Current progress in cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropy measurements opens up the possibility of determining Hubble’s constant (H0 = h × 100 km s−1 Mpc−1) from the CMB power spectrum radiation temperature anisotropy. The results show that, besides the Lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM) model, much simpler Einstein-de Sitter (EdeS) models without the cosmological constant can fit the data as well, or even better, than the ΛCDM model. Calculations with EdeS models yield unexpectedly low values for Hubble’s constant of h = 0.30 and 0.46, respectively. These values are completely inconsistent with the direct determination of h ~ 0.70 from the redshift (RS) of spectral lines. In the present paper I consider whether the gap between h = 0.3 and h = 0.7 could be explained using conventional physics without introducing further hypotheses, or whether the RS of starlight and the RS of the CMB could stem from different physical origins.
References
[1]
Hubble, E. (1929) A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity among Extra-Galactic Nebulae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 15, 168-173. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.15.3.168
[2]
Einstein, A. and deSitter. W. (1932) On the Relation between the Expansion and the Mean Density of the Universe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 18, 213. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.18.3.213
[3]
Guth, A.H. (1981) Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problem. Physical Review D, 23, 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.23.347
[4]
Moffat, J.W. and Toth, V.T. (2012) Modified Gravity: Cosmology without Dark Matter or Einstein’s Cosmological Constant. arXiv: 0710. 0346.
[5]
Lineweaer, C.H. and Barbosa, D. (1998) Cosmic Microwave Background: Implications for Hubble’s Constant and the Spectral Parameters n and Q in Cold Dark Matter Critical Density Universes. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 329, 799-808.
[6]
Blanchard, A., Douspis, M., Rowan-Robinson, M. and Sarkar, S. (2003) An Alternative to the Cosmological ‘Concordance Model’. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 412, 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20031425
[7]
Einstein, A. (1917) Cosmological Observations about the General Theory of Relativity. Proceedings of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences, 142-152.
[8]
López-Corredoira, M. (2017) Tests and Problems of the Standard Model in Cosmology. arXiv: 1701.08720.
[9]
López-Corredoira, M. (2015) Tests for the Expansion of the Universe. arXiv: 1501.01487.
Marosi, L.A. (2013) Hubble Diagram Test of Expanding and Static Cosmological Models: The Case for a Slowly Expanding Universe. Advances in Astronomy, 2013, Article ID: 917104. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/917104
[12]
Harrison, E. (1993) The Redshift-Distance and the Velocity-Distance Laws. Astrophysical Journal, 403, 28-31. https://doi.org/10.1086/172179
[13]
Marosi, L.A. (2014) Hubble Diagram Test of 280 Supernovae Redshift Data. Journal of Modern Physics, 5, 29-33. https://doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2014.51005
[14]
Marosi, L.A. (2016) Modelling and Analysis of the Hubble Diagram of 280 Supernovae and Gamma Ray Bursts Redshifts with Analytical and Empirical Redshift/Magnitude Functions. International Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 6, 272-275. https://doi.org/10.4236/ijaa.2016.63022
[15]
Sorrell, W.H. (2009) Misconceptions about the Hubble Recession Law. Astrophysics and Space Science, 323, 205-211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10509-009-0057-z
[16]
Vigoureux, J.M., Vigoureux, B. and Langlois, M. (2014) An Analytical Expression for the Hubble Diagram of Supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursts. arXiv: 1411.3648v1.
[17]
Traunmüller, H. (2014) From Magnitudes and Redshifts of Supernovae, Their Light-Curves, and Angular Sizes of Galaxies to a Tenable Cosmology. Astrophysics and Space Science, 350, 755-767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10509-013-1764-z
