Cited by 204Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaRelativity and Gravitational Theory

Expanding Confusion: common misconceptions of cosmological horizons and the superluminal expansion of the Universe

Open access
Davis, Tamara M., Lineweaver, Charles H.·2004·Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia

Abstract

We use standard general relativity to illustrate and clarify several common misconceptions about the expansion of the universe. To show the abundance of these misconceptions we cite numerous misleading, or easily misinterpreted, statements in the literature. In the context of the new standard ΛCDM cosmology we point out confusions regarding the particle horizon, the event horizon, the ‘observable universe’ and the Hubble sphere (distance at which recession velocity = c). We show that we can observe galaxies that have, and always have had, recession velocities greater than the speed of light. We explain why this does not violate special relativity and we link these concepts to observational tests. Attempts to restrict recession velocities to less than the speed of light require a special relativistic interpretation of cosmological redshifts. We analyze apparent magnitudes of supernovae and observationally rule out the special relativistic Doppler interpretation of cosmological redshifts at a confidence level of 23σ.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/as03040

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Feynman, R. P. 1995, Feynman Lectures on Gravitation (1962/63), (Reading, Massachusetts:Addison-Wesley), p. 181. 'It makes no sense to worry about the possibility of galaxies receding from us faster than light, whatever that means, since they would never be observable by hypothesis.'
  2. Weinberg, S. 1977, The First Three Minutes, (New York: Bantam Books), p. 27. 'The conclusion generally drawn from this half century of observation is that the galaxies are reced- ing from us, with speeds proportional to the distance (at least for speeds not too close to that of light).' See also p. 12 and p. 25. Weinberg makes a similar statement in his 1972 text Gravitation and Cosmology (New York: Wiley), p. 417: 'a relatively close galaxy will move away from or toward the Milky Way, with a radial velocity [v rec = Ṙ(t 0 )χ].' (our emphasis). Shortly thereafter he adds a caution about SR and distant sources: 'it is neither useful nor strictly correct to interpret the frequency shifts of light from very distant sources in terms of a special-relativistic Döppler shift alone. [The reader should be warned though, that astronomers con- ventionally report even large frequency shifts in terms of a recessional velocity, a 'red shift' of v km/sec meaning that z = v/(3 × 10 5 ).]'
  3. Schutz, B. F. 1985, A First Course in General Relativity, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 320. '[v = HD] cannot be exact since, for D > 1.2 × 10 26 m = 4000 Mpc, the References
  4. Davis, T. M., & Lineweaver, C. H. 2001, in Cosmology and Particle Physics 2000, eds. R. Durrer, J. Garcia-Bellido, & M. Shaposhnikov (New York: American Institute of Physics conference proceedings, Volume 555), 348
  5. Goldhaber, G., Dustua, S., Gabi, S., et al. 1997, in Thermo- nuclear Supernovae, NATO ASIC Proceedings 486, eds.
  6. Harrison, E. R. 1981, Cosmology: the science of the universe, 1st Edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), and 2nd Edition (2000)
  7. Landsberg, P. T., & Evans, D. A. 1977, Mathematical Cosmology, an Introduction (Oxford: Clarendon Press)
  8. Page, D. N. 1993, unpublished, gr-qc/9303008 · arXiv
  9. Peacock, J.A. 1999, Cosmological Physics, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
  10. Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P., Teukolsky, S. A., & Vetterling, W. T. 1989, Numerical Recipes (Fortran Version), (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
  11. Rindler, W. 1977, Essential relativity, special, general, and cosmological, (New York: Springer)
  12. Weinberg, S. 1972, Gravitation and Cosmology (New York: Wiley)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davis, T. M., & Lineweaver, C. H.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia
Published
2004
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
97-109
ISSN
  • 1323-3580 (ISSN-L)
  • 1448-6083
OpenAlex
W2953300055
Cited by
204
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
Keywords
cosmological horizon, particle horizon, event horizon, observable universe, Hubble sphere, cosmological redshift, special relativity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review