0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
However, the term "constant" is somewhat of a misnomer, the Hubble constant H0is the current value of the Hubble parameter H, which changes over time.
So the resulting tiny distance and tiny time from either calculation should be the same. (Please, please, please someone correct me if I am wrong)Edit correction: Please, please, please someone tell me if I am right.
The idea is that I want to attribute a magnitude to a change of time that will result in a change of acceleration to a constant speed travelling within a specific distance.And that this change in distance constituting a change in position in the gravity potential, comes with changes in time that I'm attibututing to changes in acceleration, where the magnitude of distance (tiny length distance) relates to the magnitude (tiny length time) of changes in time, and the consequent changes in acceleration, via proportionality with the cosmological constant.
c2^x10 second2^/2(ct)-(ct)/(ct)=0.5metre
EDIT: I've read paras 3&4 in your last post a few times and I'm still not sure exactly what you are trying to do. Can you explain another way??Also you are still talking about changes in acceleration. The formulae Alan & I gave you are for constant acceleration, changing speed so would not work directly with a changing acceleration.
Does c^2xage of universe^2/2R-R/R=0.5metres? Where R is the radius of the ovservable universe.
Does c^2xage of universe^2/2R-R/c/t=0.5seconds?