Section 3 Hubble law

By sure this law needs no presentation and therefore the discussion focuses on some consequences when this law is applied.

Hubble Ultra Deep Field, Cosmic microwave background and Hubble law…

Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation is considered the reminiscence of a hot universe about 300 000 years after Big Bang when the universe was at a temperature of about 4000 K. If the temperature was 4000 K, then the maxium of emission was at λpeak=724 nm. Near Earth observations shows that CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature of 2.725 K, so it peaks in the microwave range frequency of 160.2 Ghz (1.9 mm wavelength).

According to Big Bang theory, this radiation was stretched out from 724 nm up to aprox 1,9 mm or 1872659 nm in a time interval of approx 13,5 billions years.

The Hubble Ultra-Deep Field (HUDF) searched for early structure in universe after Big Bang. With a new camera in infrared (at 1700 nm), Hubble telescope was able to look for galaxies having red shifts between 9 and 12. An international team of astronomers, led by Yale University and the University of California scientists recently published an interesting study about such an early object - Galaxy EGS-zs8-1. According to their conclusion, this galaxy formed about 400 millions years after Big Bang, i.e, 100 millions years after the recombination epoch.

In case of galaxy EGS-zs8-1, a photon emitted about 400 millions years after Big Bang was stretched from UV domain i.e. 121,5 nm to 1700 nm in infrared and this stretch was performed over a period of about 13,4 billions years as in fig. 3.2.

If we make a simple comparison between first and second case we get some very interesting results.

How is possible that ,,space itself” knows if a photon is originated in big bang and stretch it out with approx. 140687 nm for a billions years and for a photon coming from a star or a galaxy the stretching is only 118 nm for a billion years? These photons follow the same path toward an Earth observer though….

If we make a difference between first and second case other interesting conclusion can be formulated: If we assume that a big bang photon is stretched similarly with a photon coming from a star when travels the same region of space, than for the first 100 millions years after recombination epoch, photons are stretched out 1897698 nm and for the rest of 13,4 billions years photons are stretched out only a tiny 1578,5 nm (see fig 3.3).

In the right spirit of Big Bang patches, a new fantastic idea has to be promoted. Alan Guth inflationary period is only a joke beside the acrobatics which needs to be invented in order to stretch a photon with 1897698 nm in only 100 millions years.

Even with a new acrobatics the new generation of instruments on Earth or in space will discover structures older than Big Bang or far away structures which needed a longer time to form than Big Bang can explain….

In fact even present discovered galaxies with redshifts between 9 and 12 will get a new face in the future. The fact they appear irregular and disorganized is merely a problem of distance and imprecise instrumentation.

The up presented calculation is only an approximation and I tried to use the most common accepted values published in literature; with other set of values close results are obtained. The purpose of this newsletter is not to argue if the age of Universe is 13,7 or 13,8 billions years or if recombination period was 300000 or 350000 years after Big Bang.

Hubble law and expansion bubbles problem….

At the time Hubble law and Big bang theory were advanced, science was at the beginning of large scale exploration of Universe. The newly discovered galaxies were considered isolated islands of mater in Universe and huge distances between them did not allow us to have a clear image about their reciprocal interactions.

One remark has to be made though: even from beginning it was known and accepted that Hubble law does not work for small distances. Inside our Solar System or inside a galaxy the gravitation forces are considered to strong to allow this expansion. Based on the same reasoning, the expansion was later excluded from clusters of galaxies and this fact already put some serious problems when we estimate distances across universe.

From the time the Hubble law was published, it was clear that this did not apply for our local group of galaxies. The Local Group includes our Milky Way and comprises more than 54 galaxies, most of them dwarf galaxies. The Local Group covers a diameter of 10 Mly (3.1 Mpc). At that time only a handful of galaxies in the group were known and few of them were blue shifted.

Later research showed that our local group is in fact part of the larger Virgo Supercluster, which in turn is considered to be a part of the Laniakea Supercluster.

To date, about 100 galaxies around Milky Way are blueshifted and most of these blueshifted galaxies are inside Virgo Supercluster; therefore we must admit that space expansion does not take place at level of clusters and superclusters either. The Virgo Supercluster has a diameter of 33 megaparsecs (110 million light-years). It is one of millions of superclusters in the observable universe.

The position of our Milky Way, in fact the position of our local group of galaxies, inside Virgosupercluster is somehow peculiar: we are in a coin of this supercluster; therefore when we make a measurement for a farther away object we should take into consideration a compensation if the incoming photons travel through Virgosupercluster!

Let us assume an observer on Earth who makes two measurements up to some far away galaxies A and B (as in fig 3.4). The galaxy A is behind the Virgosupercluster and by comparison the observer has free path up to the galaxy B.

The measurements are quite straightforward: the spectra of these galaxies are registered, their redshifts are estimated and based on Hubble law we can calculate the distances up to galaxies A and B. For simplification let us suppose that based on Hubble law, the observer obtain the same redshift and this mean the same distance up to both galaxies, for example 100 Mpc.

And now the question: are the galaxies A and B at equal distances from Earth or not?

For a cautious scientist, as far the galaxy A is behind our Virgosupercluster and the Hubble law does not apply for it, it means he should add still another 33 Mpc to the distance up to A.

If the observer does not make this correction than we have the following situation: In case of galaxy A, the photons coming from it has to travel for about 25% of distance through the Virgosupercluster. As far the photons are not stretched inside superclusters the calculated distance will have a huge error.

Therefore if Hubble law is kept alive, astronomy has to be transformed into an accounting science and put estimation for each measurement of how much the incoming photons were traveling in free space or near a galaxy or galaxy cluster.

Maybe someone will think that 33 out of 133 Mpc is not such a big deal, but when we look at even larger scale, the application of this law give us biases of up to 50% from real distance.

Beside galaxies and clusters of galaxies which seem to defy the space expansion, in the last decade even more complex and large cosmic structures were discovered.

In 1989, Margaret Geller and John Huchra of the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics discovered the first large-scale structure of the universe. This structure, known as the Great Wall (more properly, the CfA2 Great Wall, named after the Center for Astrophysics), is a 500 million light-year's wide shell of galaxies just 16 million light years thick about 200 million light-years distant from Earth. The extent of this shell, which may be the boundary of a giant "bubble," might be larger, but our own galaxy prevents further observations.

A much larger wall, the Sloan Great Wall, named after the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, was discovered in 2003. This wall was observed to extend 1.38 billion light-years, which is nearly three times larger than the CfA2 Great Wall. For comparison, the diameter of the observable universe is about 93 billion light-years.

Nor is the Sloan Great Wall the last wall found. The farther we look, the more walls we find, the last being the Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall, measuring more than ten billion light-years across, or more than 10% of the diameter of the observable universe. The discovery was made by mapping gamma ray bursts.

Anyone can imagine what errors are introduced if someone wants to measure a distance up to an object behind Sloan Great Wall or Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall, based on Hubble law, without taking into consideration the fact that photons are not stretched out during their trip inside these structures.

Is there at least one single paper in scientific literatures which make this correction in case of measurements made for large distances across Universe? I have found none….

Hubble law and peculiar motion of galaxies

I suppose none will contest the pull between Milky Way and Andromeda and after latest studies they will collide or merge somewhere after about 4 billions years.

The topic has the purpose to analyze how some close or far away observers are going to see the movement of this simple system of two galaxies.

For simplicity, the collision along x axis is considered as in fig. 3.5 and some observers situated along the same axis have to record the events. Do not worry: they don’t need to wait until galaxies collide; only the observed movement of these galaxies for a short time interval has to be recorded. I don’t want to get comments that a galaxy is behind the other and the experiment is impossible so for those people who have difficulties to imagine this experiment, please consider the observers on a line at a certain slope up or down the x axis.

Let us consider the observer, situated in A point at about 1 MLy from Andromeda, making the first series of measurement for spectra coming from Andromeda and from Milky Way. As probably you expect, the spectra of Andromeda is redshifted and spectra from Milky Way is blueshifted; nothing special till here and probably the observer thinks his position is not so convenient for the future and moves along x axis in point B.

Let us consider the distance between A and B to be 1000 Mpc (the picture is not at scale). The observer in B measures again the spectrum of Andromeda and Milky Way and obtains a similar result: Andromeda is redshifted and Milky Way is blueshifted. The results are predictable as far these galaxies are not involved in Hubble flow.

Irrespective of the position on the positive side of x axis, even the observer moves to the end of the visible Universe the result must be the same.

The same results are obtained if the observer is situated on a tilted line in first or four quadrant for any distance; only the size of the effect will decrease as value when the angle of tilting relative to x axis increases.

If the observer is situated on the negative side of x axis (left to Milky Way), or in quadrant two or three, the results will be again consistent for all observers but the Milky Way will appear redhifted and Andromeda blueshifted.

A simple conclusion has to be highlighted: Except the cases of transversal observers to the system, all other observers, irrespective on distance, have to get a blueshifted and a redshifted spectrum for galaxies in collision.

How many far away galaxies are in the process of collision in Universe?

I did not found a statistic yet, but to my estimation at least 20% of observed galaxies are in a collision or a merging process and I suppose half of these are far away from us. If the Hubble law were correct, we would have a special category: galaxies in collision - which are subtracted from the expansion of the Universe. Irrespective of distance to these galaxies, an observer should get all the time a redshifted spectrum for a component and a blueshifted spectrum for the other component.

Now is time to take a telescope and go outside our Virgo group and look for galaxies in collision….

And here appears the first and unique problem: when the spectra of distant galaxies in collision are measured, both components are always redshifted ……

Some principles of astronomy have to be formulated:

No single case of distant galaxies in collision will be ever found in Universe, having a component redshifted and another one blueshifted.
At medium distances, sometimes galaxies in collision will appear to an observer as the theory predicts (one spectra blueshifted and another redshifted) and sometimes both spectra will be redshifted.
At low distance the theory is respected and all the time an observer measures for galaxies in collision a blueshifted and a redshifted spectra.
These principles are valid for IR, VIS, UV, Xray domains. Radio and microwave are different and they will be treated as such in the book.

According to these principles, even the observer situated in B point, at large distance from Milky Way – Andromeda system will measure a redshift for both Milky Way and Andromeda.

Therefore if Hubble law is kept alive, the application of this law falsifies experimental reality.

The explanation for these principles… when the book will be published….

This is a new criterion for estimating the distance up to objects in Universe although at this time is only a qualitative one. And as a parenthesis, I started to read the work of Halton Arp. In fact in December 2015, I made an application for a position at Max-Planck-Institut für Astrophysik to continue the work of Halton Arp, an extraordinary astronomer with a lot of common sense but without the proper tools to change something in astronomy. The answer from MPA was as usual in the last decade: very polite but negative. To apply for US will be a complete nonsense; they made life a hell for Halton Arp, although he was a top astronomer and later he moved to Europe.

For some money spenders, present time is a golden era in astronomy, but in reality it is a dark age for science, astronomy included.

Cosmic microwave background (CMB) temperature and Hubble law

If organized matter (galaxies, clusters of galaxies, walls of galaxies) has the ,,strange property" to block the space expansion, the same particular effects should be observed for cosmic microwave background radiation too.

The purpose of this topic is to establish how the frequency (temperature) of the CMB signal varies when an observer measures CMB behind the Virgosupercluster in comparison with another direction where the observer has free path.

Let us assume a satellite around Earth, which makes two measurements for cosmic microwave background radiation in two different direction of Universe, A and B as in fig 5. The CMB photons coming from A direction have to travel through entire Virgosupercluster and by comparison CMB photons coming from direction B have free path to the observer.

We have to repeat again some simple mathematics:

According to Big Bang theory, CMB radiation was stretched out from 724 nm up to about 1,9 mm, i.e. 1870639 nm in a time interval of 13,5 billions years.

How much should be stretched this CMB in 110 million years?

Making a simple calculation a value of 15242 nm is obtained.

By sure, all CMB photons coming from A direction are not stretched out for the last 110 milions years - the time necessary to travel the entire diameter of Virgosupercluster and they are a bit hotter than photons coming form B direction. As consequence if photons from B direction have a maximum peak at 160,2 GHz, the other photons coming from A direction will have a maximum peak at 161,57 GHz.

Even a radio amateur would be able to see this difference with present instrumentation!

What was the precision of WMAP and Planck satellite?

They were measuring tiny variations of a miliK and even microK in CMB radiation…

Maybe someone should look again to the theoretical aspects ….

For the new theory of science, Hubble law and Big Bang theory are part of the history of physics.

Spectra displacement in the new theory of science

Astronomy uses tools furnished by physics and/or chemistry; it would be better if astronomers questioned more often the validity of these tools. As far the present foundation of entire science was build up on wrong principles, the fruits of precedent errors have started to ripen.

If the Hubble law were to be correct, in the new theory this would have been called Lemaître-Slipher-Hubble law.

Although widely attributed to Edwin Hubble, this law was first derived from the general relativity equations by Georges Lemaître in a 1927 article where he proposed the expansion of the universe and suggested an estimated value of the rate of expansion, now called the Hubble constant.

I don’t know if Hubble was aware of this Georges Lemaître’s article, but by sure he was aware of work of Vesto Slipher; in fact Hubble copied Slipher’s work without giving him any credential. I do not think that a modern physicist has at least a clue about what work was done by Slipher in order to get the redshift of a galaxy at that time! And Hubble took the speeds value for galaxies and published them as they were his own work!

Later around 1950, Hubble recognized Slipher`s contribution, but this is like the comportment of a rich drug dealer boss before retirement, who starts to build churches….

I would like to start with a short presentation of some of Vesto Slipher`s papers relevant to this topic:

In a paper published in 1913 it was presented the first radial velocity of a "spiral nebula" - the Andromeda Galaxy. He seems to be more than modern in his suppositions too. After noting the high apparent velocity of this nebula he remark about M31 having encountered a “dark star”.
The 1914 paper is the first demonstration that spiral nebula (galaxies) rotate and inferred from that observation that some nebulae are edge-on spirals.
The 1915 paper is the classic, in which Slipher gave a summary of galaxy redshifts measuread at that point. Out of 15 galaxies, 11 were clearly redshifted.
The 1917 paper analyzed a larger sample of galaxies redshifts. The redshift:blueshift ratio has now risen to 21:4, and Slipher noted that we are not at rest with respect to the other galaxies.
The spectra displacement method can reliable be used in astronomy only in some particular cases.

Like millions of other people, with my tiny telescope, I measured some absorption lines displacement in our Sun spectra and of course the method can be used to determine the rotation of Sun.

The first necessary condition is to have the same identical processes to generate the redshifted or blueshifted photons. I am sure that light generated at approaching and receding edge of the Sun was produced based on same identical processes inside Sun.

The second necessary condition is to have identical or very close condition of transport for both redshifted and blueshifted photons. With other words the trip up to observer must affect in a similar way all photons. Again in case of our Sun, I have the certitude that interplanetary medium affects in the same way both kinds of photons.

Based on similar considerations, the Slipher method developed in 1914 for measuring the rotation of a galaxy remains valid in the new theory.

Other cases will be discussed in the future studies.

The link with more details:

The accelerated expansion of the universe will be discussed in another newsletter….