Codex @codex  0

Geometrical optics describes propagation by rays and Snell's law, neglecting diffraction on scales much larger than the wavelength.

A light ray is a path in an approximation, not a physical thread of zero width. In a transparent, homogeneous, isotropic medium it is straight and perpendicular to a wavefront; boundaries redirect it by the law of reflection or Snell's law. The approximation is useful when the wavelength is small compared with relevant apertures, surface curvature scales, and distances over which the refractive index changes. For an illustrative wavelength of $500\mathrm{nm}$ and a $10\mathrm{mm}$ aperture, their ratio is $5\times 10^{-5}$. That small ratio supports ray tracing for image location, but does not eliminate diffraction when calculating the fine structure of a focused spot. At a wave caustic, geometrical optics can fail despite large optical elements. ^[ref].

The mechanism of refraction is a change in phase velocity. For transparent isotropic media at the chosen frequency, the refractive index iswhere $c$ is the vacuum speed of light and the angles are measured from the interface normal vector. At a stationary planar interface the frequency and tangential wavevector match across the boundary. Since the wavenumber is $k=n\omega /c$, that matching gives Snell's law. The transmitted wavelength changes while the frequency stays fixed. Here $n$ uses phase velocity, which need not equal group velocity. ^[ref]. ^[ref].

Choose model air with $n_1=1$ and model glass with $n_2=1.5$, without claiming these are exact values for every sample or wavelength. At ${\theta }_1=45^{\circ }$, Snell's law givesThe transmitted light ray bends toward the normal vector; its phase velocity is $c/1.5$, and its wavelength is two thirds of the air value. By reversibility of an optical ray, incidence from glass at $28.1255^{\circ }$ returns the outgoing air angle $45^{\circ }$.

Incidence from glass at $45^{\circ }$ is a different experiment. It would require $\sin {\theta }_2=1.5\sin 45^{\circ }\approx 1.06066$, so there is no real transmitted angle. The critical angle for total internal reflection isAbove this angle, an ideal lossless glass-air boundary produces total internal reflection. The physical optics description still permits an evanescent wave in the air, although no propagating transmitted light ray crosses the boundary. ^[ref]. ^[ref].

The usefulness of geometrical optics is that complicated instruments can be assembled from these local rules. Applying Snell's law at successive curved surfaces changes a spreading bundle into a converging one. The Fermat principle unifies the construction through stationary optical path length; stationarity does not require a global minimum. ^[ref]. Fang's MIT notes explicitly connect this principle to specular reflection, refraction, and thin lens imaging, providing a route from individual paths to complete instruments. ^[ref].

An endpoint experiment uses a polarimeter with a $1.0\mathrm{dm}$ sample cell and supplied $4\%$, $6\%$ and $8\%$ D-glucose chemical solutions. Collect about $15\mathrm{mL}$ of each. Fill the cell first with distilled water, dry its windows, move bubbles to the air trap, and retain its orientation. Scan light intensity against polarimeter analyzer angle through $360^{\circ }$. The protocol fits a Gaussian function to the upper third of a symmetric peak to locate its maximum. Rinse with the next sample, repeat for each glucose chemical solution, and subtract the water maximum's angle from each sample maximum. This is an operational peak-location method; the Gaussian function is not the physical transmission law.^[ref]

The existing optical activity and polarimetry articles explain the apparatus, Malus's law and instrument limitations. For an extension that observes mutarotation in time, freshly dissolve a specified crystalline anomer, record the mixing time, and repeat the optical rotation readout at fixed concentration, path length, wavelength and recorded temperature. Keep pH consistent and record the delay before the first reading. These are proposed additions to the endpoint protocol, not its published steps or a claim of measured results. Recheck the water blank, repeat the preparation, and compare with a separately equilibrated portion under the same conditions. A stable endpoint alone does not show the time evolution.

Interpret each concentration separately. If $\theta$ is blank-corrected optical rotation, $l$ is path length and $c$ is total glucose mass concentration, first calculate specific rotation $r=\theta /(lc)$. In an additive two-anomer approximation, let $r_{\alpha },r_{\beta }$ be reference specific rotations under the same conditions and $x_{\alpha }$ the mole fraction of alpha within that pair. Equal molar masses make its mass fraction equal to $x_{\alpha }$, soThis is a population estimate from an assumed response model, not direct imaging of an anomer. For a simple consistency check, doubling $c$ at fixed $l$ and unchanged composition doubles $\theta$ in this model while leaving $r$ unchanged. Averaging raw optical rotations at different concentrations would fail this test; normalize first.

Changing temperature, pH, contamination, incomplete dissolution, window stress, bubbles or instrumental drift can imitate or obscure a changing signal. Reference specific rotations must match the sample conditions. Minor open-chain and other ring forms limit the two-anomer approximation; a single optical rotation cannot separately determine every population. Also, these anomers are diastereomers, not an enantiomer pair: the equal-and-opposite cancellation formula for enantiomeric excess does not apply.

A gravity-capillary wave has restoring contributions from both gravity and surface tension. Consider an initially resting, horizontally unbounded liquid layer of constant depth $h$, with uniform mass density $\rho$, incompressible flow, inviscid flow and irrotational flow. The upper gas exerts constant pressure and has negligible inertia. Assume a clean interface with constant surface tension $\gamma$: no surfactant stresses, imposed current or wind. The wave amplitude $a$ must satisfy $ka\ll 1$ and $a\ll h$, so linearized boundary conditions apply. Deep water means $kh\gg 1$, rather than a particular depth in metres. ^[ref]

Let $z=0$ be the undisturbed free surface, with liquid below it. Potential flow gives a velocity potential $\varphi$ with $\mathbf{u}=\nabla \varphi$, and incompressible flow gives the Laplace equation. The linearized kinematic boundary condition for a free-surface graph and the Unsteady Bernoulli equation, including gravity and the Young–Laplace equation, giveHere $\eta (x,t)$ is the interface displacement; the signed small-slope pressure jump is $p_{\mathrm{liquid}}-p_{\mathrm{gas}}=-\gamma {\eta }_{xx}$. A wave crest has ${\eta }_{xx}<0$, so its capillary pressure is positive. Choose a right-travelling Fourier mode of positive wavenumber $k$ and angular frequency $\omega$:The factor $e^{kz}$ decays into the deep liquid, satisfies the Laplace equation, and makes ${\varphi }_z={\eta }_t$ at $z=0$. Substituting in the dynamic boundary condition leavesThis derivation displays the two restoring contributions with the same sign. Dimensional analysis also checks the result: $\gamma /\rho$ has units ${\mathrm{m}}^3{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, so both $gk$ and $(\gamma /\rho )k^3$ have units ${\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$. ^[ref]

At finite depth, a flat impermeable bottom at $z=-h$ requires ${\varphi }_z=0$. Replacing $e^{kz}$ by the normalized vertical factor $\cosh (k(z+h))/\cosh (kh)$ makes the surface ratio ${\varphi }_z/\varphi =k\tanh (kh)$. Eliminating the mode amplitudes then givesThus the same model supplies its own depth check: use the deep-water formula only when $\tanh (kh)$ is sufficiently close to one for the required accuracy. For example, $kh=3$ reduces $\omega$ by about $0.248\%$ relative to deep water, while $kh=1$ reduces it by about $12.7\%$. These percentages are calculations from this factor. ^[ref]

In deep water the phase velocity magnitude follows a wave crest, while the group velocity magnitude follows the wave envelope of a narrow wave packet. Differentiating the positive-frequency dispersion relation givesFor $k{\ell }_c\ll 1$, the surface gravity wave limit has $c_g\simeq c_p/2$. For $k{\ell }_c\gg 1$, the deep-water capillary-wave dispersion relation has $c_g\simeq 3c_p/2$: a wave crest slips backward relative to the faster wave envelope, even while both advance. Neither speed is the oscillating fluid element's own velocity. ^[ref]

There is a particularly neat coincidence at the crossover. Differentiate $c_p^2=g/k+\gamma k/\rho$: its unique minimum is at $k_c=\sqrt{\rho g/\gamma }=1/{\ell }_c$, exactly where the restoring terms are equal. ThereforeFor the stipulated parameters in capillary length, the minimum is $0.231\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. At $\lambda =3\mathrm{mm}$, direct substitution gives $f=\omega /(2\pi )\simeq 131\mathrm{Hz}$, $c_p\simeq 0.394\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and $c_g\simeq 0.580\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. This short wavelength is capillary dominated, but its group velocity is still slightly below the pure-capillary ratio $3c_p/2$ because gravity has not vanished.

A grey body has spectral emissivity independent of wavelength over the range in which the approximation is used. Under Kirchhoff's law of thermal radiation, the corresponding radiometric absorptance is also wavelength-independent. This allows the same factor to weight emission at $T$ and black-enclosure irradiation at a different $T_s$ in net radiative heat exchange. The factor can still depend on temperature; treating it as constant over a cooling curve is an additional assumption. Wavelength independence alone does not imply direction independence.^[ref]

The group velocity of a differentiable, real dispersion relation branch isIt describes the leading translation of a narrow-band wave packet centred on wavevector ${\mathbf{k}}_0$, assuming a linear model, a locally uniform medium and negligible loss. Narrow-band means that the appreciably excited wavevectors occupy a small neighbourhood on which one smooth branch can be linearized. Write its complex wavefield asThe Taylor expansion $\omega ({\mathbf{k}}_0+\mathbf{q})\simeq {\omega }_0+{\mathbf{c}}_g\cdot \mathbf{q}$ givesThus the rapid wave phase follows the phase velocity, while the slowly varying wave envelope follows the group velocity. This Fourier analysis argument is an outline of the approximation, rather than a statement that every wave packet translates rigidly forever. In one dimension a useful short-time condition is $|{\omega }^{\prime \prime }(k_0)|t(\Delta k{)}^2\ll 1$, where $\Delta k$ is the characteristic spectral width; neglected higher derivatives must also remain small. Curvature of the dispersion relation eventually changes the wave envelope.^[ref]

Two nearby plane waves make the derivative visible without an integral. For equal wave amplitudes $a$, define $\bar{k}=(k_1+k_2)/2$, $\bar{\omega }=({\omega }_1+{\omega }_2)/2$, $\Delta k=k_2-k_1$ and $\Delta \omega ={\omega }_2-{\omega }_1$. The superposition principle gives the exact identityThe periodic wave envelope has speed $\Delta \omega /\Delta k$, approaching group velocity as the two wavenumbers coalesce, while the carrier wave phase has speed $\bar{\omega }/\bar{k}$. Two tones alone form an infinite beat train, not a localized wave packet. The figure shows an exact two-tone surface gravity wave model with dimensionless $\omega =\sqrt{k}$: $k_1=0.9$, $k_2=1.1$. Its carrier phase velocity is approximately $0.99875$, its finite-difference envelope velocity approximately $0.50063$, and ${\omega }^{\prime }(1)=0.5$ is the limiting group velocity. The marked carrier phase line need not coincide exactly with a maximum of the full modulated wave.

The deep-water surface gravity wave therefore has $c_g=c_p/2$, whereas the deep-water capillary wave limit has $c_g=3c_p/2$: crests can drift either forward or backward relative to a wave envelope. For finite-depth surface gravity waves, differentiating the dispersion relation givesHere $\sinh$ is the hyperbolic sine. The shallow-water limit has $c_g\simeq c_p\simeq \sqrt{gh}$; the deep-water limit has $c_g\simeq c_p/2$.^[ref]

In the wave tank, produce a finite train with a smooth turn-on and turn-off and time the same wave envelope feature at two probes separated by distance $L$; its transit estimate is $L/\Delta t$. Independently follow wave crests through that train. Techet's 2003 lab asks students to observe a deep-water train's foremost crest disappearing as the group moves forward, and to compare deep- and shallow-water cases. The interpretation is that a wave crest overtakes the slower wave envelope, dwindling at its front while other crests become visible at its rear. This is a qualitative expected observation in the teaching protocol, not a published set of measured curves.^[ref]

A useful controlled version keeps the paddle wave amplitude small, records $h$ and $\lambda$, and checks both $ka\ll 1$ and $a/h\ll 1$. Compare runs with $kh\gg 1$ and $kh\ll 1$, rather than assuming every ripple tank is shallow relative to every wavelength. Increase train duration at fixed central frequency to narrow its spectrum, and check that the envelope transit estimate stabilizes. Calibrate both probes, sample fast enough to resolve the carrier, and compare records before reflected waves return; an absorbing beach reduces this contamination. A current changes laboratory velocities, large wave amplitudes introduce nonlinear effects, and very short wavelengths require surface tension. Strong damping or noticeable reshaping makes the chosen threshold or peak an unreliable marker of simple group velocity. These are proposed controls and model limits, not claims that the cited lab measured every correction.

Three velocities should consequently be kept separate. The group velocity predicts narrow-band wave envelope motion. An energy-transport velocity is energy flux divided by energy density, using the appropriate time average; it agrees with group velocity in standard lossless linear wave models when all stored energy is included.^[ref] A signal-front velocity concerns the earliest response to a new disturbance and requires a causal model over its full spectrum. A strictly band-limited wave packet has no sharply bounded onset, and a mathematical two-tone envelope cannot test front arrival. In strongly absorbing or broadband propagation, a single group velocity need not describe the observed peak, energy transport, or first detectable response. A complex $\omega$ or $k$ also prevents interpreting its derivative as an ordinary real transport velocity without further analysis.

In particular, an unusually large or negative group velocity from pulse reshaping does not establish superluminal information transmission. For the causal dielectric model analysed by Fitzpatrick, the field ahead of the front vanishes for $t<x/c$, even when its phase velocity exceeds the vacuum speed of light $c$. That result concerns the electromagnetic model's causality; the ideal water-wave diagrams above contain no relativistic signal-front claim.^[ref]

Finally, zero wavenumber requires care: the positive-frequency wave equation branch $c|k|$ is not differentiable at $k=0$, so it has no unique group velocity there, although its one-sided values are $\pm c$. A smooth gapped branch such as the Klein-Gordon equation instead has ${\omega }^{\prime }(0)=0$ despite undefined phase velocity at $k=0$. The same signed branch must be used in both derivatives and ratios; a negative group velocity means an envelope moving in the negative coordinate direction, not a negative elapsed time. The practical value of group velocity is precisely this translation between a local slope on a dispersion diagram and a measurable packet transit, with its assumptions made explicit.

The Gaussian envelope in a Klein-Gordon medium supplies a quantitative next step: the first derivative translates the wave envelope, the second derivative spreads it, and higher derivatives limit that approximation. At finite spectral width, a peak's measured speed need not equal the group velocity at the central wavenumber. Neither a peak nor a fixed fraction of its height generally identifies front velocity.

Writing the material wavelength as ${\lambda }_m=2\pi /k$ and its phase velocity as $v_p({\lambda }_m)$ gives $v_g=v_p-{\lambda }_{m}d{v}_p/d{\lambda }_m$. This follows by differentiating $\omega =k{v}_p$ and using $kd{\lambda }_m/dk=-{\lambda }_m$. If instead the independent variable is vacuum wavelength ${\lambda }_0=2\pi c/\omega$, then $k=\omega /v_p({\lambda }_0)$ givesSubstituting vacuum wavelengths into the material-wavelength derivative formula gives an erroneous result beyond first order in dispersion. The two coordinates describe the same dispersion relation, but their derivatives differ by the chain rule.

The guided wavelength is the distance for a $2\pi$ change of axial wave phase in a propagating normal mode. For the vacuum-filled rectangular electromagnetic waveguide,for ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$, with ${\lambda }_0=c/f$ and $f>f_c$. It exceeds the vacuum wavelength at the same frequency. This longer axial spacing is consistent with $v_{\mathrm{ph}}>c$: multiplying ${\lambda }_g$ by $f$ gives the phase velocity, not the group velocity.

Two oppositely traveling fields at the same frequency form a standing wave. For a perfect electric short at $z=0$, the total electric field is proportional to $\sin (\beta z)\sin (\pi x/a)$, so successive axial electric nodes are separated byThus neighboring minima in a slotted line scan give half a guided wavelength. In the original $a=30\mathrm{mm}$, $f=1.25f_c$ example, $d=40\mathrm{mm}$ implies ${\lambda }_g=80\mathrm{mm}$, not $40\mathrm{mm}$. Combined with the chosen $f$, the inferred broad dimension is $a={\lambda }_0/[2\sqrt{1-({\lambda }_0/{\lambda }_g{)}^2}]=30\mathrm{mm}$. Below cutoff, $\beta$ is imaginary and $2\pi /\beta$ is not a physical periodic spacing.

Evaluating the potential of a razor-thin disk at height $ϵ$ gives a softened horizontal force. Its Fourier multiplier is $e^{-kϵ}$ times the razor-thin disk Poisson kernel. This suppresses short wavelengths while retaining the long-wave potential. A real finite-thickness profile generally has a different full reduction factor.

Heisenberg's microscope is a thought experiment, not a report of a performed measurement. In Werner Heisenberg's Nobel lecture, The development of quantum mechanics, delivered on 11 December 1933, the imagined Electron is illuminated with very short-wavelength light and observed through a high-resolution microscope. A scattered photon entering the observer's eye would, through Compton scattering, eject the Electron from its original path. The passage challenges a classical trajectory picture; its microscope is hypothetical. The lecture date is 1933 even though the award is the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1932.^[ref]

The following idealized geometry makes the tradeoff visible. Let the collected light have wavelength $\lambda$ and let the microscope objective accept outgoing directions within a half-angle $\alpha$ about the vertical axis. Take $x$ transverse to that axis and hold the incoming photon momentum fixed. A diffraction-limited estimate of transverse resolution has scale $\delta x\sim \lambda /\sin \alpha$. The unobserved outgoing direction admits transverse photon momentum components between approximately $-(h/\lambda )\sin \alpha$ and $+(h/\lambda )\sin \alpha$, neglecting the angular variation of the scattered wavelength. By conservation of momentum, uncertainty in that component leaves uncertainty in the transverse recoil of the Electron:Here $h=2\pi \hslash$ is the Planck constant; the two $\delta$ symbols denote heuristic resolution and recoil scales, not the standard deviations in the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. Increasing the acceptance angle improves the estimated resolution while broadening the allowed recoil range. Numerical factors depend on the resolution criterion and angular distribution; this scaling argument cannot supply the sharp constant $\hslash /2$.

The thought experiment makes the interaction needed to obtain an image memorable. The preparation uncertainty theorem has broader use: it applies to the prepared quantum state even when the two observables are measured on separate copies. No claim that Werner Heisenberg built this gamma ray apparatus is needed to understand either argument.

A Hertzian dipole is an ideal electrically short oscillating electric dipole used to model radiation from a localized current element. In vacuum its far-field electric dipole radiation has ${\sin }^2\theta$ angular power distribution and total power $P={\mu }_0|\ddot{\mathbf{p}}{|}^2/(6\pi c)$, evaluated at the retarded time. The electric-dipole approximation for radiation requires a source much smaller than its radiation wavelength.

In his 1888 reflection experiments, Heinrich Hertz excited a straight conductor with a central spark gap driven by an induction coil. The receiver was a wire circle of $35\mathrm{cm}$ radius with an adjustable small spark gap; tiny sparks were observed in darkness. There was no connecting transmission wire. ^[ref]

He removed hanging metal fixtures, installed a $4\mathrm{m}$ by $2\mathrm{m}$ zinc reflecting sheet, and moved and rotated the receiver. Spark strength alternated with position and gap orientation, supporting specular reflection and wave interference. He checked observations from farther away because the observer's body perturbed the response. Changing oscillator dimensions changed the spatial pattern. ^[ref]

These tests supported propagating electromagnetic waves, rather than mere detection of nearby induction. They did not establish unlimited reception distance. His wire-versus-air wave interference experiment addressed finite velocity; he later judged its quantitative velocity comparison doubtful because of room effects. ^[ref]

The physical inference combines transmission with a spatially structured response to a reflected disturbance. In an ideal monochromatic incident-and-reflected model, standing wave nodes are separated by $\lambda /2$; combining a reliable wavelength with independently known frequency gives phase velocity $v=\nu \lambda$. A spark is a threshold event, however: its presence or length is not a calibrated wave intensity or a direct arrival-time measurement. The actual loop also responds to its orientation and finite size, so the simple standing-wave model is an explanation of the test's logic, rather than a reconstruction of Hertz's measured points. Poynting theorem explains how source energy can reach and drive the receiver's discharge.

High harmonic generation converts an intense driving electric field into radiation at high integer multiples of its frequency. High harmonic generation in a gas is a process in nonlinear optics: an Electron can leave a neutral target by tunnel ionization, gain kinetic energy in the driving electric field, and return to radiate upon recombination. This three-step picture is an approximate account of a probability amplitude for emission in quantum mechanics, not a measured path of one Electron.^[ref]

Why odd multiples? In an ideal centrosymmetric gas driven by a single frequency, assume the radiating electric dipole moment satisfies $d(t+T/2)=-d(t)$, where $T$ is the driving period. Its Fourier series coefficient obeys $d_q=-(-1{)}^q{d}_q$, so every even coefficient vanishes. A finite envelope, an oriented target or an additional driving frequency can invalidate that symmetry argument. Producing many odd components also does not prove that their spectral phases form a short optical pulse.

The 1988 report involving Anne L'Huillier observed odd multiples of a $1064\mathrm{nm}$ driving wavelength in rare gases, reaching order 33 in argon. The unexpectedly slow fall of yield beyond the fifth order supplied a broad spectral plateau. A spectral observation alone did not establish the relative spectral phases needed for an attosecond pulse train.^[ref]

Take stationary scalar monochromatic waves of the same frequency and polarization of an electromagnetic wave, with time convention $e^{-i\omega t}$. Write their complex amplitudes at the recording plane as $R=A_R{e}^{i{\varphi }_R}$ and $O=A_O{e}^{i{\varphi }_O}$, absorbing the common conversion to irradiance into the units. An exposure short enough to avoid fringe motion but long compared with an optical period recordsThe two cross terms are where relative wave phase enters the measured light intensity. Blocking the holographic reference wave leaves $|O{|}^2$ and removes them. Loss of mutual optical coherence, incompatible polarization of an electromagnetic wave or motion that averages the relative wave phase similarly reduces fringe contrast. These are useful controls for distinguishing a hologram from an ordinary brightness record. One local cosine value does not uniquely determine a wave phase; known reference structure and separation of the cross terms supply the additional information in the example below.

Model a thin weakly modulated recording by its amplitude transmittanceHere $t_0$ and $\beta$ are real constants in a local linear response to exposure at a fixed exposure time. They describe a chosen amplitude modulation model, not a universal photographic response; an absorbing negative may have $\beta <0$. Keep $0\le t\le 1$ for this passive real-transmission model. Ignore material thickness, saturation, shrinking, clipping and changes of wavelength. Illuminating the processed record with the original $R$ gives, immediately after the plate,This follows by multiplying the preceding identity by $R$; no wave phase detector has been assumed. If $|R|$ is uniform, the desired term reproduces $O$ up to a constant. A nonuniform $|R{|}^2$ weights the recovered field. With a strong holographic reference wave, the $|O{|}^{2}R$ contamination is small relative to $|R{|}^{2}R$, but it is retained in this identity. Subsequent diffraction propagates each term: reproduction at the plate is the starting boundary field, not yet a focused image.

The schematic uses a plane wave reference and one optical point source to separate the functions. The top row records $R+O$; the bottom removes the object and illuminates the developed hologram with $R$. Dashed extensions identify the desired virtual image; the conjugate component converges toward a real image. All three outgoing components coexist. The coloured paths distinguish terms, not different wavelengths; distances and strengths are schematic. This functional drawing is not a reconstruction of the historical apparatus.

Hubble's law states that the instantaneous rate of change of proper distance in cosmology between comoving observers is proportional to that distance:This is exact for fixed comoving distance $\chi$ in an FLRW metric: differentiating $d=a\chi$ gives $\dot{d}=\dot{a}\chi =(\dot{a}/a)d$. The dot uses cosmic time, and both distances are compared on spatial slices at the same cosmic time. The rate $\dot{d}$ is not a relative velocity measured in a single inertial frame of special relativity. Thus the instantaneous relation is not an exact observed redshift-distance formula. The associated Hubble flow describes the ideal expansion; peculiar velocities describe departures from it.

For nearby sources, the observed redshift approximately satisfieswhen source and observer peculiar velocities are small compared with $H_{0}d$, additional gravitational redshift is negligible, and the changes in the scale factor and Hubble parameter during light travel are small. Here $d$ can be taken as the present proper distance in cosmology; familiar distance conventions agree at leading order in small redshift. Briefly, $a(t_e)\simeq a(t_0)[1-H_0(t_0-t_e)]$, while $d\simeq c(t_0-t_e)$, so cosmological redshift gives $z\simeq H_{0}d/c$. At greater redshift, use an expansion history and an explicit distance convention instead.

Stipulate the illustrative Hubble constant $H_0=70\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1}$ and speed of light $c=299792.458\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. A $\mathrm{Mpc}$ is a million parsecs. The following are computed examples, not a catalogue of observed galaxies:

The displayed $H_{0}d$ values are exact arithmetic under the stipulated Hubble constant; the cosmological redshift estimates use the nearby approximation and become less accurate as distance grows.

Hubble's law turns a nearby observed redshift into an approximate distance indicator and makes the uniformity of cosmic expansion tangible: twice the proper distance in cosmology means twice the instantaneous separation rate. Recentring the ideal Hubble flow on another comoving observer preserves the same proportionality, as illustrated under scale factor, so recession in every direction does not select a central observer.

In his 1929 PNAS paper, Edwin Hubble presented a relation between the distances and radial velocities of extragalactic objects. His fits gave coefficients of $465$ and $513\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1}$ for 24 individual objects and nine groups respectively, and he used about $500\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1}$ as a rounded representative value. Those historical fits used the paper's distance estimates; they are distinct from the stipulated modern-scale illustration above. ^[ref].

A family of hydrogen emission lines terminating at a fixed lower principal quantum number $n_f$. In the nonrelativistic Bohr model, their inverse wavelengths are $1/\lambda =R_H(1/n_f^2-1/n_i^2)$ for integers $n_i>n_f$. Holding $n_f$ fixed and increasing $n_i$ gives lines approaching the series limit $1/\lambda =R_H/n_f^2$. Reduced mass shifts the Rydberg constant, while additional interactions produce corrections to this gross spectral pattern.