I there an Origin to the Universe?

Hello

oops forgot this link

3 Sep 2009
vixra.org/abs/0909.0009
Discovery of a New Dimming Effect Specific to Supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursts

Authors: Thomas B. Andrews

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Because type Ia supernovae (SNs) are anomalously dimmed with respect to the at (qo = 0.5) Friedman Expanding Universe model, I was surprised to find that the brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) are not anomalously dimmed. Based on the absence of anomalous dimming in BCGs, the following conclusions were reached:

#8901; Since the light from the SNs and BCGs traverses the same space, the current hypothesis of an accelerated expansion of the universe to explain the anomalous dimming of SNs is disproved.
#8901; The cause of the anomalous dimming must be specific to the SNs.

The first conclusion is important since current research in dark energy and the cosmological constant was initiated based on the accelerated expansion hypothesis. The disproof of this hypothesis, therefore, casts serious doubts on the existence of dark energy and the cosmological constant. The second conclusion indicates that the occurrence of anomalous dimming depends on a basic difference between the SNs and BCGs. The only difference besides the obvious - that SNs are exploding stars and the BCGs are galaxies - is that the light curves of the SNs are limited in duration. Due on this difference, I discovered that SNs light curves are broadened at the observer by a new Hubble redshift effect. Since the total energy of the light curve is then spread over a longer time period, the apparent luminosity is reduced at the observer, causing the observed anomalous dimming of SNs. I also show that BCGs are not anomalously dimmed because their absolute luminosity is approximately constant over the time required for the light to reach the observer. The above conclusions also apply to Gamma Ray Bursts (GRBs) since gamma-ray "light" curves are limited in duration. Finally, the light curve broadening effect can be used to determine if the universe is expanding or static. In the expanding universe model, a light curve broadening effect is predicted due to time-dilation for the SNs, GRBs and BCGs. Consequently, if the universe is expanding, two light curve broadening effects should occur for the SNs and GRBs. However, if the universe is static, only one light curve broadening effect will occur for the SNs and GRBs. Fortunately, Golhaber has measured the width's of SNs light curves and conclusively showed that only one light curve broadening effect occurs. Consequently, the expanding universe model is logically falsified.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Smile and live another day

Just because all the astronomers say the universe is expanding does not mean the universe is expanding. Some of them are willing to say its just a model and only the true believers have deep faith that the model really reflects what the universe does. It seems to me a better understanding of the universe could be developed if people knew more about models and remained objective how much faith to place in them.

Hi,
This is not a new problem.
Supernovae light curves show two effects that followers of the expanding universe tend to separate.


1) distant supernovae are dimmer than predicted by the Hubble law.
2) The light curves are stretched ie distant supernovae take longer to to go bright then dim than closer ones.

They say the conclusion to 1) is the expansion of the universe accelerating and the conclusion to 2)is that it is due to relativistic effects due to expansion.

However, relativistic effects may well stretch the light curves but not dim them.

Why use two separate problems to solve the same problem? Cos it is wrong

I must state that some say it is just a malmquist bias, ie when we look at more distant supernovae we look at brighter ones (cos we cannot see the dimmer ones) and the brighter the supernovae the longer it takes to go bright and dim. QED

not sure about this.
But as per the original posts only short bursts of light are stretched. BCG's AND quasar light curves are not stretched.
there is a area of physics where this is repeated - pulse broadening in multicolour light pulses travelling down a fibre optic.
ie what we are looking at is tired light - a normal reproducible effect in the laboratory.
See lyndonashmore.com/tired_light_explains_supernovae_.htm

Cheers
lyndon


lyndon ashmore - bringing cosmology back down to earth.

Hello Lyndon

I have read your paper, good to see that we have people who are able to write papers based on science and not ad hoc ideas so to speak.

vixra.org/abs/0909.0040
Hydrogen Cloud Separation as Direct Evidence of the Dynamics of the Universe.

Authors: Lyndon Ashmore

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Despite the idea of an expanding universe having been around for nearly one hundred years there is still no conclusive, direct evidence for expansion. This paper examines the Lyman Alpha forest in order to determine the average temperature and the average separation of Hydrogen clouds over the aging of the universe. A review of the literature shows that the clouds did once become further and further apart (showing expansion?) but are now evenly spaced (an indication of a static universe?). Doppler parameters give an indication of the temperature and/or the degree of disturbance of the clouds and the evidence is that the temperature or degree of disturbance is increasing rather than decreasing as required by an expanding universe. Whilst these results do not support any cosmology individually, they do support one where the universe expanded in the past but that expansion has now been arrested and the universe is now static. A separate mechanism for redshift would be required to explain why, in this scenario, the Hydrogen Clouds are evenly spaced in the local universe - but have differing redshifts. High z hydrogen cloud separation can be used to give an independent estimate on the lower limit of the age of the universe in an expanding model and it is found that the age must be far greater than the presently accepted value of 13.8 billion years - if the H1 clouds are to achieve their present separations without some mechanism other than inflation being<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


Thinking aloud:

On Mega scales we know that giant jets found and observed in the centre of clusters of galaxies can explain the type of expansion for millions of light years affecting local and far far away Galaxies. The smaller Galaxy jets affecting the Galaxy Halo and the reformation of galaxy form sequence.

Smile and live another day

Hello

I did not notice that the "S" is missing on the title of the topic, can someone edit please.

Smile and live another day