An Alternative To What Dr. Edwin Hubble Saw

[fahrquad]

I recall a Science Fiction short story I read about 45 years ago where life on Earth was considered an infestation and the rest of the universe was moving way from us to avoid contamination.  I cannot recall the title or author after all these years.  A rather different explanation for the expansion of the universe IMHO.

 

So expansion is caused by cosmic cooties?    

[RodneyBelieves]

In this article, I read that astronomers used Gravitational Lensing to measure the Hubble Value:

 

https://phys.org/news/2019-01-astronomers-images-quasars-hubble-constant.html

 

I then added code to my simulator of Steady Rate expansion to track observed light that is deflected by an object to an observer.  It turns out that multiple images from an object emitted at the same moment in time all yield the same Hubble Constant value to any observer.  In other words, yet another hit for this model.  This model would predict what these scientist saw and offer an alternative interpretation of the data.

 

I added the approach I used to code of Gravitational Lensing into my simulator and the data that came out of it.  You can see on my website, search for "Gravitational Lensing"  There are two entries.  The first explores lensing in a clean expansion environment.   The second, with the observer out of sync in the expansion motion.  

 

Both would offer what these scientist are reporting.  However, they do not give much detail as to the nature of the data or how they analyzed it.

 

My website again:  http://hubbleexpansion.com/

 

 

Here is the main thrust of what I added to my website concerning Gravitational Lensing:

 

 

 

 

[RodneyBelieves]

I read about another observation in our Universe report by NASA scientists.  The minute I read it I perceived an observation coming out of my simulator that sounds a lot like it.  This motion is generated in my simulator when the observer is moving out of sync with the pattern.  It is a perceived expansion within the greater expansion, a very localized observation, just like the one being reported by NASA. They named it "Dark Flow".

 

 

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html

 

Here is a plot that I posted on my website that illustrates it:

 

[RodneyBelieves]

And how do you explain accelerated expansion with this? You found a way (maybe) to explain expansion, not acceleraed expansion.

At the time you asked me this, I did not understand how observation led us to postulate that the Expansion of the Universe is accelerating.  I had read that it was because very distant objects, relativistic recession velocities, were too dim compared to the calculated distance.  Until the other day, I didn't understand that.  It was when I read a statement by Dr. Adam Weiss that at very large distances General Relativity had to be taken into account.  I then tried to find a basic equation for luminosity in Relative terms.  When I found it, I think I see the "explanation" of acceleration you asked about.

 

The Expansion Motion in the simulator I wrote is from center, and would offer motions at divergent angles, and that would seem to offer every observation I can find associated with Expansion.  Because there are divergent angles of Expansion Motion between any two objects, it might be that using General Relative would cause my simulations to suggest that the luminosity would be lowered more than Dr. Weiss expected:

 

 

http://hubbleexpansion.com/

Edited March 20, 2020 by RodneyBelieves