Scholar iON
Academic Synthesis
The scholarly paper by Giora Shaviv critically examines the historical narrative surrounding the discovery of the expanding universe and the so-called 'Hubble Law,' highlighting the contributions of Georges Lemaître and Edwin Hubble. The study asserts that Lemaître theoretically deduced the velocity-distance correlation and calculated the corresponding coefficient before Hubble's empirical demonstration of the relationship. However, it contends that accusations of censorship or plagiarism against Hubble are unfounded, as Hubble did not accept Lemaître's expanding universe model and thus did not cite his work—a trend also observed among other prominent researchers of the time. This research underscores the complexities of scientific recognition and attribution, emphasizing the nuanced interplay between theoretical predictions and empirical validation in the advancement of astrophysical knowledge.
Recently Block published an astro-ph{http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3928 (2011).} insinuating that Lemaitre discovery paper of the Expanding Universe was censored prior to its translation into English and publication in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. Consequently, Lemaitre's credit for the discovery of the velocity-distance correlation was not recognized. We examine here the chain of events leading to the discovery of the 'Hubble law'. Our summary: (a) Lemaitre found a theoretical linear correlation between velocity and distance. (b) Lemaitre assumed the existence of a linear relation between velocity and distance and calculated the coefficient. (c) Hubble took the data plotted it and demonstrated that a linear relation represents the observed data. (d) Hubble never believed in Lemaitre's solution, namely in an expanding universe. Consequently, Hubble never cited Lemaitre. We conclude that the charge that Lemaitre's paper was censored or ignored let alone plagiarized by Hubble, is not founded, and explain why Lemaitre's earlier theoretical discovery and derived 'Hubble constant' was not cited or recognized, by Hubble as well as by many other leading researchers.