DOCSLIB.ORG

Observational Evidence Favors a Static Universe

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Observational Evidence Favors a Static Universe 1 Observational evidence favors a static universe David F. Crawford Sydney Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics, University of Sydney. Correspondence: 44 Market St, Naremburn, 2065, NSW, Australia email: [email protected] Abstract The common attribute of all Big Bang cosmologies is that they are based on the assumption that the universe is expanding. However exam- ination of the evidence for this expansion clearly favors a static universe. The major topics considered are: Tolman surface brightness, angular size, type 1a supernovae, gamma ray bursts, galaxy distributions, quasar dis- tributions, X-ray background radiation, cosmic microwave background ra- diation, radio source counts, quasar variability and the Butcher{Oemler effect. An analysis of the best raw data for these topics shows that they are consistent with expansion only if there is evolution that cancels the effects of expansion. An alternate cosmology, curvature cosmology, is a tired-light cosmology that predicts a well defined static and stable uni- verse and is fully described. It not only predicts accurate values for the Hubble constant and the temperature of cosmic microwave background radiation but shows good agreement with most of the topics considered. Curvature cosmology also predicts the deficiency in solar neutrino pro- duction rate and can explain the anomalous acceleration of Pioneer 10. Note: The editor of the Journal of Cosmology required this paper to be divided into three parts. Except for the abstracts, introductions and conclusions the text of the three papers is identical to this version. For convenience a table of contents is included in this version. The correspondence between the sections in this version and those in the Journal of Cosmology are: Part I sections2,3,4 72pp 2011, JCos, 13, 3875-3946 Part II section5 53pp 2011, JCos, 13, 3947-3999 Part III sections6&7 58pp 2001, JCos, 13, 4000-4057 cosmology: observations, large-scale structure of universe, theory arXiv:1009.0953v5 [physics.gen-ph] 9 Jul 2014 CONTENTS 2 Contents 1 Introduction3 2 Cosmographic Parameters7 2.1 Big Bang cosmology (BB) . .8 2.2 Curvature cosmology (CC) . .8 2.3 Numerical comparison of BB and CC . 10 3 Theoretical 11 4 Expansion and Evolution 12 4.1 Tolman surface brightness . 12 4.1.1 Surface brightness in BB . 12 4.1.2 Surface brightness in CC . 15 4.1.3 Conclusion for surface brightness . 16 4.2 Angular size . 16 4.3 Type 1a supernovae . 17 4.3.1 Supernovae in BB . 19 4.3.2 Supernovae in CC . 20 4.3.3 Supernova conclusion . 24 4.4 Gamma ray bursts (GRB) . 25 4.5 Galaxy distribution . 25 4.6 Quasar distribution . 27 4.7 Radio Source Counts . 28 4.8 Quasar variability in time . 32 4.9 The Butcher{Oemler effect . 33 5 Non-expansion Observations 34 5.1 The Hubble redshift . 34 5.2 X-ray background radiation . 34 5.2.1 X-rays in BB . 34 5.2.2 X-rays in CC . 35 5.3 Cosmic microwave background radiation . 39 5.3.1 CMBR in BB . 40 5.3.2 CMBR in CC . 40 5.3.3 CMBR conclusions . 43 5.4 CMBR at large redshifts . 43 5.5 Fluctuations in the CMBR . 44 5.6 Dark matter . 44 5.7 The Sunyaev{Zel'dovich effect . 46 5.8 Gravitational lensing . 47 5.9 Lyman alpha forest . 48 5.10 The Gunn{Peterson trough in high redshift quasars . 49 5.11 Nuclear abundances . 51 5.12 Galactic rotation curves . 51 5.13 Redshifts in our Galaxy . 52 5.14 Anomalous redshifts . 53 5.15 Voids . 54 1 INTRODUCTION 3 6 Curvature Cosmology Theory 55 6.1 Derivation of curvature redshift . 56 6.1.1 Photons in Curved Spacetime . 57 6.1.2 Curvature redshift secondary photons . 60 6.1.3 Inhibition of curvature redshift . 61 6.1.4 Possible laboratory tests . 62 6.1.5 Interactions for other particles . 65 6.2 Derivation of curvature pressure . 66 6.2.1 Gravitation is not a force . 66 6.2.2 A Newtonian model . 67 6.2.3 General relativistic model . 68 6.2.4 Local curvature pressure . 69 6.3 The curvature cosmological model . 71 6.3.1 The Friedmann equations . 71 6.3.2 Temperature of the cosmic plasma . 72 6.3.3 Hubble constant: theory . 73 6.3.4 Geometry of CC . 73 6.3.5 Luminosities and magnitudes . 74 7 Application of Curvature Cosmology 75 7.1 Entropy . 75 7.2 Olber's Paradox . 76 7.3 Black holes and Jets . 77 7.4 Large number coincidences . 77 7.5 Solar neutrino production . 78 7.6 Heating of the solar corona . 80 7.7 Pioneer 10 acceleration . 80 8 Conclusion 83 A Analytic methods 84 1 Introduction The common attribute of all Big Bang cosmologies (BB) is that they are based on the assumption that the universe is expanding (Peebles, 1993). An early al- ternative was the steady-state theory of Hoyle, Bondi and Gold (described with later extensions by Hoyle et al.(2000)) that required continuous creation of matter. However steady-state theories have serious difficulties in explaining the cosmic microwave background radiation. This left BB as the dominant cosmol- ogy but still subject to criticism. Recently Lal(2010) and Joseph(2010) have continued major earlier criticisms of Big Bang cosmologies (Ellis, 1984; Lerner, 1991; Disney, 2000; Van Flandern, 2002). Whereas most of theses criticisms have been of a theoretical nature this paper concentrates on whether observa- tional data supports BB or a static cosmological model, curvature cosmology (CC), described below. Expansion produces two distinct effects. The first effect of expansion is the increasing redshift with distance as described by Hubble's law. This could be due to either a genuine expansion or resulting from a tired-light phenomenon. 1 INTRODUCTION 4 The second effect of expansion is time dilation resulting from the slowing down of the arrival times of the photons as the source gets further away. Section4 concentrates on the evidence for expansion as shown by time dilation and shows that the evidence is only consistent with BB if there is evolution in either lu- minosity or in angular size that closely cancels the effects of time dilation. To illustrate that a static cosmology can explain the data, a particular model, cur- vature cosmology (CC), is used. Curvature cosmology is based on the hypothesis of curvature redshift and the hypothesis of curvature pressure. Curvature red- shift arises from the principle that any localized wave travelling in curved space time will follow geodesics and be subject to geodesics focussing. Since this will alter the transverse properties of the wave some of its properties such as angu- lar momentum will be altered which is contrary to quantum mechanics. For a photon the result is an interaction that results in three new photons. One with almost identical energy and momentum as the original and two extremely low energy secondary photons. In effect the photon loses energy via an interaction with curved space-time. The concept of curvature pressure arises from the idea that the density of particles produce curved space-time. Then as a function of their velocity there will be a reaction pressure that acts to decrease the local space-time curvature. It is the evaluation of evidence for this expansion that forms the major ba- sis of this paper. Consequently minor differences between different expansion cosmologies are not particularly important here; it is the broad brush approach that is relevant. Nevertheless to provide appropriate numerical quantities the evaluation is based on a particular BB cosmology, the (ΛCDM) model, which is defined in Section2 by the equations for angular size, volume and distance modulus. Since the major difference between BB and CC arises from the expan- sion in BB, the major results of the comparison are applicable to other static cosmologies and do not depend on the validity of CC. A problem in evaluating a well established cosmology like Big Bang cosmology is that all of the obser- vations have been analyzed within the BB paradigm. Thus there can be subtle effects that may lead to a possible bias. In order to avoid this bias and wherever possible comparisons are made using original observations. Section3 discusses the theoretical justification for the basic and additional hypotheses that have been incorporated into the cosmologies. For BB these includes inflation, dark matter and dark energy. For CC the hypotheses are curvature redshift and curvature pressure. The evaluation of BB and its comparison with CC using observational evi- dence is divided into four major parts. The first in Section4 concentrates on those observations that have measurements that are strongly dependent on ex- pansion. It is found that in all cases where there is direct evidence for evolution this evolution is close to what is required to cancel the expansion term in the BB equations. This is an extraordinary coincidence. The simplest conclusion is that the universe is not expanding. Section5 looks at observations that have different explanations in CC from what they have in BB. It is found that not only does CC gave better agreement with most of the observations but it does so without requiring extra ad hoc parameters or hypotheses. The next section is a description of CC and possible experimental tests of its validity. Finally Section7 examines additional important topics that are relevant to CC. The test for Tolman surface brightness in Section4 is through the expected variation of apparent surface brightness with redshift. The results strongly favor 1 INTRODUCTION 5 a static universe but could be consistent with BB provided there is luminosity evolution. The relationship between angular size and linear size in BB includes a aber- ration factor of (1 + z) that does not occur in static cosmologies.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fred Hoyle's Universe
    GENERAL ARTICLE Fred Hoyle’s Universe Jayant V Narlikar This article recalls some of the seminal contri- butions to astronomy made by Fred Hoyle. His ideas were thought to be unrealistic at the time they were proposed, but have now been assim- ilated into mainstream science. A general com- ment that emerges from such examples is that highly creative individuals who are far ahead of their times do not get the recognition they de- Jayant V Narlikar is a serve once their ideas are rediscovered and ac- cosmologist and theoretical cepted as standard: for, by the time this hap- astrophysicist. He was a pens, they and their contributions are forgotten. research student and a long-time collaborator of 1. Introduction Fred Hoyle. He is the Founder Director of Fred Hoyle was arguably the most imaginative astro- IUCCA and is currently an emeritus professor there. physicist of the 20th century. He contributed very orig- He has made strong efforts inal ideas to astronomy and astrophysics in topics rang- to promote teaching and ing from the solar system to cosmology. He also made research in astronomy in contributions to fundamental physics, in particular to the universities. He has the concept of action at a distance. His studies on exo- written extensively in English and Marathi to biology evoked the most opposition from the Establish- popularize science. ment because their implications were so far reaching. This article presents glimpses of the work of this mul- tifaceted personality who is also known to the common man as an accomplished science populariser and writer of science ¯ction.
    [Show full text]
  • 20Th Century Cosmology
    2200tthh century cosmology 1920s – 1990s (from Friedmann to Freedman) theoretical technology available, but no data 20 th century: birth of observational cosmology Hubble’s law ~1930 Development of astrophysics 1940s – 1950s Discovery of the CMB 1965 Inflation 1981 CMB anisotropies: COBE ~1990 PHY306 1 2200tthh century cosmology 1920s – 1990s (from Friedmann to Freedman) theoretical technology available, but no data 20 th century: birth of observational cosmology Hubble’s law ~1930 Development of astrophysics 1940s – 1950s – understanding of stellar structure and evolution – beginnings of quantitative predictions in cosmology ● birth of the Big Bang and Steady State models – beginnings of non-optical astronomy ● radio astronomy (1940s), satellites (1957 on) PHY306 2 1 State of Play, 1940 Hydrogen fusion finally understood pp chain, Bethe and Crichton, 1938 CNO cycle, Bethe, 1939 Hubble constant still ~500 km/s/Mpc Hubble time ~2 Gyr, recognised as problem Most cosmological papers basically playing with the maths not enough data to produce useful constraints different theories owe more to differences in philosophy than anything else PHY306 3 Cosmological models Theories of the 1930s Theories of the 1940s general relativistic Hot Big Bang cosmologies George Gamow, Ralph Friedmann, Lemaître, Alpher, Robert Herman Robertson – driven by nuclear physics “kinematic cosmology” – main prediction not Milne tested for ~20 years! not – special but Steady State general relativity – finite “bubble” of Fred Hoyle, Herman galaxies
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Universe Really Expanding?
    Is the Universe really expanding? J.G. Hartnett School of Physics, the University of Western Australia 35 Stirling Hwy, Crawley 6009 WA Australia; [email protected] (Dated: November 22, 2011) The Hubble law, determined from the distance modulii and redshifts of galaxies, for the past 80 years, has been used as strong evidence for an expanding universe. This claim is reviewed in light of the claimed lack of necessary evidence for time dilation in quasar and gamma-ray burst luminosity variations and other lines of evidence. It is concluded that the observations could be used to describe either a static universe (where the Hubble law results from some as-yet-unknown mechanism) or an expanding universe described by the standard Λ cold dark matter model. In the latter case, size evolution of galaxies is necessary for agreement with observations. Yet the simple non-expanding Euclidean universe fits most data with the least number of assumptions. From this review it is apparent that there are still many unanswered questions in cosmology and the title question of this paper is still far from being answered. Keywords: expanding universe, static universe, time dilation I. INTRODUCTION eral relativity, which has been successfully empirically tested in the solar system by numerous tests [74], and with pulsar/neutron star and pulsar/pulsar binary pairs Ever since the late 1920’s, when Edwin Hubble discov- [16, 45, 62] in the Galaxy, is a very strong point in its fa- ered a simple proportionality [40] between the redshifts vor, and strong evidence for an expanding universe [69].
    [Show full text]
  • Einstein's Role in the Creation of Relativistic Cosmology
    EINSTEIN'S ROLE IN THE CREATION OF RELATIVISTIC COSMOLOGY CHRISTOPHER SMEENK 1. Introduction Einstein's paper, \Cosmological Considerations in the General Theory of Relativ- ity" (Einstein 1917b), is rightly regarded as the first step in modern theoretical cosmology. Perhaps the most striking novelty introduced by Einstein was the very idea of a cosmological model, an exact solution to his new gravitational field equations that gives a global description of the universe in its entirety. Einstein's paper inspired a small group of theorists to study cosmological models using his new gravitational theory, and the ideas developed during these early days have been a crucial part of cosmology ever since. We will see below that understanding the physical properties of these models and their possible connections to astro- nomical observations was the central problem facing relativistic cosmology in the 20s. By the early 30s, there was widespread consensus that a class of models de- scribing the expanding universe was in at least rough agreement with astronomical observations. But this achievement was certainly not what Einstein had in mind in introducing the first cosmological model. Einstein's seminal paper was not simply a straightforward application of his new theory to an area where one would ex- pect the greatest differences from Newtonian theory. Instead, Einstein's foray into cosmology was a final attempt to guarantee that a version of \Mach's principle" holds. The Machian idea that inertia is due only to matter shaped Einstein's work on a new theory of gravity, but he soon realized that this might not hold in his “final” theory of November 1915.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Misconceptions of Cosmological Horizons and the Superluminal Expansion of the Universe
    CSIRO PUBLISHING www.publish.csiro.au/journals/pasa Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 2004, 21, 97–109 Expanding Confusion: Common Misconceptions of Cosmological Horizons and the Superluminal Expansion of the Universe Tamara M. Davis and Charles H. Lineweaver University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia (e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]) Received 2003 June 3, accepted 2003 October 10 Abstract: We use standard general relativity to illustrate and clarify several common misconceptions about the expansion of the universe. To show the abundance of these misconceptions we cite numerous misleading, or easily misinterpreted, statements in the literature. In the context of the new standard CDM cosmology we point out confusions regarding the particle horizon, the event horizon, the ‘observable universe’ and the Hubble sphere (distance at which recession velocity = c). We show that we can observe galaxies that have, and always have had, recession velocities greater than the speed of light. We explain why this does not violate special relativity and we link these concepts to observational tests. Attempts to restrict recession velocities to less than the speed of light require a special relativistic interpretation of cosmological redshifts. We analyze apparent magnitudes of supernovae and observationally rule out the special relativistic Doppler interpretation of cosmological redshifts at a confidence level of 23σ. Keywords: cosmology: observations — cosmology: theory 1 Introduction description of the expanding universe using spacetime The general relativistic (GR) interpretation of the redshifts diagrams and we provide a mathematical summary in of distant galaxies, as the expansion of the universe, is Appendix A.
    [Show full text]
  • Hubble's Diagram and Cosmic Expansion
    Hubble’s diagram and cosmic expansion Robert P. Kirshner* Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 Contributed by Robert P. Kirshner, October 21, 2003 Edwin Hubble’s classic article on the expanding universe appeared in PNAS in 1929 [Hubble, E. P. (1929) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 15, 168–173]. The chief result, that a galaxy’s distance is proportional to its redshift, is so well known and so deeply embedded into the language of astronomy through the Hubble diagram, the Hubble constant, Hubble’s Law, and the Hubble time, that the article itself is rarely referenced. Even though Hubble’s distances have a large systematic error, Hubble’s velocities come chiefly from Vesto Melvin Slipher, and the interpretation in terms of the de Sitter effect is out of the mainstream of modern cosmology, this article opened the way to investigation of the expanding, evolving, and accelerating universe that engages today’s burgeoning field of cosmology. he publication of Edwin Hub- ble’s 1929 article ‘‘A relation between distance and radial T velocity among extra-galactic nebulae’’ marked a turning point in un- derstanding the universe. In this brief report, Hubble laid out the evidence for one of the great discoveries in 20th cen- tury science: the expanding universe. Hubble showed that galaxies recede from us in all directions and more dis- tant ones recede more rapidly in pro- portion to their distance. His graph of velocity against distance (Fig. 1) is the original Hubble diagram; the equation that describes the linear fit, velocity ϭ ϫ Ho distance, is Hubble’s Law; the slope of that line is the Hubble con- ͞ stant, Ho; and 1 Ho is the Hubble time.
    [Show full text]
  • III EO Lawrenc
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CERN Document Server OBSERVATION OF COSMOLOGICAL TIME DILATION USING TYPE IA SUPERNOVAE AS CLOCKS The Supernova Cosmology Project : III G.GOLDHABER1, S. DEUSTUA, S. GABI, D. GROOM, I. HOOK, A. KIM, M. KIM, J. LEE, R. PAIN2, C. PENNYPACKER, S. PERLMUTTER AND I. SMALL E. O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory & Center for Particle Astrophysics, University of California, Berkeley A. GOOBAR University of Stockholm R. ELLIS AND R. MCMAHON Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge University B. BOYLE, P. BUNCLARK, D. CARTER, K. GLAZEBROOK3 AND M. IRWIN Royal Greenwich Observatory H. NEWBERG Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory A. V. FILIPPENKO AND T. MATHESON University of California, Berkeley M. DOPITA AND J. MOULD MSSSO, Australian National University AND W. COUCH University of New South Wales . Abstract. This work is based on the first results from a systematic search for high redshift Type Ia supernovae. Using filters in the R-band we dis- covered seven such SNe, with redshift z =0:3 0:5, before or at maximum light. Type Ia SNe are known to be a homogeneous− group of SNe, to first order, with very similar light curves, spectra and peak luminosities. In this 1Presented by G. Goldhaber, e-mail address:[email protected] 2Current address: CNRS-IN2P3, University of Paris 3Current address: Anglo-Australian Observatory 2 talk we report that the light curves we observe are all broadened (time dilated) as expected from the expanding universe hypothesis. Small vari- ations from the expected 1 + z broadening of the light curve widths can be attributed to a width-brightness correlation that has been observed for nearby SNe (z<0:1).
    [Show full text]
  • Hubble's Cosmology
    2nd Crisis in Cosmology Conference, CCC-2 ASP Conference Series, Vol. 413, c 2009 Frank Potter, ed. Hubble’s Cosmology: From a Finite Expanding Universe to a Static Endless Universe A. K. T. Assis,1 M. C. D. Neves,1,2 and D. S. L. Soares3 1. Institute of Physics “Gleb Wataghin,” University of Campinas UNICAMP, 13083-970 Campinas, SP, Brazil email: assis@ifi.unicamp.br 2. Departamento de F´ısica, Funda¸c˜ao Universidade Estadual de Maring´a — FUEM, 87020-900 Maring´a, PR, Brazil email: [email protected] 3. Departamento de F´ısica, ICEx, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, C. P. 702, 30123-970 Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil email: dsoares@fisica.ufmg.br Abstract. We analyze the views of Edwin Hubble (1889–1953) as regards the large scale structure of the universe. In 1929 he initially accepted a finite ex- panding universe in order to explain the redshifts of distant galaxies. Later on he turned to an infinite stationary universe and a new principle of nature in order to explain the same phenomena. Initially, he was impressed by the agreement of his redshift-distance relation with one of the predictions of de Sitter’s cosmological model, namely, the so-called “de Sitter effect,” the phenomenon of the scattering of material particles, leading to an expanding universe. A number of observa- tional evidences, though, made him highly skeptical with such a scenario. They were better accounted for by an infinite static universe. The evidences he found were: (i) the huge values he was getting for the “recession” velocities of the neb- ulae (1,800 km s−1 in 1929 up to 42,000 km s−1 in 1942, leading to v/c = 1/7), with the redshifts interpreted as velocity-shifts.
    [Show full text]
  • An Observer-Based Referential That Is Consistent with Cosmological Observations Théophile Caby
    An observer-based referential that is consistent with cosmological observations Théophile Caby To cite this version: Théophile Caby. An observer-based referential that is consistent with cosmological observations. 2021. hal-02149955 HAL Id: hal-02149955 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02149955 Preprint submitted on 22 Apr 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. An observer-based referential that is consistent with cosmological observations Théophile Caby LAMIA, Université des Antilles [email protected] Abstract We propose an alternative explanation for the redshift of cosmological objects. In this approach, the wavelength of a photon is affected by the spatial curvature in- tegrated along its trajectory from the source to the observer. We explain this effect by postulating that all measurements are performed in an observer-based represen- tation referential that has the geometrical properties of flat space, resulting in a distortion of lengths associated to distant objects. Applying these considerations in the Einstein’s static universe, we obtain a redshift/distance relationship that is consistent with observations. We are also able to explain the existence and charac- teristics of the Cosmic Microwave Background.
    [Show full text]
  • Astronomy 275 Lecture Notes, Spring 2015 Coedward L. Wright, 2015
    Astronomy 275 Lecture Notes, Spring 2015 c Edward L. Wright, 2015 Cosmology has long been a fairly speculative field of study, short on data and long on theory. This has inspired some interesting aphorisms: Cosmologist are often in error but never in doubt - Landau. • There are only two and a half facts in cosmology: • 1. The sky is dark at night. 2. The galaxies are receding from each other as expected in a uniform expansion. 3. The contents of the Universe have probably changed as the Universe grows older. Peter Scheuer in 1963 as reported by Malcolm Longair (1993, QJRAS, 34, 157). But since 1992 a large number of facts have been collected and cosmology is becoming an empirical field solidly based on observations. 1. Cosmological Observations 1.1. Recession velocities Modern cosmology has been driven by observations made in the 20th century. While there were many speculations about the nature of the Universe, little progress was made until data were obtained on distant objects. The first of these observations was the discovery of the expansion of the Universe. In the paper “THE LARGE RADIAL VELOCITY OF NGC 7619” by Milton L. Humason (1929) we read that “About a year ago Mr. Hubble suggested that a selected list of fainter and more distant extra-galactic nebulae, especially those occurring in groups, be observed to determine, if possible, whether the absorption lines in these objects show large displacements toward longer wave-lengths, as might be expected on de Sitter’s theory of curved space-time. During the past year two spectrograms of NGC 7619 were obtained with Cassegrain spectrograph VI attached to the 100-inch telescope.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1701.08720V1 [Astro-Ph.CO]
    Foundations of Physics manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Tests and problems of the standard model in Cosmology Mart´ın L´opez-Corredoira Received: xxxx / Accepted: xxxx Abstract The main foundations of the standard ΛCDM model of cosmology are that: 1) The redshifts of the galaxies are due to the expansion of the Uni- verse plus peculiar motions; 2) The cosmic microwave background radiation and its anisotropies derive from the high energy primordial Universe when matter and radiation became decoupled; 3) The abundance pattern of the light elements is explained in terms of primordial nucleosynthesis; and 4) The formation and evolution of galaxies can be explained only in terms of gravi- tation within a inflation+dark matter+dark energy scenario. Numerous tests have been carried out on these ideas and, although the standard model works pretty well in fitting many observations, there are also many data that present apparent caveats to be understood with it. In this paper, I offer a review of these tests and problems, as well as some examples of alternative models. Keywords Cosmology · Observational cosmology · Origin, formation, and abundances of the elements · dark matter · dark energy · superclusters and large-scale structure of the Universe PACS 98.80.-k · 98.80.E · 98.80.Ft · 95.35.+d · 95.36.+x · 98.65.Dx Mathematics Subject Classification (2010) 85A40 · 85-03 1 Introduction There is a dearth of discussion about possible wrong statements in the foun- dations of standard cosmology (the “Big Bang” hypothesis in the present-day Instituto de Astrof´ısica de Canarias, E-38205 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain Departamento de Astrof´ısica, Universidad de La Laguna, E-38206 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain arXiv:1701.08720v1 [astro-ph.CO] 30 Jan 2017 Tel.: +34-922-605264 Fax: +34-922-605210 E-mail: [email protected] 2 Mart´ın L´opez-Corredoira version of ΛCDM, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Tired Light and Type Ia Supernovae Observations
    Tired Light and Type Ia Supernovae Observations Herman Holushko Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada, [email protected] January 2012 Abstract The phenomenon known as “supernova timescale stretching” was discovered by measuring the observed light curve broadening and by measuring the rate of spectra evolution (aging) for Type Ia supernovae. In modern cosmology this phenomenon is widely considered as one that rules out the “tired light” hypothesis. The redefined “tired light” hypothesis presented in this paper not only agrees with the supernova timescale stretching but actually explains it without employing universe expansion. Using Type Ia supernova spectra template, I have conducted a computer simulation study of light propagation from a supernova to an observer based on the tired light assumptions. The results of the simulation for “at rest” UBVRIYJHK bands do not contradict the astronomical observations related to light curve broadening and spectra aging. 1. Introduction In 2001, a group of cosmologists from Supernova Cosmology Project lead by Gerson Goldhaber published an article “Timescale Stretch Parameterization of Type Ia Supernova B-band Light Curves” [1]. While analyzing explosions of Type Ia supernovae, they discovered a dependency of the width of B-band light curves on the supernova redshift. They found that the light curve width is proportional to factor (1+Z), where Z is redshift. In the article they came to the conclusion that this dependency “provides independent evidence for cosmological expansion as the explanation of redshifts”. The conclusion is based on the idea that supernovae with high redshift are receding from us so fast that the light emitted at the end of the explosion travels a much longer way than the light emitted at the beginning of the explosion.
    [Show full text]