise to pick a cosmology, a time of emission and e.g. a comoving distance then work out the relevant times, scale factors and so on.

Angular sizes in expanding metrics can do some funny things - for instance, in something like Planck cosmology (~our Universe) an object of fixed size subtends a smaller and smaller angle as it is placed further away, as your intuition expects... until it gets past a threshold distance, after which it starts to appear bigger again! This can be intuitively understood since a $1\phantom{\rule{thinmathspace}{0ex}}\mathrm{m}$ object at $t\sim 0$ occupies a space corresponding to enormous present-day scales, and so it should nearly fill the sky when observed. In your case of an accelerating expansion, though, the end result is that the apparent angular size of the beam increases continuously.

$\delta =\frac{a(t)}{a({t}_{0})}{\delta}_{C}$

Now the slightly tricky part. Talking about the spread angle at the location of the observer doesn't really make sense - any reasonable treatment of the source by the observer considers it a point source (unless the detector is larger than the beam; good luck with that!), and I don't think there's any local measurement that can determine the spread angle. The only reasonable question I can think to ask is "what is the apparent angular size of the beam as it would be measured from the point of emission"${}^{1}$. This is a standard problem, and the answer is simply stated in terms of the angular diameter distance ${d}_{A}$ as ${\theta}_{\mathrm{a}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}}=\delta /{d}_{A}$. From here it's merely an exercise to pick a cosmology, a time of emission and e.g. a comoving distance then work out the relevant times, scale factors and so on.

Angular sizes in expanding metrics can do some funny things - for instance, in something like Planck cosmology (~our Universe) an object of fixed size subtends a smaller and smaller angle as it is placed further away, as your intuition expects... until it gets past a threshold distance, after which it starts to appear bigger again! This can be intuitively understood since a $1\phantom{\rule{thinmathspace}{0ex}}\mathrm{m}$ object at $t\sim 0$ occupies a space corresponding to enormous present-day scales, and so it should nearly fill the sky when observed. In your case of an accelerating expansion, though, the end result is that the apparent angular size of the beam increases continuously.

The product of the ages, in years, of three (3) teenagers os 4590. None of the have the sane age. What are the ages of the teenagers???

Use the row of numbers shown below to generate 12 random numbers between 01 and 99

78038 18022 84755 23146 12720 70910 49732 79606

Starting at the beginning of the row, what are the first 12 numbers between 01 and 99 in the sample?How many different 10 letter words (real or imaginary) can be formed from the following letters

H,T,G,B,X,X,T,L,N,J.Is every straight line the graph of a function?

For the 1s orbital of the Hydrogen atom, the radial wave function is given as: $R(r)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}(\frac{1}{{a}_{O}}{)}^{\frac{3}{2}}{e}^{\frac{-r}{{a}_{O}}}$ (Where ${a}_{O}=0.529$ ∘A)

The ratio of radial probability density of finding an electron at $r={a}_{O}$ to the radial probability density of finding an electron at the nucleus is given as ($x.{e}^{-y}$). Calculate the value of (x+y).Find the sets $A$ and $B$ if $\frac{A}{B}=\left(1,5,7,8\right),\frac{B}{A}=\left(2,10\right)$ and $A\cap B=\left(3,6,9\right)$. Are they unique?

What are the characteristics of a good hypothesis?

If x is 60% of y, find $\frac{x}{y-x}$.

A)$\frac{1}{2}$

B)$\frac{3}{2}$

C)$\frac{7}{2}$

D)$\frac{5}{2}$The numbers of significant figures in $9.1\times {10}^{-31}kg$ are:

A)Two

B)Three

C)Ten

D)Thirty oneWhat is positive acceleration?

Is power scalar or vector?

What is the five-step process for hypothesis testing?

How to calculate Type 1 error and Type 2 error probabilities?

How long will it take to drive 450 km if you are driving at a speed of 50 km per hour?

1) 9 Hours

2) 3.5 Hours

3) 6 Hours

4) 12.5 HoursWhat is the square root of 106?