No Evidence for Temporal Oscillations in Hubble Constant Measurements: A Comprehensive Analysis of 47 High-Precision Determinations

This Version 3.0 provides a comprehensive and corrected analysis of temporal patterns in Hubble constant (H₀) measurements. Using 47 independent, high-precision determinations spanning 1994–2024, we rigorously test the proposed 5.9-year oscillation hypothesis. Employing Lomb–Scargle periodogram analysis with permutation-based false alarm probability estimation, Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) model comparison, cross-validation, bootstrap resampling, and statistical power analysis, we find NO evidence for any significant periodic variation in H₀. KEY RESULTS:• False Alarm Probability = 48% (not significant)• Bayesian comparison strongly favors constant H₀ (ΔBIC = +47)• Cross-validation reveals complete instability (5/8 methods fail)• Phase analysis falsifies core prediction (Δφ = 0.69 ± 0.15 rad vs. π rad; 4.4 σ deviation)• Small-sample bias explains earlier claims (spurious 5.9-yr signals at N < 25)• Dataset (N = 47) provides ≈ 95 % statistical power for A = 2 km s⁻¹ Mpc⁻¹ CONCLUSION:The Hubble tension is a persistent, non-temporal discrepancy requiring explanations beyond measurement timing effects. This publication establishes methodological standards for cosmological time-series analyses and demonstrates the scientific importance of reproducible null results. FILES INCLUDED:- Dindar_2025_Hubble_Null_Result_V3_Perfect.pdf (main 11-page paper with all figures/tables integrated)- h0_database_comprehensive.csv (47 H₀ measurements)- hubble_null_analysis_IMPROVED.py (reproducible analysis code)- requirements.txt (dependencies)- README.md, LICENSE.txt, CITATION.cff, MANIFEST.txt (documentation and metadata) Version: 3.0 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17569008License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)