Hubble Expansion: Moon Orbital Distance & Error Check

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Richard
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expansion Hubble
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the validity of applying the Hubble expansion coefficient to the Earth-Moon distance, which is increasing by 38 millimeters per year due to NASA's laser ranging. It is concluded that using the Hubble constant for such close orbital distances is not valid, as it applies to an idealized homogeneous universe and does not account for the density of bound structures like the Earth-Moon system. Additionally, the Moon's gradual movement away from Earth is attributed to tidal forces rather than cosmic expansion. The participants confirm that the increase in distance is primarily due to orbital dynamics rather than Hubble's law. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the limitations of cosmological principles when applied to local celestial mechanics.
John Richard
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
Hello,
A couple of questions:
The distance to the moon is calculated as increasing by 38 millimetres per year by the laser ranging work of NASA following Apollo 11.

When I apply the Hubble expansion coeficient to the centre to centre distance from Earth to the Moon, I get just over 28 millimetres per year relative to todays measured distance.

Firstly, is it valid to apply the Hubble constant to relatively close orbitals in this manner?

Secondly, if it is valid, is there sufficient error in the centre to cenre distance being stated as an average of 385,000Km to compensate for the difference, (38 to 28)?

I am of course checking my maths.

Thanks for any help

John
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
No, it isn't valid to apply the Hubble expansion on these scales, it's not that the expansion term is small but because the Hubble result applies to an idealized homogeneous Universe as therefore does not work for bound structures that are thousands of times more dense than the mean density.

I remember learning once why the Moon is moving away, I think it's to do with some orbital dynamics such as tides, but I'm hazy. Hopefully someone else can help you on that part.
 
Thanks Wallace.
 
I had a search around the net and found some info confirming what you said Wallace, it is tides, thanks for the clue.
John
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top