HELP Hubble's constant Watch

MrToodles4
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
The mean density of the Universe, ρ0, is thought to be approximately 1 × 10–26 kg m–3. Calculate a value for the Hubble constant H0.

The only formula I know for this is v/d = H0.

I feel like Im missing something big here?? Any help?
0
reply
Tskadem
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
(Original post by MrToodles4)
The mean density of the Universe, ρ0, is thought to be approximately 1 × 10–26 kg m–3. Calculate a value for the Hubble constant H0.

The only formula I know for this is v/d = H0.

I feel like Im missing something big here?? Any help?
Not sure how to use LaTex here but here's a link to the equation for critical density

http://file.scirp.org/Html/4-7500931...a58d426e4e.jpg
0
reply
7David7
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report 9 months ago
#3
(Original post by Tskadem)
Not sure how to use LaTex here but here's a link to the equation for critical density

http://file.scirp.org/Html/4-7500931...a58d426e4e.jpg
There is now a very simple way to calculate Hubble’s Constant, by inputting to an equation, the numerical value of Pi and the speed of light (C) from Maxwell’s equations, and the value of a parsec. NO space probe measurements (with their inevitable small measuring / interpretation errors) are now required. Hubble’s Constant is ‘fixed’ at 70.98047 PRECISELY. This maths method removes the errors / tolerances that is always a part of attempting to measuring something as ‘elusive’ as Hubble’s Constant. This has very deep implications for theoretical cosmology.
The equation to perform this is 2 X a meg parsec X light speed (C). This total is then divided by Pi to the power of 21. This gives 70.98047 kilometres per sec per meg parsec.
The equation to perform this can also be found in ‘The Principle of Astrogeometry’ on Amazon Kindle Books. This also explains how the Hubble 70.98047 ‘fixing’ equation was found. David.

0
reply
Joinedup
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 9 months ago
#4
(Original post by 7David7)
There is now a very simple way to calculate Hubble’s Constant, by inputting to an equation, the numerical value of Pi and the speed of light (C) from Maxwell’s equations, and the value of a parsec. NO space probe measurements (with their inevitable small measuring / interpretation errors) are now required. Hubble’s Constant is ‘fixed’ at 70.98047 PRECISELY. This maths method removes the errors / tolerances that is always a part of attempting to measuring something as ‘elusive’ as Hubble’s Constant. This has very deep implications for theoretical cosmology.
The equation to perform this is 2 X a meg parsec X light speed (C). This total is then divided by Pi to the power of 21. This gives 70.98047 kilometres per sec per meg parsec.
The equation to perform this can also be found in ‘The Principle of Astrogeometry’ on Amazon Kindle Books. This also explains how the Hubble 70.98047 ‘fixing’ equation was found. David.
This isn't orthodox science.
don't use that formula in exams - H0 is experimentally determined
0
reply
Meowstic
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 9 months ago
#5
(Original post by Joinedup)
This isn't orthodox science.
don't use that formula in exams - H0 is experimentally determined
how did you find a thread this old?
the problem op had was in the last question of the 2016 2nd a2 unit physics paper, the content assessed in the question is no longer part of the specification.
hope they did well in their exams this year.
0
reply
Joinedup
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report 9 months ago
#6
(Original post by yolkie)
how did you find a thread this old?
the problem op had was in the last question of the 2016 2nd a2 unit physics paper, the content assessed in the question is no longer part of the specification.
hope they did well in their exams this year.
a quick check of the timestamps on the left should reveal that guy above me, the chap with the book to sell, just bumped it - so that it was the most recently updated thread in the physics forum when I got here.
no special skill on my part was involved - I've no idea how they're finding them you should probably direct your question to that chap or this guy from earlier today

https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho...d.php?t=673376
0
reply
7David7
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report 9 months ago
#7
(Original post by Joinedup)
This isn't orthodox science.
don't use that formula in exams - H0 is experimentally determined
Time to take in new stuff. This is similar to when Maxwell first calculated light speed (C). It was measurement versus maths -maths finally 'fixed' light speed to its precise value. Now this has been done regarding Hubble's Constant. It is 'fixed' at 70.98047 kilometres per sec per meg parsec precisely using Astrogeometry maths. Have a look at the Wikipedia Hubble charts to see the confusion. Measuring Hubble will always give small errors, and to continue trying to measure Hubble is now pointless. Those small measuring errors will always exist. The exams need updating to take in progress in this field. Of course, if you wish to not take in this advance is your choice entirely, David
0
reply
Joinedup
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 9 months ago
#8
(Original post by 7David7)
Time to take in new stuff. This is similar to when Maxwell first calculated light speed (C). It was measurement versus maths -maths finally 'fixed' light speed to its precise value. Now this has been done regarding Hubble's Constant. It is 'fixed' at 70.98047 kilometres per sec per meg parsec precisely using Astrogeometry maths. Have a look at the Wikipedia Hubble charts to see the confusion. Measuring Hubble will always give small errors, and to continue trying to measure Hubble is now pointless. Those small measuring errors will always exist. The exams need updating to take in progress in this field. Of course, if you wish to not take in this advance is your choice entirely, David
Unfortunate that you weren't able to caluclate H0 before the experiments converged on a value of about 70
You've got it wrong about the speed of light too... Maxwell died in 1879 and the value of c was being revised experimentally until the 1970s

Most importantly considering this is primarily a GCSE and A level study help forum... anyone repeating your nonsense in physics exams will not get marks for it. spamming gcse and A level students is not going to get your equations accepted as science, you're going to confuse people who've come here for help.
0
reply
7David7
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#9
Report 9 months ago
#9
This is an 'interesting' one. Maxwell's equations could only be as accurate as the electric data of his period in science would allow. Maxwell's equations are unchanged, whatever data is impuuted to them. So the same goes for my Hubble equation. If it were suddenly anounced the speed of light was 220,000 kilometres per second, then the 'fixed' Hubble would not be 70.98047, but a bit lower. As you rightly said, I knew any Hubble 'fixing' equation would have to give a Hubble of somewhere between 50 to 90, in order to be in the same 'ball park' as the measured values. If you change that Hubble equation in any way, you would then get really 'silly' Hubble values. So that equation has to be correct. If Pi was set to the power of say 20 instead of 21, the Hubble 'error' would be vast, and way outside the 'ball park' value of 50 to 90!!. The purpose of my equation is to 'fix' Hubble's Constant to its PRECISE value of 70.98047. There is more chance of winning the Lottery 3 times in a row, than this Hubble 'fixing' equation to be wrong. Change just one part of it, and its result would be a vast error in the Hubble value.
This now exposes a very serious 'blunder' in today's theoretical cosmology. Because we now know Hubble is 'fixed' at 70.98047, its reciprocal of 13.778 BLY's NEVER increases with time, and so it CANNOT be the age of the universe. 13.778 BLY's is the 'Hubble Horizon Distance' ONLY. This now indicates 'Big Bang' ideas are very suspect and probaly fake, and dark matter / energy / strings and multiverses are unlikely as sensible postulates.
Where does this now leave us??. So it's back to 'square one', which is the universe Creation account as described in the Torah. We have nothing else that 'fits' these equations.
I have no intention of misleading students, who must stick to their corriculum, or they would certainly fail thier tests, even though these tests are based on fake teaching, so students, please ignore my posts if you want a pass!!!!!
This is for the purpose of discussion only. So can you now prove my equation from Astrogeometry is fake?? A maths / space Professor at Imperial College, London said this Hubble equation is 'elegant'. He has published over 70 papers in his career, so he is no 'novice'!!
Regards, David Hine.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

University open days

  • Bournemouth University
    Clearing Open Day Undergraduate
    Wed, 31 Jul '19
  • Staffordshire University
    Postgraduate open event - Stoke-on-Trent campus Postgraduate
    Wed, 7 Aug '19
  • University of Derby
    Foundation Open Event Further education
    Wed, 7 Aug '19

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice now or on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (132)
18.78%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (70)
9.96%
No I am happy with my course choice (401)
57.04%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (100)
14.22%

Watched Threads

View All