For the sake of preventing the spread of misinformation by Shermana;
First off, Hubble would have done anything but agree with a non-expanding, static universe.
Hubble's law is the name for the astronomical observation in physical cosmology first made by American astronomer Edwin Hubble, that: (1) all objects observed in deep space (interstellar space) are found to have a doppler shift observable relative velocity to Earth, and to each other; and (2) that this doppler-shift-measured velocity, of various galaxies receding from the Earth, is proportional to their distance from the Earth and all other interstellar bodies. In effect, the space-time volume of the observable universe is expanding and Hubble's law is the direct physical observation of this process.[1] The law was first derived from the General Relativity equations by Georges Lemaître in 1927.[2] Edwin Hubble derived it empirically in 1929[3] after nearly a decade of observations. The recession velocity of the objects was inferred from their redshifts, many measured earlier by Vesto Slipher (1917) and related to velocity by him.[4] It is considered the first observational basis for the expanding space paradigm and today serves as one of the pieces of evidence most often cited in support of the Big Bang model.
The law is often expressed by the equation v = H0D, with H0 the constant of proportionality (the Hubble constant) between the "proper distance" D to a galaxy (which can change over time, unlike the comoving distance) and its velocity v (i.e. the derivative of proper distance with respect to cosmological time coordinate; see Uses of the proper distance for some discussion of the subtleties of this definition of 'velocity'). The SI unit of H0 is s−1 but it is most frequently quoted in (km/s)/Mpc, thus giving the speed in km/s of a galaxy 1 megaparsec (3.09×1019 km) away. The reciprocal of H0 is the Hubble time.
A recent 2011 estimate of the Hubble constant, which used a new infrared camera on the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) to measure the distance and redshift for a collection of astronomical objects, gives a value of H0 = 73.8 ± 2.4 (km/s)/Mpc.[5][6] An alternate approach using data from galactic clusters gave a value of H0 = 67.0 ± 3.2 (km/s)/Mpc.[7][8]
An observational determination of the Hubble constant obtained in 2010 based on measurements of gravitational lensing by using the HST yielded a value of H0 = 72.6 ± 3.1 (km/s)/Mpc.[9] WMAP seven-year results, also from 2010, gave an estimate of H0 = 71.0 ± 2.5 (km/s)/Mpc based on WMAP data alone, and an estimate of H0 = 70.4 +1.3
−1.4 (km/s)/Mpc based on WMAP data with Gaussian priors based on earlier estimates from other studies.[10] In 2009 also using the Hubble Space Telescope the measure was 74.2 ± 3.6 (km/s)/Mpc.[11] The results agree closely with an earlier measurement, based on observations by the HST of Cepheid variable stars, of H0 = 72 ± 8 km/s/Mpc obtained in 2001.[12] In August 2006, a less-precise figure was obtained independently using data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory: H0 = 77 (km/s)/Mpc or about 2.5×10−18 s−1 with an uncertainty of ± 15%.[13] NASA's WMAP site summarizes existing data to indicate a constant of 70.8 ± 1.6 (km/s)/Mpc if space is assumed to be flat, or 70.8 ± 4.0 (km/s)/Mpc otherwise,[14] although these estimates have been on the site since January 2007[15] and may not take into account the more recent studies discussed above.
Second, yes, and because of relativity the Earth seems to be the center because things move away from it, this is also relative.
Pick one point on a balloon and put a dot there, now surround that dot with a bunch of other little dots. Then surround those dots with other little dots.
Ok now blow up the balloon. Note that the expansion between all dots increases, even though the center of the balloon is the original point of expansion.
From the view of the individual dots, it would appear as if they are, indeed, the center.
http://iopscience.iop.org/0264-9381/20/11/102/fulltext
"However, we find that spatially homogeneous gravitational-wave perturbations of the most general type destabilize a static universe. We pointed out the link that can be forged between this homogeneous instability and the behaviour of the inhomogeneous gravitational wave spectrum by choosing modes with imaginary wave number. Our results show that if the universe is in a neighbourhood of the Einstein static solution, it stays in that neighbourhood, but the Einstein static is not an attractor (because the stability is neutral, with non-damped oscillations). Expansion away from the static state can be triggered by a fall in the pressure of the matter. Typically, expansion away from the static solution will lead to inflation. If inflation occurs, then perturbations about a Friedmann geometry will rapidly be driven to zero. The nonlinear effects (which will certainly be important in these models because of the initial infinite timescale envisaged) will be discussed in a further paper, as will other aspects of the spatially homogeneous anisotropic modes."
I'm not done.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1108/1108.3962v1.pdf
"We have established that the Einstein static universe is unstable to Bianchi typeIX spatially homogeneous perturbations in the presence of non-tilted and tilted
perfect fluids with ρ + 3p > 0. We also found that the imaginary eigenvalues
corresponding to the perturbative effects of anisotropic curvature (Mixmaster
modes) and fluid tilt generalise the oscillatory behaviour of the finite wavelength
vector and tensor perturbations found in early studies of small amplitude perturbations"
Relevant research.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0703/0703556v1.pdf
