In this article, we present an example of an inhomogeneous cosmological model, which is inspired by the linear perturbation theory. The metric of this model can be described as the Einstein-de Sitter background with a periodically distributed dust overdensities. The model construction enables application of the Green-Wald averaging scheme and the Buchert averaging technique simultaneously. We compare the angular diameter distance function of the considered model to the angular diameter distances corresponding to the average space-times given by the Green-Wald and the Buchert frameworks respectively.

The aim of this work is to show, in the framework of a simple finite-width disk model, that the amount of mass seen through gravitational microlensing measurements in the region 0 < R < R • is consistent with the dynamical mass ascertained from Galaxy rotation after subtracting gas contribution. Since microlensing only detects compact objects, this result suggests that a non-baryonic mass component may be negligible in this region.

We model the phase-space distribution of the kinematic tracers using general, smooth distribution functions to derive a conservative lower bound on the total mass within ≈150−200 kpc. By approximating the potential as Keplerian, the phase-space distribution can be simplified to that of a smooth distribution of energies and eccentricities. Our approach naturally allows for calculating moments of the distribution function, such as the radial profile of the orbital anisotropy. We systematically construct a family of phase-space functions with the resulting radial velocity dispersion overlapping with the one obtained using data on radial motions of distant kinematic tracers, while making no assumptions about the density of the tracers and the velocity anisotropy parameter β regarded as a function of the radial variable. While there is no apparent upper bound for the Milky Way mass, at least as long as only the radial motions are concerned, we find a sharp lower bound for the mass that is small. In particular, a mass value of 2.4 × 10 11 M , obtained in the past for lower and intermediate radii, is still consistent with the dispersion profile at larger radii. Compared with much greater mass values in the literature, this result shows that determining the Milky Way mass is strongly model-dependent. We expect a similar reduction of mass estimates in models assuming more realistic mass profiles.

We constructed a simple cosmological model which approximates the Einstein-de Sitter background with periodically distributed dust inhomogeneities. By taking the metric as a power series up to the third order in some perturbative parameter λ, we are able to achieve large values of the density contrast. With a metric explicitly given, many model properties can be calculated in a straightforward way which is interesting in the context of the current discussion concerning the averaging of the inhomogeneities and their backreaction in cosmology. Although the Einstein-de Sitter model can be thought as the model average, the light propagation differs from that of the Einstein-de Sitter. The angular diameter distance-redshift relation is affected by the presence of inhomogeneities and depends on the observer's position. The model construction scheme enables some generalizations in the future, so the present work is a step towards more realistic cosmological model described by a relatively simple analytical metric.

We construct an approximate solution to the cosmological perturbation theory around Einstein–de Sitter background up to the fourth-order perturbations. This could be done with the help of the specific symmetry condition imposed on the metric, from which follows that the model density forms an infinite, cubic lattice. To verify the convergence of the perturbative construction, we express the resulting metric as a polynomial in the perturbative parameter and calculate the exact Einstein tensor. In our model, it seems that physical quantities averaged over large scales overlap with the respective Einstein–de Sitter prediction, while local observables could differ significantly from their background counterparts. As an example, we analyze the behavior of the local measurements of the Hubble constant and compare them with the Hubble constant of the homogeneous background model. A difference between these quantities is important in the context of a current Hubble tension problem.