Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:18 am
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:45 am
Sun Feb 17, 2019 12:02 pm
buckles29 wrote:From the last Sky at Night programme....
I am not a scientist but thought this should be considered - this is not a debate for me, just some ideas ' out of the box'.
1. Should we be treating the Hubble constant as a constant at all? By assuming the universe were to be accelerating in its rate of expansion would explain potentially the difference in the measured results using the different methods. In other words, taking an average rate of expansion from time point 0 (the earliest observable CMB) would yield an incorrect, and lower, value if the constant is not a constant. Perhaps we should be measuring not in ms but ms per s.
2. Expansion should also consider (and I am going way out there now) that other universes have an increasing gravitational affect on ours as we expand. Maybe the matter needed to explain the expansion of our universe is not in our universe at all?????
Just some thoughts