Recent content by Gege01

Thank you for your help.

I'm sorry! R is r. I made a mistake

Although there are other factors affecting the observed data, the above three assumptions are still valid.

This conclusion is based on the following assumptions: 1. Hubble's law is valid at small distances and velocities. 2. Special relativity can be satisfied in a very small space-time range. 3. There is a functional relationship between star velocity and distance: V=V (r)

If we use the formula in this post, some data may be changed.

If the universe is finite but unbounded, it means that the universe is smaller than the observable universe. In this case, galaxies that look far away may be illusions of neighboring galaxies, which are illusions created by light circling the universe. This hypothesis is very difficult to detect...

When we study specific problems, for example, the distance between A and B is R and r+dr, then, in the range of R to r+dr, it is a small area. Special relativity is satisfied

B Distance Observer Distance is r+dr The distance of B measured by point A observer is dr'

O is the position of any observer. A is a star whose distance from the observer is r.

Although FLRW spacetime is not flat，We can still think that special relativity can be satisfied in a very small space-time range.

Although we can't guarantee that Hubble's law holds at large distances and high speeds, we can still assume that special relativity is satisfied. The true velocity v (r + dr) of b, measured by the observer of o, is the superposition of the velocity v (r) of a star and the velocity v (dr') of B...

Based on the following facts That Hubble's law is valid at short distances and at small speeds: V(dr') = Hdr'

However, it is reasonable in the scope of r≤πc/(2H).

Yes, some of the conclusions are not very rigorous.