New answers tagged

0 votes

Interpretation of Hubble constant in SI units

If it were km/s, you wouldn't think of it as a frequency. Don't think of this as a frequency but a rate. It's just that the top instead of measuring a distance is measuring an expansion so there's no ...
user avatar
  • 1,405
2 votes

Interpretation of Hubble constant in SI units

In a closed universe, the Hubble Constant would vary from high values, through zero, to negative high values. In an oscillating universe, this would repeat. Hence, the inverse of the Hubble Constant ...
user avatar
  • 2,802
3 votes
Accepted

Interpretation of Hubble constant in SI units

One exasecond is an SI unit. There is no rule that says that one is not allowed to combine the prefix exa- with second. Thus the interpretation is straightforward: it's the number of $e$-fold ...
user avatar
1 vote

Interpretation of Hubble constant in SI units

SI units are just Units. They do not necessarily say what they are describing. They are like numbers in that sense. What is a square-second or even second cubed? You can't imagine it but we're using ...
user avatar
  • 202
3 votes

Interpretation of Hubble constant in SI units

A change in units doesn't change the effect. As @planetmaker says in the comments to the question: It's inconsequential, whether you drive with 100km/h or 62 mph or 54 knots or 28m/s through town - ...
user avatar
  • 555
8 votes

Interpretation of Hubble constant in SI units

Unless the expansion/contraction is periodic then the frequency is just the reciprocal of an expansion timescale. There isn't any evidence that the universe will contract again. However, if it did, ...
user avatar
  • 114k

Top 50 recent answers are included