3JCN - The Simplest Music Notation
EDWIN HUBBLE'S LAW
A FUNDAMENTAL WEAKNESS OF THE BIG BANG THEORY by Thomas Nguyen
Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity which established the relationship between matter, space, time and gravity, governs modern cosmology's view of the universe. But when Einstein began to apply his theory to the structure of the universe, he was dismayed to find that it predicted either an expanding or contracting universe--something entirely incompatible with the prevailing notion of a static universe. In what he would later call "the greatest blunder of my life," Einstein added a term called the cosmological constant to his equations that would make his calculations consistent with a static universe (1).
Einstein admitted his mistake in 1929 because Edwin Hubble showed that distant galaxies were receding from the earth, and the further away they were, the faster they were moving (This does not sound great, because it violates Einstein's speed limit). Hubble discovered that the light coming from many galaxies was shifted toward the red, end of the spectrum. The more distant the galaxy, the greater its redshift is, and therefore the higher the velocity, a relation known as Hubble's Law. The simplest interpretation of this "redshift" was that the galaxies were moving away from us, based on Doppler Effect (2).
That Hubble’s discovery changed cosmology tremendously: It gave rise to Big Bang theory and Inflation theory as the standard cosmological models, and the Expanding Universe (or Steady State theory as alternative to the standard). They all agree on the Universe expands (3). In short, Hubble proposed that the redshift was caused by a Doppler effect due to the receding movement of the stars and galaxies, which logically suggested an ever-expanding universe. It has been further proposed that this expansion originated from a big bang (4). WHAT IF HUBBLE'S ORIGINAL PREMISE WAS FLAWED?
Even Hubble doubted that red-shifts may not be due to an expanding universe by himself. In his "Publications of astronomical society of the Pacific", Volume 59, Number 349, in August 1947, Hubble wrote:
A FUNDAMENTAL WEAKNESS OF THE BIG BANG THEORY by Thomas Nguyen
Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity which established the relationship between matter, space, time and gravity, governs modern cosmology's view of the universe. But when Einstein began to apply his theory to the structure of the universe, he was dismayed to find that it predicted either an expanding or contracting universe--something entirely incompatible with the prevailing notion of a static universe. In what he would later call "the greatest blunder of my life," Einstein added a term called the cosmological constant to his equations that would make his calculations consistent with a static universe (1).
Einstein admitted his mistake in 1929 because Edwin Hubble showed that distant galaxies were receding from the earth, and the further away they were, the faster they were moving (This does not sound great, because it violates Einstein's speed limit). Hubble discovered that the light coming from many galaxies was shifted toward the red, end of the spectrum. The more distant the galaxy, the greater its redshift is, and therefore the higher the velocity, a relation known as Hubble's Law. The simplest interpretation of this "redshift" was that the galaxies were moving away from us, based on Doppler Effect (2).
That Hubble’s discovery changed cosmology tremendously: It gave rise to Big Bang theory and Inflation theory as the standard cosmological models, and the Expanding Universe (or Steady State theory as alternative to the standard). They all agree on the Universe expands (3). In short, Hubble proposed that the redshift was caused by a Doppler effect due to the receding movement of the stars and galaxies, which logically suggested an ever-expanding universe. It has been further proposed that this expansion originated from a big bang (4). WHAT IF HUBBLE'S ORIGINAL PREMISE WAS FLAWED?
Even Hubble doubted that red-shifts may not be due to an expanding universe by himself. In his "Publications of astronomical society of the Pacific", Volume 59, Number 349, in August 1947, Hubble wrote:
The following explains the flaw of Hubble's law:
Redshift was caused mainly by dark matter, dark energy, or some things else such as cluster of galaxies' gravitational lensing, the curvature of spacetime, not from galaxies moving away from us.
Redshift was caused mainly by dark matter, dark energy, or some things else such as cluster of galaxies' gravitational lensing, the curvature of spacetime, not from galaxies moving away from us.
Let's talk about dark matter and dark energy: According NASA Science (5) the composition of the universe contains about 68% dark energy, 25% dark matter, and only 5% normal matter.
Dark energy is (functionally equivalent to) cosmological constant, a constant energy density filling space homogeneously which Einstein added into his equation to grant a static universe. In other words, dark energy is the "energy inherent to space itself". This is the thing we do not understand at all.
Over 65 years ago the Swiss astrophysicist Fritz Zwicky noticed that the speed of galaxies in large clusters, such as the Coma cluster, is much too great to keep them gravitationally bound together unless they weigh over one hundred times more than one would estimate based on the number of stars in the cluster. Decades of investigation confirmed his analysis, and in the 1970s further evidence for dark matter was found from gravitational studies of matter in the outer parts (the halos) of ordinary nearby galaxies (1).
Dark matter is thought to be a strange form of matter. It is all-pervasive in the universe. While astronomers can’t directly see dark matter, its effects can still be observed. When a large amount of dark matter gathers in one place, such as the halo around a galaxy, it will exert a massive gravitational force. This field is so strong it can bend the path of light beams passing near it. This might suggest a method to find out if dark matter exists or not: Study trajectory of light in universe at some "empty space"spots (no presence of normal matter).
The light from a distant galaxy has been bent so many times before coming to us, because of many layers of dark matters or cluster of galaxies or ... in universe. When the light has been bent, it is stretched or its wavelength is stretched (redshifts). This effect might be thought as: if there were no dark matter in universe, then the sources of light would move away from us (same duration of time) or the space between us and the light sources increased. This expanding stretched out the light caused redshift (see picture below). That was Hubble's law! Hubble thought that distant galaxies moved away from us caused redshifts based on Doppler Effect.
Not only dark matter caused redshift, but dark energy might also caused redshift. All ordinary matter objects including photons which move through dark energy might be experienced a "friction" (if spacetime is not perfectly smooth), that slows down photons as they travel vast distance. As we know energy of a photon E = h.f (h is Planck constant), because photon loses its energy, frequency f is decreasing or wavelength is increasing (redshift).
Dark energy is (functionally equivalent to) cosmological constant, a constant energy density filling space homogeneously which Einstein added into his equation to grant a static universe. In other words, dark energy is the "energy inherent to space itself". This is the thing we do not understand at all.
Over 65 years ago the Swiss astrophysicist Fritz Zwicky noticed that the speed of galaxies in large clusters, such as the Coma cluster, is much too great to keep them gravitationally bound together unless they weigh over one hundred times more than one would estimate based on the number of stars in the cluster. Decades of investigation confirmed his analysis, and in the 1970s further evidence for dark matter was found from gravitational studies of matter in the outer parts (the halos) of ordinary nearby galaxies (1).
Dark matter is thought to be a strange form of matter. It is all-pervasive in the universe. While astronomers can’t directly see dark matter, its effects can still be observed. When a large amount of dark matter gathers in one place, such as the halo around a galaxy, it will exert a massive gravitational force. This field is so strong it can bend the path of light beams passing near it. This might suggest a method to find out if dark matter exists or not: Study trajectory of light in universe at some "empty space"spots (no presence of normal matter).
The light from a distant galaxy has been bent so many times before coming to us, because of many layers of dark matters or cluster of galaxies or ... in universe. When the light has been bent, it is stretched or its wavelength is stretched (redshifts). This effect might be thought as: if there were no dark matter in universe, then the sources of light would move away from us (same duration of time) or the space between us and the light sources increased. This expanding stretched out the light caused redshift (see picture below). That was Hubble's law! Hubble thought that distant galaxies moved away from us caused redshifts based on Doppler Effect.
Not only dark matter caused redshift, but dark energy might also caused redshift. All ordinary matter objects including photons which move through dark energy might be experienced a "friction" (if spacetime is not perfectly smooth), that slows down photons as they travel vast distance. As we know energy of a photon E = h.f (h is Planck constant), because photon loses its energy, frequency f is decreasing or wavelength is increasing (redshift).
The more distant the galaxy, its light has been bent more by dark matters or cluster of galaxies or the curvature of spacetime (more redshift). If there were no dark matter or galaxies blocked the light, then the source of light would seem to move away from us faster as simulation below (Hubble's thought). So more redshift doesn't mean that the source of light move away from us faster, but it means that the light from the source had been bent more before coming to us.
ANATOMY OF HUBBLE'S LAW
(Time in this simulation is just few seconds. For real situation, time can be years, million years, or billion years, then galaxies' motion is continuing.)
For distant galaxies move toward us, their lights were blueshifted; however, the lights have to go through many layers of dark matters and dark energy before coming to us which caused more redshift. The more distant the galaxy, the greater its redshift is. Therefore, what Hubble saw in spectrums were just redshifts (not blueshift) and he concluded that those distant galaxies were moving faster away from us! It is a flaw!
For those cases, Doppler Effect was too small compare to dark matter's, dark energy's, or galaxies' effects which led Hubble to a wrong conclusion.
For galaxies close to the Milky Way, the role of Doppler Effect might greater than the dark matter’s and dark energy's effects. Therefore we can see some cases of blueshifts, for instance Andromeda. For both cases, much more redshifts are observed than blueshifts. This conclusion is exactly what is observed!
The above argument can be summarized by the following mathematical clauses:
For distant galaxies move toward us, their lights were blueshifted; however, the lights have to go through many layers of dark matters and dark energy before coming to us which caused more redshift. The more distant the galaxy, the greater its redshift is. Therefore, what Hubble saw in spectrums were just redshifts (not blueshift) and he concluded that those distant galaxies were moving faster away from us! It is a flaw!
For those cases, Doppler Effect was too small compare to dark matter's, dark energy's, or galaxies' effects which led Hubble to a wrong conclusion.
For galaxies close to the Milky Way, the role of Doppler Effect might greater than the dark matter’s and dark energy's effects. Therefore we can see some cases of blueshifts, for instance Andromeda. For both cases, much more redshifts are observed than blueshifts. This conclusion is exactly what is observed!
The above argument can be summarized by the following mathematical clauses:
Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were right to protect the fact that universe was static and the geometry of the universe is flat. Einstein should not worry about universe expands from Hubble's law. He could take back his words "The greatest blunder of my life".
In short, Big Bang theory has many weaknesses, but the fundamental one is the Hubble's law. Hubble used Doppler effect as the main reason to explain redshift. We do not know about 95% of Universe, the probability of other things in this portion 95% can cause redshift is very high. So just based on the concept of Doppler effect to conclude that the universe is expanding is not mature.
There are many scientists in the world opposed the Big Bang theory, here are some notable ones: Sir Fred Hoyle, Erik Verlinde, Geoffrey and Margaret Burridge, Paul Steinhardt, Neil Turok, etc.
Scientific community needs to have a new standard cosmological model to replace for Big Bang, Inflation, and the Expanding universe theory. Let consider two unsolved problems with Big Bang theory:
1. ONE GREAT ARGUMENT:
If the universe is expanding, why are the Milky way and Andromeda galaxies on a collision course?
Big Bang theory's scientists today have only one way to explain this question: In a galaxy's local neighborhood, the gravitational attraction force can be stronger than dark energy repulsive force.
This answer is not so convinced because: First, we don't know about dark energy, how can we compare its force and gravitational force. Second, our Local Group comprises about 55 galaxies including Milky Way and Andromeda and its diameter is about 10 million light years, while Virgo Cluster comprises about 2000 galaxies and its diameter is about 15 million light years. That means galaxies in Virgo cluster are much more crowded than galaxies in our Local Group. Will galaxies in Virgo Cluster be on collision course because of strong local galaxy's neighborhood gravitational attraction force?
2. PROBLEM WITH PARALLAX METHOD:
The following picture explains the principle of the parallax method, which used to measure distances to nearby stars by measuring parallax angle p. With this method, the distance from our Sun to the nearby star can be determined by a simple formula:
D = 1/p (D in parsec, p in arcsec)
The problem is our Sun and the nearby star is not stay still in Milky Way. They have different speed and trajectory because of their different positions in Milky Way.
Our Sun moves around the center of Milky Way with a speed of 230 km/s and our Earth is moving around the Sun as the following picture. As a result, after 6 months our Sun has moved a way a distance 230*(365*24*3600) ~ 24 AU. This means that our Earth is at a new place which is about 24 AU from the old place, not on the opposite position as picture A.
Our Sun moves around the center of Milky Way with a speed of 230 km/s and our Earth is moving around the Sun as the following picture. As a result, after 6 months our Sun has moved a way a distance 230*(365*24*3600) ~ 24 AU. This means that our Earth is at a new place which is about 24 AU from the old place, not on the opposite position as picture A.
Picture A
Picture B
Because GAIA satellite is around the Sun-Earth Lagrange Point L2 (6), which is 1.5 million km from Earth as Picture C, its trajectory must be mainly similar to the trajectory of Earth as Picture B.
Because GAIA satellite is around the Sun-Earth Lagrange Point L2 (6), which is 1.5 million km from Earth as Picture C, its trajectory must be mainly similar to the trajectory of Earth as Picture B.
|
|
Picture C
The fact that parallax method is imprecise causes a big domino effect in cosmic distance ladder, as well as measuring velocities of stars in galaxy. Example: the following picture shows M33 rotation curve problem:
The fact that parallax method is imprecise causes a big domino effect in cosmic distance ladder, as well as measuring velocities of stars in galaxy. Example: the following picture shows M33 rotation curve problem:
Picture D
In 1929, Edwin Hubble announced that almost all galaxies appeared to be moving away from us. In fact, he found that the universe was expanding - with all of the galaxies moving away from each other. This phenomenon was observed as a redshift of a galaxy's spectrum. This redshift appeared to be larger for faint, presumably further, galaxies. Hence, the farther a galaxy, the faster it is receding from Earth. You can see this trend in Hubble's data shown in the images above. The velocity of a galaxy could be expressed mathematically as
v = H x dwhere v is the galaxy's radial outward velocity, d is the galaxy's distance from Earth, and H is the constant of proportionality called the Hubble constant.
The exact value of the Hubble constant is still somewhat uncertain, but is generally believed to be around 65 kilometers per second for every megaparsec in distance. (A megaparsec is given by 1 Mpc = 3 x 106 light-years). This means that a galaxy 1 megaparsec away will be moving away from us at a speed of 65 km/sec, while another galaxy 100 megaparsecs away will be receding at 100 times this speed. So essentially, the Hubble constant reflects the rate at which the universe is expanding.
So to determine an object's distance, we only need to know its velocity. Velocity is measurable thanks to the Doppler shift. By taking the spectrum of a distant object, such as a galaxy, astronomers can see a shift in the lines of its spectrum and from this shift determine its velocity. Putting this velocity into the Hubble equation, they determine the distance. Note that this method of determining distances is based on observation (the shift in the spectrum) and on a theory (Hubble's Law). If the theory is not correct, the distances determined in this way are all nonsense.
It should be noted that, on very large scales, Einstein's theory predicts departures from a strictly linear Hubble law. The amount of departure, and the type, depends on the value of the total mass of the universe. In this way a plot of recession velocity (or redshift) vs. distance, which is a straight line at small distances, can tell us about the total amount of matter in the universe and may provide crucial information about the mysterious dark matter.
REFERENCES
1. J. P. Ostriker, P. Steinhardt. New Light on Dark Matter, Retrieved October 31, 2012 from http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~steinh/osdark.pdf
2. The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. Retrieved October 31, 2012 from
http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html
3. H. Bondi; T. Gold. The Steady-State Theory of the Expanding Universe, Retrieved December 22, 2012 from
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1948MNRAS.108..252B
4. L. J. Wang. The Dispersive Extinction Theory of Redshift, Retrieved December 23, 2012 from
http://web2.utc.edu/~tdp442/RedshiftEssay.pdf
5. NASA Science. Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Retrieved December 23, 2012 from
http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy/
6. ESA Science & Technology
http://sci.esa.int/gaia/
San Diego, July 10, 2007
In 1929, Edwin Hubble announced that almost all galaxies appeared to be moving away from us. In fact, he found that the universe was expanding - with all of the galaxies moving away from each other. This phenomenon was observed as a redshift of a galaxy's spectrum. This redshift appeared to be larger for faint, presumably further, galaxies. Hence, the farther a galaxy, the faster it is receding from Earth. You can see this trend in Hubble's data shown in the images above. The velocity of a galaxy could be expressed mathematically as
v = H x dwhere v is the galaxy's radial outward velocity, d is the galaxy's distance from Earth, and H is the constant of proportionality called the Hubble constant.
The exact value of the Hubble constant is still somewhat uncertain, but is generally believed to be around 65 kilometers per second for every megaparsec in distance. (A megaparsec is given by 1 Mpc = 3 x 106 light-years). This means that a galaxy 1 megaparsec away will be moving away from us at a speed of 65 km/sec, while another galaxy 100 megaparsecs away will be receding at 100 times this speed. So essentially, the Hubble constant reflects the rate at which the universe is expanding.
So to determine an object's distance, we only need to know its velocity. Velocity is measurable thanks to the Doppler shift. By taking the spectrum of a distant object, such as a galaxy, astronomers can see a shift in the lines of its spectrum and from this shift determine its velocity. Putting this velocity into the Hubble equation, they determine the distance. Note that this method of determining distances is based on observation (the shift in the spectrum) and on a theory (Hubble's Law). If the theory is not correct, the distances determined in this way are all nonsense.
It should be noted that, on very large scales, Einstein's theory predicts departures from a strictly linear Hubble law. The amount of departure, and the type, depends on the value of the total mass of the universe. In this way a plot of recession velocity (or redshift) vs. distance, which is a straight line at small distances, can tell us about the total amount of matter in the universe and may provide crucial information about the mysterious dark matter.
REFERENCES
1. J. P. Ostriker, P. Steinhardt. New Light on Dark Matter, Retrieved October 31, 2012 from http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~steinh/osdark.pdf
2. The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. Retrieved October 31, 2012 from
http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html
3. H. Bondi; T. Gold. The Steady-State Theory of the Expanding Universe, Retrieved December 22, 2012 from
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1948MNRAS.108..252B
4. L. J. Wang. The Dispersive Extinction Theory of Redshift, Retrieved December 23, 2012 from
http://web2.utc.edu/~tdp442/RedshiftEssay.pdf
5. NASA Science. Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Retrieved December 23, 2012 from
http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy/
6. ESA Science & Technology
http://sci.esa.int/gaia/
San Diego, July 10, 2007
