Comments on: Oldest and Most Distant Water in the Universe Detected http://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/ Space and astronomy news Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:59:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Lawrence B. Crowellhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-65229 Lawrence B. Crowell Sat, 25 Apr 2009 03:18:04 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-65229 Distances can distort because the dynamics of space is stretching out space or moving points apart. Particles in spac or spacetime can't move faster than light in a local frame, but different local frames can be comoved by the dynamics of spacetime.Lawrence B. Crowell Distances can distort because the dynamics of space is stretching out space or moving points apart. Particles in spac or spacetime can't move faster than light in a local frame, but different local frames can be comoved by the dynamics of spacetime.

Lawrence B. Crowell

]]> By: rudeydhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-65207 rudeyd Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:38:07 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-65207 Okay, I've asked this before to no response.....How does a Universe that is 13.73 billion years old (unstretched?!?!) create a distance that is 19.8 billion years??Doesn't that mean that virtually everything we measure in the Universe has a "stretched" distance?? Okay, I've asked this before to no response…..

How does a Universe that is 13.73 billion years old (unstretched?!?!) create a distance that is 19.8 billion years??

Doesn't that mean that virtually everything we measure in the Universe has a "stretched" distance??

]]> By: Dave Fintonhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64735 Dave Finton Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:07:26 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64735 Silenus: I could be wrong, but I don't think special relativity applies to objects speeding away from us due to the expansion of the Universe because it's literally space itself that's moving away from us, not the object, per se. Silenus: I could be wrong, but I don't think special relativity applies to objects speeding away from us due to the expansion of the Universe because it's literally space itself that's moving away from us, not the object, per se.

]]> By: Jon Hanfordhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64703 Jon Hanford Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:10:08 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64703 @ Silenus, After a closer reading of the 1999 paper I linked to above, on pg. 3 under Conclusions the researchers state explicitly that they searched for the 22 GHz maser line that was redshifted to 6 GHz. In addition, they deliberately searched a radio swath centered on 6 GHz, since the maser emission line is quite sharp. The new observations must also rule out the possibility of some weird possibility of maser emission from the lensing galaxy itself (probably easy, given the redshift difference alone). Interestingly, the paper also notes their nondetection of water masers as probably related to the paucity of such galaxies in the nearby universe, just as mentioned in the article above. If they only knew then that they were looking at a quasar with a water maser! @ Silenus, After a closer reading of the 1999 paper I linked to above, on pg. 3 under Conclusions the researchers state explicitly that they searched for the 22 GHz maser line that was redshifted to 6 GHz. In addition, they deliberately searched a radio swath centered on 6 GHz, since the maser emission line is quite sharp. The new observations must also rule out the possibility of some weird possibility of maser emission from the lensing galaxy itself (probably easy, given the redshift difference alone). Interestingly, the paper also notes their nondetection of water masers as probably related to the paucity of such galaxies in the nearby universe, just as mentioned in the article above. If they only knew then that they were looking at a quasar with a water maser!

]]> By: Silenushttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64698 Silenus Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:51:24 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64698 So applying Dopplers formula, gives me that the observed object (the maser) is moving away from earth at app. 0.73c (or 73% of light speed) (assuming that the observed frequency is around 6GHz as indicated in the second picture).Impressive.But this speed also results in a mass increase of app. 45% according to relativity theory. Don't know how to interprete this though.Anyway, amusing brain exercise :-) So applying Dopplers formula, gives me that the observed object (the maser) is moving away from earth at app. 0.73c (or 73% of light speed) (assuming that the observed frequency is around 6GHz as indicated in the second picture).

Impressive.

But this speed also results in a mass increase of app. 45% according to relativity theory. Don't know how to interprete this though.

Anyway, amusing brain exercise :-)

]]> By: Jon Hanfordhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64654 Jon Hanford Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:50:55 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64654 @Silneus, Astronomers take the doppler shift of lines into account all the time. This is why astronomers who want to study the Lyman-alpha line of hydrogen (normally in the deep ultraviolet at rest) look at the near to mid-infrared portion of the spectrum for the line emitted by extremely distant objects. The line they're looking for in the spectrum has 'red-shifted' from the ultraviolet to the infrared portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Same deal here. This is a very distant object, the discrepancy you note reflects that enormous redshift. @Silneus, Astronomers take the doppler shift of lines into account all the time. This is why astronomers who want to study the Lyman-alpha line of hydrogen (normally in the deep ultraviolet at rest) look at the near to mid-infrared portion of the spectrum for the line emitted by extremely distant objects. The line they're looking for in the spectrum has 'red-shifted' from the ultraviolet to the infrared portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Same deal here. This is a very distant object, the discrepancy you note reflects that enormous redshift.

]]> By: Jon Hanfordhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64653 Jon Hanford Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:34:27 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64653 While digging through the NED database for info on this object (it seems to be well studied, with over 120 papers listed) where I came across "A search for water masers in the gravitationally lensed quasars H 1413+117 and MG 0414+0534" by Wiltner et al in the March 1999 issue of Astronomical Journal (paper here: http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1538-3881/117/3/1139/980480.web.pdf?request-id=6c51b451-445b-4286-bef0-7ac6d318e8c9 ). While no detection in either object was made, the researchers were looking for the same 22 GHz water maser line as the new study. They were using the Australian Telescope Compact Array( ATCA ) with obviously a limited detection capability compared to the more sensitive observations used here. So this new search was not the first, but made the first successful observation of this maser activity. If at first you don't succeed...... While digging through the NED database for info on this object (it seems to be well studied, with over 120 papers listed) where I came across "A search for water masers in the gravitationally lensed quasars H 1413+117 and MG 0414+0534" by Wiltner et al in the March 1999 issue of Astronomical Journal (paper here: http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1538-3881/117/3/1139/980480.web.pdf?request-id=6c51b451-445b-4286-bef0-7ac6d318e8c9 ). While no detection in either object was made, the researchers were looking for the same 22 GHz water maser line as the new study. They were using the Australian Telescope Compact Array( ATCA ) with obviously a limited detection capability compared to the more sensitive observations used here. So this new search was not the first, but made the first successful observation of this maser activity. If at first you don't succeed……

]]> By: Andrewhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64636 Andrew Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:39:26 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64636 Silenus, yes, the Doppler Effect is taken into account for all of those universe-distant obsevations. Redshift shifts those absorption signals just like it shifts all other light signals due to expansion. Silenus, yes, the Doppler Effect is taken into account for all of those universe-distant obsevations. Redshift shifts those absorption signals just like it shifts all other light signals due to expansion.

]]> By: Astronomy Link Listhttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64627 Astronomy Link List Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:59:27 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64627 This article has been added to the Astronomy Link List. This article has been added to the Astronomy Link List.

]]> By: Silenushttp://www.universetoday.com/2009/04/22/oldest-and-most-distant-water-in-the-universe-detected/comment-page-1/#comment-64615 Silenus Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:53:17 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/?p=29622#comment-64615 I wonder if for such measurements the Doppler effect has to be/been taken into account?Since it took so long for the radiation to get here, the object it came from must be travelling in the opposite direction as we (earth) do, maximizing relative velocity, maximizing Doppler effect.However, I don't know if the second image is scientifically correct, but 6GHz for a water maser seems rather low, even with Doppler included. A quick Google search learns that water masers emit around 22GHz?How do they determine the distance of such an object anyway? Is this done by measuring the Doppler shift on a water maser emission? But isn't the characterisation of the maser done by measuring the spectral lines? Smells like a chicken-egg problem. I wonder if for such measurements the Doppler effect has to be/been taken into account?

Since it took so long for the radiation to get here, the object it came from must be travelling in the opposite direction as we (earth) do, maximizing relative velocity, maximizing Doppler effect.

However, I don't know if the second image is scientifically correct, but 6GHz for a water maser seems rather low, even with Doppler included. A quick Google search learns that water masers emit around 22GHz?

How do they determine the distance of such an object anyway? Is this done by measuring the Doppler shift on a water maser emission? But isn't the characterisation of the maser done by measuring the spectral lines? Smells like a chicken-egg problem.

]]>