• 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle










  • You can’t use triangulation for anything over a few light-years, the angles are just too acute. And even then, you need to use the full width of Earth’s orbit (i.e. repeat a measurement at different times of the year).

    I think they just know what the frequency distribution normally is for a burst like this when it is emitted, and use the redshift of the measured frequencies to estimate the distance. Plus they correlate it with the apparent source based on direction (a certain galaxy, in this case, which helped confirm the distance estimate).










  • Well, following the main reference in the Wikipedia page leads to this:

    The implied velocity for the Solar System barycenter is v = 369.82 ± 0.11 km s−1, assuming a value T0 = Tγ , towards (l, b) = (264.021◦ ± 0.011◦, 48.253◦ ± 0.005◦) [13]. Such a Solar System motion implies a velocity for the Galaxy and the Local Group of galaxies relative to the CMB. The derived value is vLG = 620 ± 15 km s−1 towards (l, b) = (271.9◦ ± 2.0◦, 29.6◦ ± 1.4◦) [13], where most of the error comes from uncertainty in the velocity of the Solar System relative to the Local Group. The dipole is a frame-dependent quantity, and one can thus determine the ‘CMB frame’ (in some sense this is a special frame) as that in which the CMB dipole would be zero. Any velocity of the receiver relative to the Earth and the Earth around the Sun is removed for the purposes of CMB anisotropy studies, while our velocity relative to the Local Group of galaxies and the Local Group’s motion relative to the CMB frame are normally removed for cosmological studies. The dipole is now routinely used as a primary calibrator for mapping experiments, either via the time- varying orbital motion of the Earth, or through the cosmological dipole measured by satellite experiments.

    Do any references suggest this dipole is under debate?