Cepheid Conflict in Como Berenices
or Breaking Hubble's Law
In 1994, Cepheids in the M100 galaxy were studied.
In 1996, cosmologists met to discuss 'The Scale of the Universe" and M100 was probably a topic.
There is little public information about the results of either.
I strongly suspect the M100 study broke Hubble's Law. This post explains why.
Cepheid variables are claimed to be a standard candle where its measured brightness enables a distance calculation by the known 'dimming by distance' for light.
A conflict with Cepheid calculations possibly arose for the M100 galaxy, one of the galaxies in the Messier list.
According to APOD, IM100 was a galaxy to be used for a Cepheid test for Hubble's constant. I find no published report of this study with all the details, other than Cepheids were observed. The study claimed M100 is the most distant galaxy found to have Cepheids.
Also there is no public report whether the M100 study was even a topic in the 1996 debate, or if M100 results were evaluated. The meeting's schedule is vague.
APOD has a 1996 entry titled
The Cepheids of M100
The photographed "Cepheid variable" star in M100 brightens and dims over the course of days as its atmosphere expands and contracts. A longer blinking cycle means an intrinsically brighter star. Cepheids variable stars are therefore used as distance indicators. By noting exactly how long the blinking period is and exactly how bright the star appears to be, one can tell the distance to the star and hence the star's parent galaxy. This distance can then be used to match-up easily measured recessional velocity ("redshift") with distance. Once this "Hubble relation" is determined for M100, it should be the same for all galaxies - and hence tell us how fast the universe is expanding. The exact magnitude of this calibration is under dispute and so a real live debate involving the value of Hubble's constant titled "The Scale of the Universe" will occur in April 1996 in Washington, DC.
NOAO has a page from 2014 titled just:
Best of AOP - Galaxies M100
This spiral galaxy [M100] currently holds a unique distinction in that it is one of the furthest galaxies in which Cepheid variables have been detected. These special variable stars have a specific relationship between their period of variation and brightness. Astronomers measure the periods of these stars to learn how bright they are. By knowing how bright the star truly is and how bright it appears, astronomers can measure their distance from Earth. In general galaxies are so far away even the best telescopes in the world cannot resolve individual stars. However in some of our nearby galactic neighbors it is possible. From these measurements M100 is estimated to be 56 million light years away.
The critical line in the APOD except:
Once this "Hubble relation" is determined for M100, it should be the same for all galaxies.
M100 has one of the highest redshift (1571 km/s) of all the galaxies in the Messier list, exceeded by M99 (2404 km/s). Both are in Como Berenices. The IGM must be similar for them.
Using Hubble's constant at 70 that puts M100 far away at 55Mly.
The 7 galaxies in the Messier list which are in the constellation Como Berenices are a very interesting set.
Here is a table with 6 columns: 1-galaxy, 2-velocity, 3-z, 4-type, 5-distance in Wikipedia (it has none for M88. just 50-60),
6-distance calculated from velocity using Hubble constant=70
These 7 galaxies are in the Como Berenices constellation.
name, vel km/s, z, type, distance, distance w/ Hubble's Law
M64,410, 0.0014, SAab, 17.3Mly, 19.1Mly
M85,729, 0.0024,S0, 60Mly, 34Mly
M88,2281, 0.0076,Sc, none, 106.2Mly
M91,486, 0.0016,SBb, 63Mly, 22.6Mly
M98,-142, -0.0005, SABab,44.4Mly, negative!
M99,2404, 0.0080, Sc,45.2Mly, 112Mly
M100,1571, 0.0052, SAB, 56Mly, 73.2Mly
First, comments about the data, then a conjecture about M100.
None have a published spectrum.
A 3-D plot is unreliable due to wrong distances from redshifts so their spacial relationships are unknown.
1) M98 is one of the very few blue shift galaxies, like M31 and M33. All 3 are spirals.
I expect its spectrum is like M31 with blue shifted calcium absorption lines.
This spiral galaxy is putting calcium atoms into the IGM in this area.
Wikipedia has a positive distance for it so M98 must have used Cepheids for that value, just like M31 and M33.
2) M64, M91 have lower + velocities than the others
3) M85,M88, M99, M100 have high + velocities. I expect those calcium atoms departing from M98 are rapidly approaching these 4 galaxies.
By Hubble's Law, they are much further than M91.
The differences between published distances and the Hubble calculated distances are striking.
Using the published velocity and the published distance, these are the Hubble constant (HC) values. 70 is the value often used.
M64 used HC=77
M85 used HC=39.6
M88 no data; is M88 distance not published because it is too extreme for the group?
M91 used HC=25.1
M98 used HC=??
M99 used HC=173.4; were Cepheids used for this distance?
M100 used HC=91.5
However if Cepheids found M100 is at the distance of M98 then HC is 115.3!
This is a big difference from the expected value near 70.
If Cepheids found M100 is at the even closer distance of M64 then HC is 296!
A larger HC (which is velocity / distance) means less expansion because there is more velocity related to less distance.
I expect the Cepheids placed M100 much closer (like M98) than the distance ccalculated by its unusually inflated red shift.
If that is the case, cosmologists have a big problem.
1) The Cepheids have been studied for a century. At this time, this mechanism is awkward to doubt.
2) they refuse to admit a distance from a redshift is wrong.
My conjecture is: M100 Cepheids broke Hubble's Law.
The calculated Hubble's constant was unacceptable.
Hit back to go to previous page in history.
Here is the list of topics in this Cosmology Topic Group .
Ctrl + for zoom in; Ctrl - for zoom out ; Ctrl 0 for no zoom;
triple-tap for zoom to fit; pinch for zoom change; pinched for no zoom