Could be a photon moving in an expanding universe be thought of as an ant moving along an elastic rope fixed at the upper end on a cieling that is streching due to a constant mass at its bottom end. So even the ant has a specific velocity regarding the elastic rope he could have different velocities regarding the end point hanging on the cieling because the points on the rope themselves are moving?
-
Not clear what you are asking about physics. – sammy gerbil Mar 23 '20 at 02:43
-
@sammygerbil What is not clear? I simply ask if two points with a comoving distance have a time for a photon to reach one from the other defined just as distance divided with c or the velocity is not just c but should be a function of space expansion.... – Krešimir Bradvica Mar 23 '20 at 05:47
-
1Yes, and indeed I have used exactly this analogy. – John Rennie Mar 23 '20 at 10:19
-
@KrešimirBradvica You seem to be asking for confirmation of something you have read elsewhere. Questions which simply ask for a Yes/No answer are not useful. If you have doubts about the applicability of the analogy please explain these in the question so that an answer can be given which addresses those doubts. – sammy gerbil Mar 23 '20 at 14:32
2 Answers
Could be a photon moving in an expanding universe be thought of as an ant moving along an elastic rope fixed at the upper end on a ceiling that is stretching due to a constant mass at its bottom end.
The point where the elastic rope meets with the ceiling can be thought of as an inertial point. I believe for this reason this analogy is not a good one to describe the speed of light. There's no general inertial frame in cosmology. All inertial frames are defined locally. In your analogy, it seems like the universe has a general inertial reference frame, which is not true.
I simply ask if two points with a comoving distance have a time for a photon to reach one from the other defined just as distance divided with c or the velocity is not just c but should be a function of space expansion...
Well you can describe the comoving distance ($d_c$) as a function of $t$, $a(t)$ or $z$. In order to find how much time took for light to travel between two comoving objects you can divide comoving distance by $c$.
The conformal time defined as
$$\eta = \frac{d_p}{c}$$
where $$d_p = c\int_{t_e}^{t_0} \frac{dt}{a(t)}$$
Thus $$\eta =\int_{t_e}^{t_0} \frac{dt}{a(t)}$$
PS: If you want to write the above equations in terms of $z$ you can do it like this
$$\eta=\int \frac {dt} {a}=\int\frac {da} {a\dot{a}}=\int\frac {da} {a^2H}$$ and we can write $$H(z)=H_0E(z)$$ $$E(z)=\sqrt{\Omega_{\Lambda}+\Omega_m(1+z)^3+\Omega_r(1+z)^4+\Omega_{\kappa}(1+z)^2}$$
so we have,
$$\eta=\int\frac {da} {a^2H_0E(z)}$$
and $dz=-da/a^2$ so we can write,
$$\eta=-H_0^{-1}\int_z^0\frac {dz} {E(z)}$$
$$\eta=H_0^{-1}\int_0^{z}\frac {dz} {E(z)}$$

- 3,112
- 14
- 32
The analogy fails because the ant has different velocities relative to different observers, while according to Special Relativity photons always have the same velocity in free space, for all observers.
A closer analogy might be that the ant looks longer or shorter to different observers at different points on the elastic.

- 7,372
-
If the space is expanding then every point the photon will reach during its journey from point 1 towards point 2 will move away from point 2 before the photon reaches any of these points so the photon should travel longer....am I correct? – Krešimir Bradvica Mar 23 '20 at 20:38
-
The photon should travel longer than what? Yes, longer than if space had not expanded. – Guy Inchbald Mar 23 '20 at 21:35
-
Why then we are told that photons from the edge of the visible universe must have travelled for 13 billion years to reach Earth? This would imply that the space has not expanded contrary to Your response according which these photons must have been travelled a distance longer than 13 bly due to space expansion.... – Krešimir Bradvica Mar 25 '20 at 22:23
-
Space was smaller 13 billion years ago, today it is bigger. Think of 13 billion lightyears as a kind of average size over the period. – Guy Inchbald Mar 26 '20 at 09:28