Galaxies in Tandem

[rigney]

In using "red shift", (the Hubble Constant), to determine galactic distances when looking at galaxies in tandem; is one increasing in speed or the other lagging? Or is the raisin bread idea the only right answer?

Edited May 23, 2011 by rigney

[J.C.MacSwell]

In using "red shift", (the Hubble Constant), to determine galactic distances when looking at galaxies in tandem; is one increasing in speed or the other lagging? Or is the raisin bread idea the only right answer?

 

I think it is generally assumed that any given Galaxy is close to being at rest with respect to the CMBR in the region of space it occupies, so that the redshift will give a reasonable estimation of it's distance away. The further away the less significant any local velocity affect on the redshift would be in a relative sense. (if that is what you are getting at)

[rigney]

I think it is generally assumed that any given Galaxy is close to being at rest with respect to the CMBR in the region of space it occupies, so that the redshift will give a reasonable estimation of it's distance away. The further away the less significant any local velocity affect on the redshift would be in a relative sense. (if that is what you are getting at)

Not really. Suppose we are in a galaxy that is presumably going faster than light speed to someone in front of or behind us. If we look adjacent, would the galaxy next door appear to be receeding at such a speed? Then, if we look at the milky way, in front, to the back or side, how would it appear on the scope thirteen billion light years away? Not too deep into science my questions may sound silly and perhaps are, but I've went through several volumes of material now and still haven't found a satisfactory explanation. Just dumb, perhaps? Edited May 23, 2011 by rigney