Why the Hubble constant, H, isn’t constant; and why we don’t need Dark Energy.

Approximately 100 years ago Hubble and co-workers realized that the galaxies outside the Milky Way were receding from us. Based on early and very few measurements it appeared that the recessional velocity divided by the distance to the galaxy was a constant; i.e., V/D = H. H came to be known as the Hubble constant. Subsequent measurements did not show the same behavior unless the distance was corrected by 1+z, Zwicky’s so-called ‘tired light’ correction, where z is the frequency shift in the light spectrum usually written as z = Δν / ν. Even with the correction, the value of the Hubble 'constant’ is still very much in dispute since direct measurements do not agree with the Cosmic Microwave Background measurements when interpreted using the standard Λ-CDM model. By contrast the alternative theory of George and Johansson [1] correctly predicts both results, and shows that it is the 1+z ‘correction’ that is wrong. H really does vary as 1+z, so no correction to D is necessary. [1] also shows good agreement with the supernovae data of Riess et al. and others WITHOUT needing to invoke Dark Energy, the previous need for which was a consequence of making the ‘tired light’ correction. Without the ‘correction’ the universe is not accelerating, hence no additional source of energy is needed after the Big Bang. Also, clearly the standard Λ-CDM model is wrong.

[1] George, W.K. and Johansson, T.J.(2025) "An alternative cosomological model for an expanding universe", Physics of Fluids 37, 037137 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0254954