A redshift occurs when the wavelengths increase in objects by light or electromagnetic radiation levels in an object. In cosmological redshift also has to do with light; however, instead of an increase in wavelengths, there is an expansion of the universe.
I presume the question refers to the "redshift" of distant galaxies. Actually it is the other way around - i.e. the Doppler redshift helps to support and explain the Big Bang Theory. This "redshift" is called the "cosmological redshift". Strictly speaking, it's not the Doppler effect.
That is called "redshift".That is called "redshift".That is called "redshift".That is called "redshift".
Actually, no on both counts. The redshift is a DIRECT measure of the fact that distant objects are moving away from us. It IMPLIES the expansion of the universe, but doesn't directly measure it. Also, even if it were, it wouldn't necessarily be independent of direction. One recent study indicates that it might not be, which (if true) means the Universe is not expanding isotropically.
The redshift is caused by relative motion that increases the distance from the source to the observer. The faster the source of light is moving away to the observer, the greater the redshift
According to the cosmological principle, from ANY point it would seem as if we are at the center of the Universe.According to the cosmological principle, from ANY point it would seem as if we are at the center of the Universe.According to the cosmological principle, from ANY point it would seem as if we are at the center of the Universe.According to the cosmological principle, from ANY point it would seem as if we are at the center of the Universe.
The expansion of the Universe results in the light from faraway galaxies being redshifted. This is called the "cosmological redshift"; it can be compared with the Doppler effect (which also causes a redshift), but the details are somewhat difference.It is an observed fact that most galaxies are redshifted; the explanation that seems most reasonable is that it is caused by the cosmological redshift. This means that space itself is expanding.
Redshift; the generally accepted explanation for the redshift of distant galaxies is that it is cosmological redshift, caused by the expansion of the Universe. This is somewhat related to the idea of the Doppler effect.
I presume the question refers to the "redshift" of distant galaxies. Actually it is the other way around - i.e. the Doppler redshift helps to support and explain the Big Bang Theory. This "redshift" is called the "cosmological redshift". Strictly speaking, it's not the Doppler effect.
On short distances (ie. within a few million lightyears), the redshift we see is the direct result of the Doppler effect. The Doppler effect causes light from receding sources to be less energetic, and thus red-shifted. On distances exceeding that, redshift can be attributed to the metric expansion of the universe. In cosmological redshift, the shifting of frequencies is basically caused by the stretching of space the light is passing through, and the stretching of the light wave with it.
The main evidence is the redshift of distant galaxies; the only sensible explanation is a cosmological redshift, related to an expanding Universe. Other pieces of evidence are the microwave background radiation, which agrees very well with the predictions made by the Big Bang theory, and Olber's paradox - among others.
The Universe is not expanding. The Universe is in equilibrium. The idea that the Universe is expanding results from a mis-interpretation of Hubble's redshift measures and the Biblical Creation Story. Einstein observed that the universe was not contracting under gravity and added a cosmological constant to "account" for the lack of contraction. This cosmological constant is an anti-gravity feature that adds expansion. mathematicians claimed that Einstein's Equations only allowed for expansion or contraction. When the redshift was discovered the deal was sealed. Hubble did not interpret the redshift as an expansion, he called it "an hither to unknown principle of nature". Hubble was correct and the current view of expansion is wrong. There is a herd mentality in physics like in Stock Market Bubbles. The Big Bang is a Bubble, there is no expansion.
That is called "redshift".That is called "redshift".That is called "redshift".That is called "redshift".
Actually, no on both counts. The redshift is a DIRECT measure of the fact that distant objects are moving away from us. It IMPLIES the expansion of the universe, but doesn't directly measure it. Also, even if it were, it wouldn't necessarily be independent of direction. One recent study indicates that it might not be, which (if true) means the Universe is not expanding isotropically.
Quantum Redshift happened in 2002.
The Redshift was created on 2008-09-22.
Redshift does not expand the universe. Redshift is a physical quantity that is used to describe the expansion of the universe. The current time has a redshift of zero. at redshift 1, the universe was half the size it is now. At redshift 2, the universe was 1/3 the size it is now, and so on. if redshift is z, then (size of universe at redshift z)/(current size of universe)= 1/(z+1)
No