The Theoretical Value of the Hubble Constant Ho and Unification of the Fundamental Forces of Nature



Abstract Views
451

Downloads
463

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Jun 17, 2021
Published Jul 21, 2021
10.24018/ejphysics.2021.3.4.88

Abstract viewed = 451 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The Hubble constant Ho represents the speed of expansion of the universe and various cosmological observations and modeling methods were utilized by astronomers for a century to pin down its exact value. Determining Ho from cosmological observations is a long and tedious process requiring highly accurate datasets. To circumvent this need, a simple theoretical approach is introduced in this study which uses the concept of gravitational weakening and seismic-induced recession. As tremors occur among celestial objects, their gravitational fields would also change. This resulted in a fundamental relation of Ho and the computed rate of recession that gives a theoretical value for Ho=69.921 Km/s/Mpc. Using the newly discovered seismic-induced gravitational weakening and time dilation, it is possible that various astrophysical methods using different measurement methods would converge to this theoretical Ho value when cosmological distances and time delay measurements are corrected with the simple formulas we derived. The new model assumes that, as quakes occur in celestial objects, luminosity-induced acceleration and high-energy collision of protons and electrons may produce a massive number of neutrinos, quarks and other subatomic particles. Furthermore, the fine structure constant was found to be inversely proportional to Ho-squared and that the fine-structure constant obtained in this study gives a new physical interpretation of α. New relations for the speed of light, orbital velocity, gravitational force and the Hubble constant were further derived from the new recession constant using approximate relations for the Newtonian and electric force constant. This resulted in a modified gravitational law that is both repulsive and attractive and a theoretical explanation of the phenomenon of light-induced gravitation analogous to the electromagnetic force where photon is the force-carrier. Finally, the fundamental forces of gravitation, electromagnetism and strong nuclear force are now unified.

Keywords: Hubble constant, gravitational weakening, light-induced gravitation, photo-fragmentation, seismic-induced recession, time delay

References

  1. Freedman et al. 2019. The Carnegie-Chicago Hubble Program. VIII. An Independent Determination of the Hubble Constant Based on the Tip of the Red Giant Branch. ArXiv e-prints, Jul. 2019.
     Google Scholar
  2. Abbott et al. 2017. A Gravitational-wave Standard Siren Measurement of the Hubble Constant.ArXiv e-prints, Oct. 2017.
     Google Scholar
  3. Riess et al. 2018. New parallaxes of Galactic Cepheids from Spatially Scanning the Hubble Space Telescope: Implications for the Hubble Constant. ArXiv e-prints, Feb. 2018.
     Google Scholar
  4. www.gsfc.nasa.gov.Available online (accessed on 17 June 2020).
     Google Scholar
  5. Bennett C. L., D. Larson, J. L. Weiland, G. Hinshaw. 2014. The 1% Concordance Hubble Constant. The Astrophys. J., 794:135 (8pp), 2014 October 20.
     Google Scholar
  6. Blakeslee et al. 2021. The Hubble constant from infrared surface brightness fluctuation distances. ArXiv e-prints, Mar. 2021.
     Google Scholar
  7. Rivera PC. 2019. Gravitational Weakening of Seismic Origin as a Driving Mechanism of Some Astronomical Anomalies. App. Phys. Res. Vol. 11, No. 2. doi:10.5539/apr.v11n2p10.
     Google Scholar
  8. Cheng C., Huang, Q. 2015. An accurate determination of the Hubble constant from baryon acoustic oscillation datasets. Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 58, 599801.
     Google Scholar
  9. Riess et al. 2020. Cosmic distances calibrated to 1% Precision with GaiaEDR3 Parallaxes and Hubble Space Telescope Photometry of 75 Milky Way Cepheids Confirm Tension with Lambda CDM. ArXiv e-prints, Dec. 2020.
     Google Scholar
  10. Planck (2018). Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]
     Google Scholar
  11. Riess et al. 2016. A 2.4% determination of the local Hubble Constant. The Astrophysical J. 826 (1), 56, 2016.
     Google Scholar
  12. Rivera PC. 2019a. An Alternative Model of Rotation Curve that Explains Anomalous Orbital Velocity, Mass Discrepancy and Structure of Some Galaxies. Am. J. Astro. Astrophys. Vol. 7, No. 4, 2019, pp. 73-79. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaa.20190704.14.
     Google Scholar
  13. LeBlanc, F. 2010. An Introduction to Stellar Astrophysics. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Pp. 358.
     Google Scholar
  14. Nikitin, A. 2018. Fundamental connection between the Planck and the Hubble constants. Unpublished Physics Report.
     Google Scholar
  15. Kotus, S., Murphy, M. and Carswell, R. 2017. High-precision limit on variation in the fine-structure constant from a single quasar absorption system. MNRAS, Vo. 464, Issue 3, pp. 3679-3703 DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw2543.
     Google Scholar
  16. Goncalves et al. 2019. Variation in the fine-structure constant, distance-duality relation and the next generation of high-resolution spectrograph. ArXiv e-prints, Jul. 2019.
     Google Scholar
  17. Perkovic N. 2019. On the time variation of fundamental constants. hal-02265620.
     Google Scholar
  18. Tolman RC, Ehrenfest P, & Podolsky B. 1931. On the gravitational field produced by light. Phys. Rev. Vol. 37. No. 875.
     Google Scholar
  19. Zhu Y. 2018. Gravitational-magnetic-electric field interaction. Res. In Phys. 10, 794-798.
     Google Scholar
  20. Rancourt LJ. 2011. Effect of light on gravitational attraction. Phys. Essays. Doi:10.4006/1.3653936.
     Google Scholar
  21. www.physics.nist.gov.Available online (accessed on 3 July 2020).
     Google Scholar