-1
$\begingroup$

I've seen disagreement about whether the cosmological Doppler-effect violates conservation of energy. It can be complicated to analyze since there is no reference frame of a photon. My question is: would the following (thought-)experiment prove it does violate energy conservation?

You are in the center of mass-frame where a stationary electron annihilates with a stationary positron. Two photons of 511 keV go out in opposite directions, both heading towards equidistant mirrors through nothing but expanding space. Perhaps your buddies at the mirrors notice a small momentum change when a photon bounces back. No absorption, although the photons have to lose some energy at the reflection. Anyway, both photons head back to center of mass-frame and at the point of their creation you measure their energy.

The further away the mirrors are, the bigger the energy-discrepancy between their creation and your final measurement, right? While your buddies at the mirrors would measure a smaller (not bigger!) kinetic energy of a mirror if the mirrors are further away, right? So: can we conclude the (cosmological) Doppler-shift violates conservation of energy?

Edit/update:

Without (cosmological) redshift the photon imparts the following momentum and kinetic energy to the mirror:

$p_m= h(\frac{1}{\lambda_0}+\frac{1}{\lambda_1})$

$\Delta E_f+\Delta E_k =0$ which means that $hc(\frac{1}{\lambda_0}-\frac{1}{\lambda_1})=\frac{p²_m}{2m}$

Defining $a=\frac{1}{\lambda_0}$ and $b=\frac{1}{\lambda_1}$, using Wolfram Alpha, and a Taylor-expansion for the sum under the square root I get:

$\Delta p_f=h(\frac{1}{\lambda_1}-\frac{1}{\lambda_0})=\frac{-2h²}{mc \lambda_0}$

Since the photons are 511 keV their wavelength is roughly 2.4 picometer. Filling in the numerical values for Planck's constant and the speed of light, for a 1 kg mirror we get a percentage change in momentum of:

$\frac{\Delta p_f}{p_{f,0}}=\frac{-2h}{mc \lambda_0}=-1,84\cdot10^{-28}$ %

Pretty small! While with cosmological redshift the photons will return back to the place they started with way less energy and momentum if the distance to the mirror is big. Also, the photons will impart less momentum and enery to the mirror if they have redshifted (where the accent indicates a redshifted wavelength):

$p_m= h(\frac{1}{\lambda_0'}+\frac{1}{\lambda_1'})$

Redshifted wavelengths are larger so their reciprocal is smaller. The kinetic energy that the mirror takes away depends on a difference:

$hc(\frac{1}{\lambda_0'}-\frac{1}{\lambda_1'})=\frac{p²_m}{2m}$

But the difference between the positive reciprocal wavelenghts is always smaller than the first term of this difference, which can become arbitrary small when the distance becomes large enough.

So with cosmological redshift the experimenter in the center of mass-frame will detect photons with energy way lower than 511 keV, while the mirrors can't account for this energy difference. Therefore: violation of energy conservation. My question remains: is my conclusion correct?

$\endgroup$
16
  • $\begingroup$ Why are you thinking that the photons would lose more energy if the mirrors are farther away? And how are you going to make mirrors for gamma rays? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 25, 2023 at 4:40
  • $\begingroup$ Can you be clearer that you are talking about cosmological redshift. Can you also say how it differs from the lots of other questions about cosmological redshift and energy conservation. e.g., physics.stackexchange.com/questions/410392/… physics.stackexchange.com/questions/13577/… and links therein. $\endgroup$
    – ProfRob
    Commented Jun 25, 2023 at 6:45
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the comments. @naturallyInconsistent: further distance means longer transit in expanding space and thus more redshift, therefore less momentum to impart on the mirrors. You could even choose the distance such that you get optimal circumstances so that the mirror would reflect visible light which once was a gamma ray, right? ProfRob: I've checked a lot of pages but I can't check/find them all. What is special about my question is that it has a frame of reference that coincides with the emission ánd absorption of a photon (two photons). $\endgroup$
    – Geert VS
    Commented Jun 25, 2023 at 10:25
  • $\begingroup$ You cannot have cosmological redshift in an inertial frame. This question doesn’t make sense to me $\endgroup$
    – Dale
    Commented Jun 26, 2023 at 23:27
  • $\begingroup$ @Dale, why isn't the frame I've described inertial? The experimenter (in the middle) is not accelerating $\endgroup$
    – Geert VS
    Commented Jun 26, 2023 at 23:34

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

The 4-momentum transfer of a photon to the mirror needs to be orthogonal to the mirror's 4-momentum, to keep the mirror "on shell". The photon initial/final 4-momenta are ($c=1$):

$$ k_{\mu} = (k,k) $$ $$ k_{\mu}' = (k',-k')$$

so the 4-momentum transfer to the mirror is:

$$ q_{\mu} = k_{\mu}'-k_{\mu}= -(k-k', k+k') $$

Meanwhile, the mirror is moving away, so the four-velocity is:

$$ u_{\mu} = \gamma(1, v) $$

The condition that:

$$ q_{\mu}u^{\mu} = 0$$

means

$$ (k'-k) - v(k+k') = 0 $$

or

$$ \frac{k'}k = \frac{1-v}{1+v} = f_D^2$$

That is, the two-way Doppler shift is the square of the one-way Doppler shift.

The missing energy is transferred to the mirror.

Fixing the coordinates to co-moving coordinates means they're moving away.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ thanks for your answer. But I think you're getting conservation of energy by construction: you assume the transfer to the mirror is equal to the difference of the initial and final states. No surprise everything checks out then. I've made an edit/update to my question to show the mirror(s) can't account for the energy change. Perhaps I'm wrong, I'm happy to see where I might have made a mistake. $\endgroup$
    – Geert VS
    Commented Jun 26, 2023 at 23:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.