1 / 42

Evidence for a Non-Expanding Universe: Surface Brightness Data from HUDF Eric J. Lerner

Evidence for a Non-Expanding Universe: Surface Brightness Data from HUDF Eric J. Lerner Lawrenceville Plasma Physics. GEOMETRICAL TESTS OF TWO HYPOTHESES 1) FRW Expanding universe (Big Bang) Euclidean non-expanding universe with z=(H/c)distance, as in local universe

hachi
Télécharger la présentation

Evidence for a Non-Expanding Universe: Surface Brightness Data from HUDF Eric J. Lerner

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evidence for a Non-Expanding Universe: Surface Brightness Data from HUDF Eric J. Lerner Lawrenceville Plasma Physics

  2. GEOMETRICAL TESTS OF TWO HYPOTHESES 1) FRW Expanding universe (Big Bang) Euclidean non-expanding universe with z=(H/c)distance, as in local universe (non-geometric cause of redshift)

  3. Galaxy size and surface brightness Big Bang Prediction: z~(z+1)F(z) Euclidean non-expanding: z is constant Big Bang Prediction: Surface brightness (ABMag)~1/(1+z)3 Euclidean non-expanding: Surface brightness is constant

  4. DATA SETS HIGH z: HUDF “z” 850 nm Photometric z: i drops z~6 v drop z~4.9 NICMOS z=2.5-4 LOW z: GALEX FUV 155 nm NUV 230 nm Medium Sample MIS Spectroscopic z from SDSS

  5. SAMPLE SELECTION SB~1.5, at-galaxy  must be closely matched SB~M0.6 , match M Lower size cutoff 0.07” for Hubble, 1.8” for SDSS+GALEX, must match rz=R Sufficient sample size

  6. UNITS: Absolute luminosity defined here as: M=m(AB)-5 log z M(abs)=M-43 Milky Way L= 1.5x1010Ls M= 23.26 Surface brightness in magnitudes/arsec2 r=half light radius SB=m+2.5 log(r2) Milky Way SB= 24 magnitudes/arsec2 At z=6 SB for BB is down by 343

  7. HIGH Z-LOW Z PAIRS z obs. gal log r(kpc) N M 6 910 130 -0.91 34 23.5-24.5 0.165-0.205 154 121 -0.91 60 4.9 910 154 -0.82 61 23.5-24.5 0.135-0.165 154 130 -0.82 50 2.5-4 910 217 -0.58 32 23.5-24.5 0.135-0.165 232 205 -0.58 76

  8. COMPARE NUV HUDF SAMPLES USING FWHM/2 AS RADIUS MEASURE z obs. gal N M 3.3 910 212 12 23.5-24.5 2.7 775 209 13 23.5-24.5 1.9 606 209 15 23.5-24.5 2.7 775 209 13 24.5-25.5 1.9 606 209 24 24.5-25.5 1.1 435 207 11 24.5-25.5

  9. RESULTS Z Log SB 6 -0.06+0.03 4.9 -0.13+0.07 3.2 0.30+0.12

  10. =k(z+1)0.17+0.25 =k(z)0.09+0.15

  11. BIG BANG EVOLUTION HYPOTHESIS GALAXIES ARE ACTUALLY HUNDREDS OF TIMES BRIGHTER AND MUCH SMALLER BUT THIS PRODUCES HYPOTHETICAL GALAXIES THAT ARE HAVE 40-100 TIMES THE SB OF ANY EXTANT GALAXIES AND ARE PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE

  12. SURFACE BRIGHTNESS DATA EXCLUDES BIG BANG GEOMETRY BUT IS AN EXCELLENT FIT TO EUCLIDEAN NON-EXPANDING GEOMETRY Implications: Observable universe is infinite in spatial and temporal extent Redshift-distance relationship is non-geometric in origin. Laboratory test of relationship should be possible with modified LIGO

  13. WHY DO WE NEED A NEW WORLD MODEL? 1) BB requires increasing numbers of hypothetical entities without observational evidence—inflation, non-baryonic matter, dark energy—and free parameters. Reduces predictive power. 2) BB violates well-confirmed physical laws—conservation of baryon number

  14. 3) Basic predictions BB makes are contradicted by observation: a) light element predictions are wrong-Li in particular b) geometric–size, surface brightness—predictions wrong c) age of universe is wrong—voids at least five times too old, high z galaxies are too old d) Gaussian CBR is wrong

  15. BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF PLASMA COSMOLOGY SINCE THE UNIVERSE IS NEARLY ALL PLASMA, ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES ARE EQUAL IN IMPORTANCE WITH GRAVITATION SINCE WE NEVER SEE EFFECTS WITHOUT CAUSES, WE HAVE NO REASON TO ASSUME AN ORIGIN IN TIME FOR THE UNIVERSE—AN EFFECT WITHOUT A CAUSE SINCE EVERY PART OF THE UNIVERSE WE OBSERVE IS EVOLVING, WE ASSUME THAT THE UNIVERSE ITSELF IS EVOLVING AS WELL.

  16. PLASMA SCALE INVARIANTS VELOCITY IS SCALE INVARIANT TIME SCALES AS LENGTH 1 Gy, 30kpc scales to 3s, 10 cm

  17. PLASMA FILAMENTATION AND STRUCTURE FORMATION Pinch effect draws currents in plasma at all scales into force free filaments, concentrating matter and magnetic fields Gravitation acts on condensed matter in filaments to compress it further. As gravitational condensation rotates through filament field, new, smaller set of filaments set up. Filaments act to drain angular momentum from condensation, allowing further compression.

  18. LARGE SCALE STRUCTURE Plasma filamentation model: No time problem Instability theory: Filament Formation V=(m/M)c= 160km/s Stable filament V=(m/M)3/4 c= 1070 km/s Orbital velocity of condensed objects 160km/s<V<1070 km/s Plasma must be collisional for gravitational condensation nR=1019/cm2

  19. PLASMA FOCUS AS LABORATORY MODEL FOR QUASARS Model of quasars based on the dense plasma focus device show how dense, magnetically confined plasmoids (toroidal vortex) can produce tightly collimated beams of electrons and ions: Good quantitative agreement with observations of density, velocity, B field, radius, radiation spectrum

  20. GALACTIC PRODUCTION OF He, D M = 1.8n-2 Intermediate mass stars 4<M<12 Produce He, very little CNO Throughout proto-galaxy He=.21-.23 p+p->d+3.3mb 2% of thermonuclear power prediction (1989) 2.2x10-5

  21. PLASMA MODEL OF CBR CBR energy produced by first generation stars in galaxies UV energy absorbed and thermalized by dust microwave energy isotropized, thermalized by electrons in magnetized plasma filaments emitted by QSOs, AGNs, Herbig Haro objects

  22. KEY PREDICTION OF PLASMA CBR MODEL: universe not transparent at >100-200 microns Using IR-21cm correlation for 301 IR bright galaxies, we find evidence(1993) for absorption at 8 Confirmed with 850 microns SCUBA data(SLUGS)

  23. More confirmation: WMAP alignment with supercluster Lieu observations of SZ effect

  24. A Flux-Number Test of Absorption For IR and optical sources ,excluding the brightest ones, N~S-1.1 Implies fractal distribution N~D2.2 n~D-0.8 For radio sources, excluding the brightest ones, N~S-0.9 S~D-2.44 Implies absorption A~D.44 compared with D.32 up to 300 Mpc

  25. Today, virtually all financial and experimental resources in cosmology are devoted to big bang studies. Funding comes from only a few sources, and all the peer-review committees that control them are dominated by supporters of the big bang. As a result, the dominance of the big bang within the field has become self-sustaining, irrespective of the scientific validity of the theory. To redress this, we urge those agencies that fund work in cosmology to set aside a significant fraction of their funding for investigations into alternative theories and observational contradictions of the big bang. To avoid bias, the peer review committee that allocates such funds could be composed of astronomers and physicists from outside the field of cosmology.

  26. Armenzano Observatory Astronomical Institute, St. Petersburg State University Danish Space Research Institute Escola Municipal de Astrofísica, Brazil European Southern Observatory Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics High Altitude Observatory, NCAR Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica Max-Planck-Institute Fur Astrophysik Observatoire de Lyon Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden Service d'Astrophysique, CEA Space Research Institute, Russia Special Astrophysical Observatory of RAS Università di Bari Cambridge University College de France Cornell University Indian Institute of Technology Padua University Los Alamos National Laboratory Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Jet Propulsion Laboratory

More Related