CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesRelativity and Gravitational TheoryNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories

The kinematic origin of the cosmological redshift

Open access
Bunn, Emory F., Hogg, David W.·2009·American Journal of Physics
DOI 10.1119/1.3129103
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

A common belief about big-bang cosmology is that the cosmological redshift cannot be properly viewed as a Doppler shift (that is, as evidence for a recession velocity) but must be viewed in terms of the stretching of space. We argue that, contrary to this view, the most natural interpretation of the redshift is as a Doppler shift, or rather as the accumulation of many infinitesimal Doppler shifts. The stretching-of-space interpretation obscures a central idea of relativity, namely that it is always valid to choose a coordinate system that is locally Minkowskian. We show that an observed frequency shift in any spacetime can be interpreted either as a kinematic (Doppler) shift or a gravitational shift by imagining a suitable family of observers along the photon’s path. In the context of the expanding universe, the kinematic interpretation corresponds to a family of comoving observers and hence is more natural.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1119/1.3129103

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The redshift along any particular path is a single number; it is not possible to decompose it into Doppler and cosmic expansion terms in a unique way.

    “The redshift along any particular path is a single number; it is not possible to decompose it into 'Doppler' and 'cosmic expansion' terms in a unique way [11].”

    From In What Sense Is the Early Universe Fine-Tuned? (2014) · cites this paper as [11]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bunn, E. F., & Hogg, D. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Richmond (US)
  • New York University (US)
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Physics
Publisher
American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT)
Published
2009-08-01
Volume
77
Issue
8
Pages
688-694
ISSN
  • 0002-9505 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-2909
DOI
10.1119/1.3129103
OpenAlex
W2151799114
Cited by
80
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 9
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Physics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Keywords
cosmological redshift, Doppler shift, gravitational redshift, comoving observers, cosmic expansion, Big Bang theory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review