Starlight

I loosely studied on my own Astronomy around 10 years ago. I have an 8" Newtonian on an equatorial mount. I have seen down to 13th magnitude with it using averted vision.I understand the Hubble concept, but I have a question. can we measure the red shift stars close to us, in our own galaxy. Do we only see their motion relative to our galaxy, or can we see the motion from the big bang?

I could find my old log, but I believe I looked at a few galaxies through my scope. I remember, m-101, m-31, m81 and 82, I think m-105. Yes, that I knew. Like measuring Doppler with sound equipment. I think that is wrong? Objects we measure using Hubble's law are only measured relative to us. Everything in our galaxy is moving with us, so universal expansion is undetectable. (I just realized/remembered this) I think galaxies close to us, are also moving with us, so we can't detect their expansion relative to the universe. If M-33/31 are only 2 million light years away, then it has only separated from us very little compared to the 14 billion light years we have traveled from the center. So it is moving too slowly away from us to measure using Hubble's law.

quote:

---

Dang! You're just asking for it, aren't you. (Psst! It's not wrong, and you said almost the same thing anyway.)

---

I think in the last 4 posts and replies to me we are confusing two different topics, or thoughts. I had said the expansion as a result of the big bang of objects in our own galaxy cannot be measured because they are moving with us.Then I was talking about our local group, and not being able to measure their expansion relative to the universe, not to us.Onfire: I was taught a long time ago by the administrators to try and combine posts, cause it can get out of hand, and that 300 limit can come up fast. Anyone who is involved in the thread should be reading all posts, otherwise things get repeated.

quote:

---

The expansion of the universe is not a result of any impetus provided by the Big Bang. Rather, expansion appears to be an inherent property of the universe.

---

That is not how I learned it. Also the name Big Bang does not lend itself to be considered anything but impetus. I would think it to be logical to assume that there is some force behind the expansion of space, or the universe as we know it. Especially since objects are attracted to each other, something must be driving them apart.Either way there should be some kind of leading edge (microwave background) and a direction were something is not moving away from us, because there is nothing.
As I read it, we are like dots on a balloon that is being filled with air. If all the stars within our dot are moving with us, we can't measure their expansion relative to the rest of the universe.

quote:

---

Combining replies into a single message is usually only suggested by moderators to those who have a tendency to post a bunch of consecutive short replies to many messages.

---

If that were only the case. If 5 people reply to you, shouldn't it require 5 replies back? That is how I think it should be, yet I was told to do otherwise. I can't believe you just said that, this site continues to amaze me. Bias.