Skip to main content

Redshifts versus Paradigm Shifts: Against Renaming Hubble’s Law

Abstract

We consider the proposal by many scholars and by the International Astronomical Union to rename Hubble’s law as the Hubble-Lemaître law. We find the renaming questionable on historic, scientific, and philosophical grounds. From a historical perspective, we argue that the renaming presents an anachronistic interpretation of a law originally understood as an empirical relation between two observables. From a scientific perspective, we argue that the renaming conflates the redshift/distance relation of the spiral nebulae with a universal law of cosmic expansion derived from the general theory of relativity. We note that the first of these phenomena is merely one manifestation of the second, an important distinction that might be relevant to contemporary puzzles concerning the current rate of cosmic expansion. From a philosophical perspective, we note that many of the named laws of science are empirical relations between observables, limited in range, rather than laws of universal application derived from theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. We are aware of one preprint on the topic, discussed below.

  2. Strictly speaking, Hubble’s investigation concerned the determination of the motion of the sun relative to the nebulae.

References

  1. See for example Michael Way and Harry Nussbaumer, “Lemaître’s Hubble Relationship,” Physics Today 64, no. 8 (2011), 8; Sidney van den Bergh, “Discovery of the Expansion of the Universe,” Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 105, no. 5 (2011), 197–217; Ari Belenkiy, “Discovery of Hubble’s Law as a Series of Type III Errors,” The Physics Teacher 53, no. 1 (2015), 20–24.

  2. See for example Helge Kragh and Robert Smith, “Who Discovered the Expanding Universe?,” History of Science 41, no. 2 (2003), 141–63; David Block, “Georges Lemaître and Stigler’s Law of Eponymy,” in Georges Lemaître; Life, Science and Legacy, Astrophysics and Space Science Library 395, ed. Rodney Holder and Simon Mitton, 89–96 (Berlin: Springer, 2012); Michael Way, “Dismantling Hubble’s Legacy?,” in Origins of the Expanding Universe: 1912–1932, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series 471, ed. Michael Way and Deidre Hunter, 97–133 (San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2013).

  3. Steven Stigler, “Stigler’s Law of Eponymy,” Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences 39, no. 1 (1980), 147–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. International Astronomical Union, “Resolution Presented to the XXXth General Assembly, Resolution B4 on a Suggested Renaming of the Hubble Law,” accessed July 24, 2020, https://www.iau.org/static/archives/announcements/pdf/ann18029e.pdf.

  5. See for example Andrew Masterson, “Hubble’s Law No More,” Cosmos, November 1, 2018; Chelsea Gohd, “IAU Vote Recommends Changing the Name of Hubble’s Law,” Discover Magazine, November 2, 2018; John Flynn, “Astronomers Recommend Renaming Hubble’s Law to Honor Belgian Priest,” The Catholic News Agency, 3 November, 2018.

  6. “Hubble’s Law,” Wikipedia, accessed July 24, 2020, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble%27s_law.

  7. Edwin P. Hubble, “A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity Among Extra-Galactic Nebulae,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 15, no. 3 (1929), 168–73.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hubble, “A Relation between Distance” (ref. 7), 173.

  9. Helge Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), 18; Malcolm Longair, The Cosmic Century: A History of Astrophysics and Cosmology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 110; Harry Nussbaumer and Lydia Bieri, Discovering the Expanding Universe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 115–16; Jeremiah P. Ostriker and Simon Mitton, Heart of Darkness: Unravelling the Mysteries of the Invisible Universe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013), 73; John A. Peacock, “Slipher, Galaxies, and Cosmological Velocity Fields,” in Way and Hunter, eds.,Origins of the Expanding Universe 1912–1932 (ref. 2), 3–25.

  10. Robert W. Smith, “The Origins of the Velocity-Distance Relation” Journal for the History of Astronomy 10, no. 3 (1979), 133–64.

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Edwin P. Hubble and Milton L. Humason, “The Velocity-Distance Relation among Extra-Galactic Nebulae,” The Astrophysical Journal 74 (1931), 43–80.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy (ref. 9), 21, 31; Nussbaumer and Bieri, Discovering the Expanding Universe (ref. 9), 121.

  13. Willem de Sitter, “Proceedings of the RAS,” The Observatory 53 (1930), 37–39.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Georges Lemaître, “Un Univers Homogène de Masse Constante et de Rayon Croissant, Rendant Compte de la Vitesse Radiale des Nébuleuses Extra-Galactiques,” Annales de la Société Scientifique de Bruxelles A47 (1927), 49–59.

    ADS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Georges Lemaitre, letter to Arthur S. Eddington, February 1930, Archives Lemaître, Université Catholique de Louvain.

  16. Georges Lemaitre, “A Homogeneous Universe of Constant Mass and Increasing Radius, Accounting for the Radial Velocity of the Extra-Galactic Nebulae,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 91, no. 5 (1931), 483–90. See also Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy (ref. 9), 32; Nussbaumer and Bieri, Discovering the Expanding Universe (ref. 9), 122–25.

  17. Kragh and Smith, “Who Discovered the Expanding Universe?” (ref. 2).

  18. For more on this point, see Cormac O’Raifeartaigh, “Eddington, Lemaître and the Discovery of the Expanding Universe,” in Arthur Stanley Eddington, ed. David Valls-Gabaud (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020), in press.

  19. Kragh and Smith, “Who Discovered the Expanding Universe?” (ref. 2).

  20. Harry Nussbaumer, “Einstein’s Conversion from His Static to an Expanding Universe,” European Physical Journal H 39, no. 1 (2014), 37–62.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. Thomas S. Kuhn, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), 165–77; Imre Lakatos, “History of Science and Its Rational Reconstructions,” in Scientific Revolutions, ed. Ian Hacking (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981).

  22. Smith, “The Origins of the Velocity-Distance Relation” (ref. 10); Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy (ref. 9), 18.

  23. Virginia Trimble, “Eponyms, Hubble’s Law, and the Three Princes of Parallax,” The Observatory 132 (2012), 33–35.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hubble and Humason, “The Velocity-Distance Relation” (ref. 11).

  25. Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy (ref. 9), 73–76.

  26. Fritz Zwicky, “On the Red Shift of Spectral Lines through Interstellar Space,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 15, no. 10 (1929), 773–83.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Helge Kragh, “Is the Universe Expanding?: Fritz Zwicky and Early Tired-Light Hypotheses,” Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage 20, no. 1 (2017), 2–12.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Edward A. Milne, “World-Relations and the Cosmical Constant,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 94, no. 1 (1933), 3–9.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kragh and Smith, “Who Discovered the Expanding Universe?” (ref. 2).

  30. Edwin P. Hubble and Richard C. Tolman, “Two Methods of Investigating the Nature of the Nebular Redshift,” The Astrophysical Journal 82 (1935), 303.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kragh, “Is the Universe Expanding?” (ref. 27).

  32. Edwin P. Hubble, “The Law of Red-Shifts: George Darwin Lecture,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 113, no. 6 (1953), 658.

  33. John D. North, “The Early Years,” in Modern Cosmology in Retrospect ed. Bruno Bertotti et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 11–30; Kragh and Smith, “Who Discovered the Expanding Universe?” (ref. 2).

  34. Robert W. Smith, “Observations and the Universe,” in The Oxford Handbook of the History of Modern Cosmology ed. Helge Kragh and Malcolm Longair, 39–76 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).

  35. Virginia Trimble, “H0: The Incredible Shrinking Constant 1925–1975,” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 108, no. 12 (1996), 1073–82; Malcolm Longair, “Observational and Astrophysical Cosmology 1940–1980,” in Kragh and Longair, eds., Oxford Handbook (ref. 34), 206–44.

  36. Milne, “World-Relations” (ref. 28); Arthur G. Walker, “Distance in an Expanding Universe,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 94, no. 2 (1933), 159–84.

  37. George Gamow, The Creation of the Universe (New York: Viking Press, 1952), 37; Denis Sciama, The Unity of the Universe (New York: Doubleday & Co., 1959); Pierre Couderc, The Expansion of the Universe (London: Faber and Faber, 1952), 108–10.

  38. Georges Lemaître, “A Homogeneous Universe” (ref. 16).

  39. Georges Lemaître, letter to William Smart, March 9, 1931, Correspondence of the Royal Astronomical Society. See also Mario Livio, “Lost in Translation: Mystery of the Missing Text Solved,” Nature 479, no. 7372 (2011), 171–73.

  40. Georges Lemaître, “Compte rendu de P. Couderc; L’expansion de l’universe,” Annales d’Astrophysique 13, no. 3 (1950), 344.

  41. Georges Lemaître, “Clusters of Nebulae in an Expanding Universe,” Monthly Notices of the Astronomical Society of Southern Africa 11 (1952), 110.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Helge Kragh, “On the History and Philosophy of Twentieth-Century Cosmology,” in Atti Del XVI Congresso Nazionale Di Storia Della Fisica E Dell’Astronomia, ed. Pasquale Tucci, 13–53 (Università degli Studi di Milano, 1997); Laurent Loison, “Forms of Presentism in the History of Science,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 60 (2016), 29–37.

  43. Helge Kragh, “Hubble Law or Hubble-Lemaître Law?: The IAU Resolution,” arXiv, September 7, 2018, https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.02557.

  44. Edward Harrison, Cosmology: The Science of the Universe, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 274–75.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  45. Smith, “The Origins of the Velocity-Distance Relation” (ref. 10).

  46. Edward Harrison, “The Redshift-Distance and Velocity-Distance Laws,” Astrophysical Journal 403, no. 1 (1993), 28–31.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  47. Peter Caws, The Philosophy of Science: A Systematic Account (New York: Van Nostrand, 1965), 85.

    Google Scholar 

  48. For further discussion of this point, see Kragh and Smith, “Who Discovered the Expanding Universe?” (ref. 2).

  49. Wendy Freedman, ‘‘Cosmology at a Crossroads,’’ Nature Astronomy 1, no. 0121 (2017), 1–3; Richard Panek, ‘‘A Cosmic Crisis,’’ Scientific American 322, no. 3 (2020), 30–37.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cormac O’Raifeartaigh.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cormac O’Raifeartaigh lectures in physics at Waterford Institute of Technology, Ireland and is Visiting Associate Professor of Physics at University College Dublin. Michael O’Keeffe is a Lecturer Emeritus at Waterford Institute of Technology, Ireland.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

O’Raifeartaigh, C., O’Keeffe, M. Redshifts versus Paradigm Shifts: Against Renaming Hubble’s Law. Phys. Perspect. 22, 215–225 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00016-020-00263-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00016-020-00263-z

Keywords

  • Hubble’s law
  • Hubble-Lemaître law
  • redshifts
  • paradigm shifts
  • cosmic expansion
  • empirical laws
  • anachronistic histories