The Contradiction in Astrophysicist on the Expansion of the Universe

What do the @physicists think?

1 Like

First the good news, @swamidass !

As the article outlines all the ways that numbers can vary from each other, it concludes with this wonderful news:

In the yellow circle in the upper left of the image below, the Hubble viewing area is compared to “the viewing area that WFIRST will be able to view, at the same depth, in the same amount of time” !!!
WFIRST = “Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope”

WOO HOO!!!

I did a rough comparison in dimensions… WFIRST’s viewing area is more than 60 TIMES (!) the viewing area of Hubble!

The text under the image concludes: “If dark energy varies by more than 1% of the value its anticipated to have, WFIRST will find it” !

From Ethan Siegel’s article:

[1] “The different methods [distance ladders] all agree, and yield a value of 73 km/s/Mpc

[2] “From the CMB and BAO both, we get a very different value: 67 km/s/Mpc”

“There are numerous very good reasons indicating that the results of both groups ought to be believed. If that’s the case, there has to be some sort of new physics involved to explain what we’re seeing.”

My comment:

If the time dimension of 4-dimensional spacetime is exotic rather than ordinary and unremarkable, then one might expect different rates of expansion depending on what they were measuring. Such a notion would be classified as “new physics” and I would have to agree that “both groups ought to be believed”.