The latest reported measurements for the evaluation of the Hubble constant by two different teams, the Riess et al. (2019) in USA and the Plank Collaboration (2018) in Europe, in spite of increased accuracy of measurements, have resulted in significantly different values. This tension between the results of the two different measurement methodologies has been a vexing puzzle. To resolve this tension we present a two-parameter kinematic model which predicts two different values for the Hubble constant. Each predicted value is essentially identical to one of the measured values. The two parameters are the redshift and the age of the universe. Using the model we show that the elapsed time between the event of the Big Bang and the event of the release of photons, at the decoupling time, is the factor causing the tension in the above two measurements of the Hubble constant. This model also yields a simple relation for predictions of distance moduli. It is shown that the predicted distance moduli are remarkably consistent both with the observational data and with those of the standard Lambda CDM model. As the predicted values of the Hubble constant are essentially identical to the corresponding measured values, it is concluded that the difference in the measured values of the Hubble constant is due to how the elapsed time, between the event of the big bang and the event of the appearance of photons, has incorporated itself into the measurement methodologies.
| Published in | American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics (Volume 8, Issue 4) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13 |
| Page(s) | 80-86 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Cosmic Expansion Rate, Hubble Constant, Redshift, Distance Modulus, Dark Energy
| [1] | Bull, P., Akrami, Y., Adamek, J., et al., 2016, “Beyond LambdaCDM: Problems, Solutions, and the Road Ahead,” “https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.05356. |
| [2] | Riess, A. G., Casertano, S., Yuan, W., et al., 2019, “Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics Beyond Lambda CDM,”: 1903.07603v1 [astro-ph.Co] 18 Mar 2019, https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.07603. |
| [3] | Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., Ashdown, M., et al., Plank 2018 Results, VI. “Cosmological Parameters,” arXiv: 1807.06209v1 [astro-ph.Co] 17 Jul 2018. |
| [4] | Freedman, W. L., Madore, B. F., Hatt, D., et al., 2019, “An Independent Determination of the Hubble Constant Based on the Tip of the Red Giant Branch,” arXiv: 1907.05922v1 [astro- ph.CO] 12 Jul 2019, https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.05922v1. |
| [5] | NIST, CODATA VALUE: Plank Time, https://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?plkt. |
| [6] | Tian, S., 2017, “The Relation between Cosmological Redshift and Scale Factor for Photons,” The Astrophysical Journal, 846-90, 2017 September 10. |
| [7] | David W. Hogg, 2000 Distance Measures in Cosmology, arXiv. astro-ph/9905116v4. |
| [8] | Mukhanov, V., (2005). Physical Foundations of Cosmology. Cambridge University Press. |
| [9] | NIST, CODATA VALUE: Wien Wavelength Displacement Law Constant, http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?bwien. |
| [10] | Walker, J., (2008), Fundamentals of Physics, 8th ed., John Wiley and Sons. |
| [11] | Fixen, D. J., 2009, "The Temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background,” The Astrophysical Journal. 707 (2): 916–920. arXiv: 0911.1955 (astro-ph.CO) 10. Nov. |
| [12] | Ripalda, J.M., 2010, “Time Reversal and Negative Energies in General Relativity” arXiv: gr-qc/9906012. |
| [13] | Freeman, W. L., 2017, Cosmology at Crossroads: Tension with the Hubble Constant. https://arXiv.org/abs/1706.02739. |
| [14] | Young, M., 2019, “Tension over Hubble Constant Continues,” SKY & Telescope, July 24, 2019 https://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/tension-continues-hubble-constant/. |
| [15] | Amanullah, R., Lidman, C., Rubin, D., Aldering, G., et al., 2010, “Spectra and Hubble Space Telescope Light Curves of Six Types Ia Supernovae at 0.511< z <1.12 and the Union2 Compilation,” The Astrophysical Journal, 716: 712-738, http://supernova.lbl.gov/Union/figur...n2_mu_vs_z.txt. |
| [16] | Madore, B. F., Steer, I. P., 2008, “NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database Master List of Galaxy Distances,” NED-4D, http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/NED4D/. |
| [17] | Peebles, P. J. E., 1993, Principles of Physical Cosmology, Princeton University Press. |
| [18] | Distance Measures in Cosmology - UF Astronomy https://www.astro.ufl.edu/~guzman/ast7939/projects/project01.html. |
APA Style
Naser Mostaghel. (2020). The Cause of Tension in the Measurements of the Hubble Constant. American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 8(4), 80-86. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13
ACS Style
Naser Mostaghel. The Cause of Tension in the Measurements of the Hubble Constant. Am. J. Astron. Astrophys. 2020, 8(4), 80-86. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13
AMA Style
Naser Mostaghel. The Cause of Tension in the Measurements of the Hubble Constant. Am J Astron Astrophys. 2020;8(4):80-86. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13,
author = {Naser Mostaghel},
title = {The Cause of Tension in the Measurements of the Hubble Constant},
journal = {American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics},
volume = {8},
number = {4},
pages = {80-86},
doi = {10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajaa.20200804.13},
abstract = {The latest reported measurements for the evaluation of the Hubble constant by two different teams, the Riess et al. (2019) in USA and the Plank Collaboration (2018) in Europe, in spite of increased accuracy of measurements, have resulted in significantly different values. This tension between the results of the two different measurement methodologies has been a vexing puzzle. To resolve this tension we present a two-parameter kinematic model which predicts two different values for the Hubble constant. Each predicted value is essentially identical to one of the measured values. The two parameters are the redshift and the age of the universe. Using the model we show that the elapsed time between the event of the Big Bang and the event of the release of photons, at the decoupling time, is the factor causing the tension in the above two measurements of the Hubble constant. This model also yields a simple relation for predictions of distance moduli. It is shown that the predicted distance moduli are remarkably consistent both with the observational data and with those of the standard Lambda CDM model. As the predicted values of the Hubble constant are essentially identical to the corresponding measured values, it is concluded that the difference in the measured values of the Hubble constant is due to how the elapsed time, between the event of the big bang and the event of the appearance of photons, has incorporated itself into the measurement methodologies.},
year = {2020}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - The Cause of Tension in the Measurements of the Hubble Constant AU - Naser Mostaghel Y1 - 2020/12/08 PY - 2020 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13 DO - 10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13 T2 - American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics JF - American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics JO - American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics SP - 80 EP - 86 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2376-4686 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaa.20200804.13 AB - The latest reported measurements for the evaluation of the Hubble constant by two different teams, the Riess et al. (2019) in USA and the Plank Collaboration (2018) in Europe, in spite of increased accuracy of measurements, have resulted in significantly different values. This tension between the results of the two different measurement methodologies has been a vexing puzzle. To resolve this tension we present a two-parameter kinematic model which predicts two different values for the Hubble constant. Each predicted value is essentially identical to one of the measured values. The two parameters are the redshift and the age of the universe. Using the model we show that the elapsed time between the event of the Big Bang and the event of the release of photons, at the decoupling time, is the factor causing the tension in the above two measurements of the Hubble constant. This model also yields a simple relation for predictions of distance moduli. It is shown that the predicted distance moduli are remarkably consistent both with the observational data and with those of the standard Lambda CDM model. As the predicted values of the Hubble constant are essentially identical to the corresponding measured values, it is concluded that the difference in the measured values of the Hubble constant is due to how the elapsed time, between the event of the big bang and the event of the appearance of photons, has incorporated itself into the measurement methodologies. VL - 8 IS - 4 ER -
Email: