Hubble's law 1

 

Preface

Many scientists treat the cosmological principle as a secondary matter. Here in this work, this principle is the basis of all cosmological thinking. Now is the time to research whether our conclusions, based on this principle, agree (or do not conflict) with the observation.

Remember that in this work the cosmological principle has been taken as a basic assumption (a priori) as an axiom. About 500 years ago, at the time of Copernicus, the thought that we are not the center of the universe was a breakthrough, a revolution. Copernicus himself, and later many other philosophers, did not understand the essence of the principle. Even Giordano Bruno, who was burned at the stake in 1600 for his views, did not realize its essence. But today the cosmological principle seems so clear (and "obvious") that even its violation by many hypotheses and theories is not a problem... [It is important that this violation can be presented mathematically - it is immediately acceptable as a scientific thing par excellence, regardless of the category: False - true. The existence of a mathematical notation has become the sole criterion of science. Should it be so?] Recently, the cosmological principle has ceased to be a criterion for assessing the correctness of many hypotheses and even theories. This is not their advantage. The cosmological principle has become a marginal thing, far from what attracts the attention of scientists who obviously deal with "serious" matters. Soon only the historians of science will deal with the cosmological principle. Is it right? After all, based on this principle as a starting point, we obtained interesting and scientifically important results, and we were also able to predict the results of the observations. What matters is that our expectations can be refuted empirically (they are falsifiable). This is the real criterion of science.

Today, the movements of the galaxies (in the Newtonian sense) are not being considered. As you know, in line with the common (and binding) position, we are talking about the expansion of space. In this context, the cosmological principle is not so important. Is it right? I am asking again, referring to the article on the speed of expansion (No. 8). After all, the existence of a speed that does not depend on system of reference - c, even results from a principle. In my opinion, compliance with the cosmological principle should be the criterion for assessing cosmological hypotheses and theories.

The main result of adopting the cosmological principle with regard to the dynamics of objects of cosmological significance was, as we remember, the hypothesis that the relative velocities of galaxies are proportional to their mutual distances. We wrote it symbolically as follows:

v/r =const.

It's a kind of anticipation. Will scientific research confirm this? Is it possible to measure the constant that appears in the formula above? We see that we only need to (...) measure speeds and distances.