|
Samuelprime,
I guess you\'re still not getting an answer for your original question. The farther you look the earlier you see. Still if you see the hubble\'s constant to be a \'constant\', there\'s only 2 possiblities for this which I can think.
1. Hubble\'s constant was always a constant, from the start of universe itself. this doesn\'t make much sense to me for many reasons. This makes the time of the big-bang an indeterminate quantity.
2. Now a more sensible explanation will be particles are moving with an -ve acceleration (deceleration) outwards. And particles are moving with different deceleration outwards. So the farther you look, you\'re looking at an object with a higher deceleration. Doesn\'t this answer you. So the farther the particle is, the later it attains the velocity which complies to what we say with hubble\'s theory. This makes a bit of sense for me, and I don\'t expect that this silly thought never came in Hubble\'s or hawkings\' mind.
A B
.-----------------.--->--------------.--->-
I v1,a1 v2,a2
Let\'s consider 2 particles which are at distances 1ly and 2ly from us.
Velocities are v1 and v2, this will be given by H1*1 and H2*2 respectively.
H1 is the hubble\'s constant before 1ly and H2 is the hubble\'s constant before 2ly.
H1=1/(T-1ly), H2=1/(T-2ly)
H2 > H1
Now it\'s mathematics to find these values. I don\'t know how much this will come to.
I would really appreciate if you could share your personal mailid, I would like to get this solved. Being a mathematician I think you can really help me in this. I\'m a software engineer by profession and I feel it really difficult to track this in the forum.
I found some theories about accelerating universe, but all those sounds more to me like metaphysics. Whatever I can\'t see or visualize in physics, I consider it towards metaphysics, the dark matter, virtual particles et al. I firmly think, universe is running on some rather simple theories than all these quickfixes to hold some theories.
Kannan
|