Does more light from Andromeda get scattered in the atmosphere than in the entire trip to Earth?
$begingroup$
Fires have been burning here in Northern California. Today there was just a slight haze of smoke. The sun had a slight red hue to it. As expected the lower it got the redder it became. The blue light was filtered out by the earth’s atmosphere and the smoke. Yet, I can look at distant stars and even a galaxy (with a telescope) millions of light years away, and there appears to be no loss of blue light.
I wonder if it's really possible that there is more stuff in Earth’s atmosphere than there is in all of the space between Earth and Andromeda. The galaxy is a fuzzy patch of whitish light indicating that all of the visible spectrum is making it through. Does that mean there is more “stuff” in our atmosphere than there is in the two million light years of space between Earth and Andromeda?
visible-light astrophysics atmospheric-science estimation space
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Fires have been burning here in Northern California. Today there was just a slight haze of smoke. The sun had a slight red hue to it. As expected the lower it got the redder it became. The blue light was filtered out by the earth’s atmosphere and the smoke. Yet, I can look at distant stars and even a galaxy (with a telescope) millions of light years away, and there appears to be no loss of blue light.
I wonder if it's really possible that there is more stuff in Earth’s atmosphere than there is in all of the space between Earth and Andromeda. The galaxy is a fuzzy patch of whitish light indicating that all of the visible spectrum is making it through. Does that mean there is more “stuff” in our atmosphere than there is in the two million light years of space between Earth and Andromeda?
visible-light astrophysics atmospheric-science estimation space
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Fires have been burning here in Northern California. Today there was just a slight haze of smoke. The sun had a slight red hue to it. As expected the lower it got the redder it became. The blue light was filtered out by the earth’s atmosphere and the smoke. Yet, I can look at distant stars and even a galaxy (with a telescope) millions of light years away, and there appears to be no loss of blue light.
I wonder if it's really possible that there is more stuff in Earth’s atmosphere than there is in all of the space between Earth and Andromeda. The galaxy is a fuzzy patch of whitish light indicating that all of the visible spectrum is making it through. Does that mean there is more “stuff” in our atmosphere than there is in the two million light years of space between Earth and Andromeda?
visible-light astrophysics atmospheric-science estimation space
$endgroup$
Fires have been burning here in Northern California. Today there was just a slight haze of smoke. The sun had a slight red hue to it. As expected the lower it got the redder it became. The blue light was filtered out by the earth’s atmosphere and the smoke. Yet, I can look at distant stars and even a galaxy (with a telescope) millions of light years away, and there appears to be no loss of blue light.
I wonder if it's really possible that there is more stuff in Earth’s atmosphere than there is in all of the space between Earth and Andromeda. The galaxy is a fuzzy patch of whitish light indicating that all of the visible spectrum is making it through. Does that mean there is more “stuff” in our atmosphere than there is in the two million light years of space between Earth and Andromeda?
visible-light astrophysics atmospheric-science estimation space
visible-light astrophysics atmospheric-science estimation space
edited Aug 27 '18 at 4:18
knzhou
44.3k11121214
44.3k11121214
asked Aug 27 '18 at 3:52
LambdaLambda
2,51641126
2,51641126
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Sure, let's do the order of magnitude calculation! According to Wikipedia:
In cool, dense regions of the ISM, matter is primarily in molecular form and reaches number densities of $10^6$ molecules per $textcm^3$. In hot, diffuse regions of the ISM, matter is primarily ionized, and the density is [$10^−4$ to $10^-2$] ions per $textcm^3$. Compare this with a number density of roughly $10^19$ molecules per $textcm^3$ for air at sea level.
The distance to Andromeda is $2.5 times 10^6$ light years while the thickness of the Earth's atmosphere is on the order of $20$ kilometers. (It technically extends much higher, but the thickness decreases rapidly.) Then the ratio of the distances is
$$fractextAndromeda distancetextatmosphere height sim 10^18.$$
At this point we would naively multiple this by the ratio of densities and call it a day, but it's crucial to account for the loss mechanism.
- The atmosphere mostly consists of $N_2$ and $O_2$, which perform Rayleigh scattering. This is the kind that occurs way more for blue light than red, explaining why the sky is blue and sunsets are red.
- Cool regions of the interstellar medium are mostly $H$ or $H_2$, and hydrogen just absorbs a few, discrete frequencies of visible light. These effects are important for astronomers, but not too important for the colors you see. That is, the cool regions don't matter, which is important for getting the right answer, because they're much denser than the hot regions!
- Hot regions of the interstellar medium are mostly ionized hydrogen. The dominant effect should be Thomson scattering off the free electrons.
Since only the hot regions matter, let's focus on those and suppose the whole line between the Earth and Andromeda is hot. Looking up standard numbers, for blue light we have
$$N_2 text Rayleigh cross section sim 2 times 10^-26 , textcm^2$$
and the Thomson cross section is wavelength independent,
$$e^- text Thomson cross section sim 7 times 10^-25 , textcm^2.$$
These are close enough that we can just neglect the difference, so we just need to compare the total distance and density. The ratio of the densities is about $10^19/10^-3 = 10^22$, so we have
$$fractextISM effecttextatmosphere effect sim frac10^1810^22 sim 10^-4.$$
It looks like all the space between us and Andromeda has less effect than the atmosphere alone.
Edit: as pointed out by Joshua (a real astrophysicist, unlike me, a regular physicist who just multiplied a bunch of powers of ten), the ISR is much sparser outside of galaxies, so I should have used the size of a galaxy rather than the full distance between galaxies. Also, a much larger effect comes from Rayleigh scattering off interstellar dust, which comes out to 20%. This is relatively close to the effect of the atmosphere.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– ACuriousMind♦
Aug 28 '18 at 15:18
$begingroup$
This answer is incorrect. The ISM densities quoted here are only for within our Galaxy; most of the distance between here and Andromeda crossed through regions with much lower density than the typical ISM. Also, the dominant source of attenuation in the universe (at least for optical light) is Rayleigh scattering due to dust, not Thomson scattering.
$endgroup$
– Joshua
Sep 5 '18 at 2:57
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f425041%2fdoes-more-light-from-andromeda-get-scattered-in-the-atmosphere-than-in-the-entir%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Sure, let's do the order of magnitude calculation! According to Wikipedia:
In cool, dense regions of the ISM, matter is primarily in molecular form and reaches number densities of $10^6$ molecules per $textcm^3$. In hot, diffuse regions of the ISM, matter is primarily ionized, and the density is [$10^−4$ to $10^-2$] ions per $textcm^3$. Compare this with a number density of roughly $10^19$ molecules per $textcm^3$ for air at sea level.
The distance to Andromeda is $2.5 times 10^6$ light years while the thickness of the Earth's atmosphere is on the order of $20$ kilometers. (It technically extends much higher, but the thickness decreases rapidly.) Then the ratio of the distances is
$$fractextAndromeda distancetextatmosphere height sim 10^18.$$
At this point we would naively multiple this by the ratio of densities and call it a day, but it's crucial to account for the loss mechanism.
- The atmosphere mostly consists of $N_2$ and $O_2$, which perform Rayleigh scattering. This is the kind that occurs way more for blue light than red, explaining why the sky is blue and sunsets are red.
- Cool regions of the interstellar medium are mostly $H$ or $H_2$, and hydrogen just absorbs a few, discrete frequencies of visible light. These effects are important for astronomers, but not too important for the colors you see. That is, the cool regions don't matter, which is important for getting the right answer, because they're much denser than the hot regions!
- Hot regions of the interstellar medium are mostly ionized hydrogen. The dominant effect should be Thomson scattering off the free electrons.
Since only the hot regions matter, let's focus on those and suppose the whole line between the Earth and Andromeda is hot. Looking up standard numbers, for blue light we have
$$N_2 text Rayleigh cross section sim 2 times 10^-26 , textcm^2$$
and the Thomson cross section is wavelength independent,
$$e^- text Thomson cross section sim 7 times 10^-25 , textcm^2.$$
These are close enough that we can just neglect the difference, so we just need to compare the total distance and density. The ratio of the densities is about $10^19/10^-3 = 10^22$, so we have
$$fractextISM effecttextatmosphere effect sim frac10^1810^22 sim 10^-4.$$
It looks like all the space between us and Andromeda has less effect than the atmosphere alone.
Edit: as pointed out by Joshua (a real astrophysicist, unlike me, a regular physicist who just multiplied a bunch of powers of ten), the ISR is much sparser outside of galaxies, so I should have used the size of a galaxy rather than the full distance between galaxies. Also, a much larger effect comes from Rayleigh scattering off interstellar dust, which comes out to 20%. This is relatively close to the effect of the atmosphere.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– ACuriousMind♦
Aug 28 '18 at 15:18
$begingroup$
This answer is incorrect. The ISM densities quoted here are only for within our Galaxy; most of the distance between here and Andromeda crossed through regions with much lower density than the typical ISM. Also, the dominant source of attenuation in the universe (at least for optical light) is Rayleigh scattering due to dust, not Thomson scattering.
$endgroup$
– Joshua
Sep 5 '18 at 2:57
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sure, let's do the order of magnitude calculation! According to Wikipedia:
In cool, dense regions of the ISM, matter is primarily in molecular form and reaches number densities of $10^6$ molecules per $textcm^3$. In hot, diffuse regions of the ISM, matter is primarily ionized, and the density is [$10^−4$ to $10^-2$] ions per $textcm^3$. Compare this with a number density of roughly $10^19$ molecules per $textcm^3$ for air at sea level.
The distance to Andromeda is $2.5 times 10^6$ light years while the thickness of the Earth's atmosphere is on the order of $20$ kilometers. (It technically extends much higher, but the thickness decreases rapidly.) Then the ratio of the distances is
$$fractextAndromeda distancetextatmosphere height sim 10^18.$$
At this point we would naively multiple this by the ratio of densities and call it a day, but it's crucial to account for the loss mechanism.
- The atmosphere mostly consists of $N_2$ and $O_2$, which perform Rayleigh scattering. This is the kind that occurs way more for blue light than red, explaining why the sky is blue and sunsets are red.
- Cool regions of the interstellar medium are mostly $H$ or $H_2$, and hydrogen just absorbs a few, discrete frequencies of visible light. These effects are important for astronomers, but not too important for the colors you see. That is, the cool regions don't matter, which is important for getting the right answer, because they're much denser than the hot regions!
- Hot regions of the interstellar medium are mostly ionized hydrogen. The dominant effect should be Thomson scattering off the free electrons.
Since only the hot regions matter, let's focus on those and suppose the whole line between the Earth and Andromeda is hot. Looking up standard numbers, for blue light we have
$$N_2 text Rayleigh cross section sim 2 times 10^-26 , textcm^2$$
and the Thomson cross section is wavelength independent,
$$e^- text Thomson cross section sim 7 times 10^-25 , textcm^2.$$
These are close enough that we can just neglect the difference, so we just need to compare the total distance and density. The ratio of the densities is about $10^19/10^-3 = 10^22$, so we have
$$fractextISM effecttextatmosphere effect sim frac10^1810^22 sim 10^-4.$$
It looks like all the space between us and Andromeda has less effect than the atmosphere alone.
Edit: as pointed out by Joshua (a real astrophysicist, unlike me, a regular physicist who just multiplied a bunch of powers of ten), the ISR is much sparser outside of galaxies, so I should have used the size of a galaxy rather than the full distance between galaxies. Also, a much larger effect comes from Rayleigh scattering off interstellar dust, which comes out to 20%. This is relatively close to the effect of the atmosphere.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– ACuriousMind♦
Aug 28 '18 at 15:18
$begingroup$
This answer is incorrect. The ISM densities quoted here are only for within our Galaxy; most of the distance between here and Andromeda crossed through regions with much lower density than the typical ISM. Also, the dominant source of attenuation in the universe (at least for optical light) is Rayleigh scattering due to dust, not Thomson scattering.
$endgroup$
– Joshua
Sep 5 '18 at 2:57
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sure, let's do the order of magnitude calculation! According to Wikipedia:
In cool, dense regions of the ISM, matter is primarily in molecular form and reaches number densities of $10^6$ molecules per $textcm^3$. In hot, diffuse regions of the ISM, matter is primarily ionized, and the density is [$10^−4$ to $10^-2$] ions per $textcm^3$. Compare this with a number density of roughly $10^19$ molecules per $textcm^3$ for air at sea level.
The distance to Andromeda is $2.5 times 10^6$ light years while the thickness of the Earth's atmosphere is on the order of $20$ kilometers. (It technically extends much higher, but the thickness decreases rapidly.) Then the ratio of the distances is
$$fractextAndromeda distancetextatmosphere height sim 10^18.$$
At this point we would naively multiple this by the ratio of densities and call it a day, but it's crucial to account for the loss mechanism.
- The atmosphere mostly consists of $N_2$ and $O_2$, which perform Rayleigh scattering. This is the kind that occurs way more for blue light than red, explaining why the sky is blue and sunsets are red.
- Cool regions of the interstellar medium are mostly $H$ or $H_2$, and hydrogen just absorbs a few, discrete frequencies of visible light. These effects are important for astronomers, but not too important for the colors you see. That is, the cool regions don't matter, which is important for getting the right answer, because they're much denser than the hot regions!
- Hot regions of the interstellar medium are mostly ionized hydrogen. The dominant effect should be Thomson scattering off the free electrons.
Since only the hot regions matter, let's focus on those and suppose the whole line between the Earth and Andromeda is hot. Looking up standard numbers, for blue light we have
$$N_2 text Rayleigh cross section sim 2 times 10^-26 , textcm^2$$
and the Thomson cross section is wavelength independent,
$$e^- text Thomson cross section sim 7 times 10^-25 , textcm^2.$$
These are close enough that we can just neglect the difference, so we just need to compare the total distance and density. The ratio of the densities is about $10^19/10^-3 = 10^22$, so we have
$$fractextISM effecttextatmosphere effect sim frac10^1810^22 sim 10^-4.$$
It looks like all the space between us and Andromeda has less effect than the atmosphere alone.
Edit: as pointed out by Joshua (a real astrophysicist, unlike me, a regular physicist who just multiplied a bunch of powers of ten), the ISR is much sparser outside of galaxies, so I should have used the size of a galaxy rather than the full distance between galaxies. Also, a much larger effect comes from Rayleigh scattering off interstellar dust, which comes out to 20%. This is relatively close to the effect of the atmosphere.
$endgroup$
Sure, let's do the order of magnitude calculation! According to Wikipedia:
In cool, dense regions of the ISM, matter is primarily in molecular form and reaches number densities of $10^6$ molecules per $textcm^3$. In hot, diffuse regions of the ISM, matter is primarily ionized, and the density is [$10^−4$ to $10^-2$] ions per $textcm^3$. Compare this with a number density of roughly $10^19$ molecules per $textcm^3$ for air at sea level.
The distance to Andromeda is $2.5 times 10^6$ light years while the thickness of the Earth's atmosphere is on the order of $20$ kilometers. (It technically extends much higher, but the thickness decreases rapidly.) Then the ratio of the distances is
$$fractextAndromeda distancetextatmosphere height sim 10^18.$$
At this point we would naively multiple this by the ratio of densities and call it a day, but it's crucial to account for the loss mechanism.
- The atmosphere mostly consists of $N_2$ and $O_2$, which perform Rayleigh scattering. This is the kind that occurs way more for blue light than red, explaining why the sky is blue and sunsets are red.
- Cool regions of the interstellar medium are mostly $H$ or $H_2$, and hydrogen just absorbs a few, discrete frequencies of visible light. These effects are important for astronomers, but not too important for the colors you see. That is, the cool regions don't matter, which is important for getting the right answer, because they're much denser than the hot regions!
- Hot regions of the interstellar medium are mostly ionized hydrogen. The dominant effect should be Thomson scattering off the free electrons.
Since only the hot regions matter, let's focus on those and suppose the whole line between the Earth and Andromeda is hot. Looking up standard numbers, for blue light we have
$$N_2 text Rayleigh cross section sim 2 times 10^-26 , textcm^2$$
and the Thomson cross section is wavelength independent,
$$e^- text Thomson cross section sim 7 times 10^-25 , textcm^2.$$
These are close enough that we can just neglect the difference, so we just need to compare the total distance and density. The ratio of the densities is about $10^19/10^-3 = 10^22$, so we have
$$fractextISM effecttextatmosphere effect sim frac10^1810^22 sim 10^-4.$$
It looks like all the space between us and Andromeda has less effect than the atmosphere alone.
Edit: as pointed out by Joshua (a real astrophysicist, unlike me, a regular physicist who just multiplied a bunch of powers of ten), the ISR is much sparser outside of galaxies, so I should have used the size of a galaxy rather than the full distance between galaxies. Also, a much larger effect comes from Rayleigh scattering off interstellar dust, which comes out to 20%. This is relatively close to the effect of the atmosphere.
edited Aug 27 '18 at 22:47
answered Aug 27 '18 at 4:15
knzhouknzhou
44.3k11121214
44.3k11121214
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– ACuriousMind♦
Aug 28 '18 at 15:18
$begingroup$
This answer is incorrect. The ISM densities quoted here are only for within our Galaxy; most of the distance between here and Andromeda crossed through regions with much lower density than the typical ISM. Also, the dominant source of attenuation in the universe (at least for optical light) is Rayleigh scattering due to dust, not Thomson scattering.
$endgroup$
– Joshua
Sep 5 '18 at 2:57
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– ACuriousMind♦
Aug 28 '18 at 15:18
$begingroup$
This answer is incorrect. The ISM densities quoted here are only for within our Galaxy; most of the distance between here and Andromeda crossed through regions with much lower density than the typical ISM. Also, the dominant source of attenuation in the universe (at least for optical light) is Rayleigh scattering due to dust, not Thomson scattering.
$endgroup$
– Joshua
Sep 5 '18 at 2:57
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– ACuriousMind♦
Aug 28 '18 at 15:18
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– ACuriousMind♦
Aug 28 '18 at 15:18
$begingroup$
This answer is incorrect. The ISM densities quoted here are only for within our Galaxy; most of the distance between here and Andromeda crossed through regions with much lower density than the typical ISM. Also, the dominant source of attenuation in the universe (at least for optical light) is Rayleigh scattering due to dust, not Thomson scattering.
$endgroup$
– Joshua
Sep 5 '18 at 2:57
$begingroup$
This answer is incorrect. The ISM densities quoted here are only for within our Galaxy; most of the distance between here and Andromeda crossed through regions with much lower density than the typical ISM. Also, the dominant source of attenuation in the universe (at least for optical light) is Rayleigh scattering due to dust, not Thomson scattering.
$endgroup$
– Joshua
Sep 5 '18 at 2:57
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f425041%2fdoes-more-light-from-andromeda-get-scattered-in-the-atmosphere-than-in-the-entir%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown