TR: Non-Expanding Cosmology Attempts To Oust Big Bang Theory

Find out the latest thinking about our universe.
Post Reply
User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21577
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

TR: Non-Expanding Cosmology Attempts To Oust Big Bang Theory

Post by bystander » Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:56 am

Non-Expanding Cosmology Attempts To Oust Big Bang Theory
Technology Review | the physics arXiv blog | 09 Sept 2010
A static universe better explains the properties of the cosmos than the Big Bang and avoids the nagging problems of dark matter and dark energy, according to a new cosmology

The idea that the universe began in an event called the Big Bang some 13 billion years ago has a special place in science and in our society. We like the idea of a beginning.

And the evidence is persuasive. Distant galaxies all appear to be moving away from us at great speed, which is exactly what you'd expect if they were created in a Big Bang type event many billions of years ago. Such an event might also have left an echo, exactly like the one we can see as the cosmic microwave background radiation.

The Big Bang seems so elegant an explanation that we're prepared to overlook the one or two anomalies that don't quite fit, like the fact that distant galaxies aren't travelling fast enough to have moved so far since the Big Bang, a problem that inflation was invented to explain. Then there are the problems of dark matter and dark energy, which still defy explanation.

So a legitimate question, albeit an uncomfortable one, is whether there is an alternative hypothesis that also explains the observations. We looked at one here and today, David Crawford at the University of Sydney in Australia gives us another. He says all this can be explained just as well by a static universe in which spacetime is curved. He says this explains most of the major characteristics of our universe without the need for dark matter or dark energy. Neither is there any need for inflation in a static universe.

Of course, he has to make one or two new assumptions but he argues these are no more difficult to swallow than things like inflation which we have to accept in the Big Bang model. His main idea, which he has championed for a couple of years now, is that the redshift associated with disant galaxies is caused by the interaction of photons with other low energy photons in curved space, an idea called the tired-light model.

For such an effect to operate, space would have to be filled with a high temperature plasma which would be easily identified by the light it emits. Crawford says the observed x-ray background radiation between 10 and 300 keV could easily be the signature of such a plasma. The cosmic microwave background, he says, can also be explained like this: it is by high energy electrons in this plasma that interact with photons passing through.

Redshift data is also used to infer the rotation rates of galaxies. These seem to be spinning so fast that they ought to fly apart--so astronomers have hypothesised that they must contain mountains of dark matter to provide the gravitational tug to hold them together. Crawfrod says this problem disappears is the redshift effect comes not from the movement of the galaxies but from the new plasma effect in curved space between here and there. A similar kind of reasoning does away with the need for dark energy too.

And Crawford says his model explains at least one thing that leaves conventional cosmologists scratching their heads: the strange deceleration of the Pioneer spacecraft at the edge of the Solar System. This, he says is caused by the interaction between the spacecraft, the cosmic plasma and interplanetary dust, which must be a little denser than current estimates.

Crawford has certainly give his ideas some careful thought and there are plenty of strands of evidence he calls upon; we've looked at only a few here. He says curvature redshift is testable in the lab although the paper is a little light on details.

It's certainly an unusual take and a sterling effort. And it's one of a growing number of new ideas that suggest the Big bang is an idea too far. For example we looked at an even stranger model just a few weeks weeks ago.

But abandoning the Big Bang is something most cosmologists will find difficult to do, which means Crawford is set to get some stick over his ideas. Exactly how they attack his model will be fascinating to watch.
Observational evidence favours a static universe - DF Crawford
The common attribute of all Big Bang cosmologies is that they are based on the assumption that the universe is expanding. However examination of the evidence for this expansion clearly favours a static universe. The major topics considered are: Tolman surface brightness, angular size, type 1a supernovae, gamma ray bursts, galaxy distributions, quasar distributions, X-ray background radiation, cosmic microwave background radiation, 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 in full agreement with the raw data. This tired-light cosmology predicts a well defined static and stable universe and is fully described. It not only predicts accurate values for the Hubble constant and the temperature of cosmic microwave background radiation but shows excellent agreement with most of the topics considered. Curvature cosmology also predicts the deficiency in solar neutrino production rate and can explain the anomalous acceleration of Pioneer 10.
<-- Previous

swainy (tc)

Re: TR: Non-Expanding Cosmology Attempts To Oust Big Bang Th

Post by swainy (tc) » Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:17 pm

Thanks Bystander.

Finally, Some body who thinks my way. Breath of fresh Air.

The Code

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 18185
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Contact:

Re: TR: Non-Expanding Cosmology Attempts To Oust Big Bang Th

Post by Chris Peterson » Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:12 pm

swainy (tc) wrote:Finally, Some body who thinks my way. Breath of fresh Air.
Yeah, well I wouldn't hold it...
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21577
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

UT: Astronomy Without A Telescope – One Crowded Nanosecond

Post by bystander » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:02 pm

Astronomy Without A Telescope – One Crowded Nanosecond
Universe Today | Astronomy, Cosmology | 12 Sept 2010
Steve Nerlich wrote:Remember how you could once pick up a book about the first three minutes after the Big Bang and be amazed by the level of detail that observation and theory could provide regarding those early moments of the universe. These days the focus is more on what happened between 1×10-36 and 1×10-32 of the first second as we try to marry theory with more detailed observations of the cosmic microwave background.

About 380,000 years after the Big Bang, the early universe became cool and diffuse enough for light to move unimpeded, which it proceeded to do – carrying with it information about the 'surface of last scattering'. Before this time photons were being continually absorbed and re-emitted (i.e. scattered) by the hot dense plasma of the earlier universe - and never really got going anywhere as light rays.

But quite suddenly, the universe got a lot less crowded when it cooled enough for electrons to combine with nuclei to form the first atoms. So this first burst of light, as the universe became suddenly transparent to radiation, contained photons emitted in that fairly singular moment – since the circumstances to enable such a universal burst of energy only happened once.

With the expansion of the universe over a further 13.6 and a bit billion years, lots of these photons probably crashed into something long ago, but enough are still left over to fill the sky with a signature energy burst that might have once been powerful gamma rays but has now been stretched right out into microwave. Nonetheless, it still contains that same 'surface of last scattering' information.

Observations tell us that, at a certain level, the cosmic microwave background is remarkably isotropic. This led to the cosmic inflation theory, where we think there was a very early exponential expansion of the microscopic universe at around 1×10-36 of the first second – which explains why everything appears so evenly spread out.

However, a close look at the cosmic microwave background (CMB) does show a tiny bit of lumpiness – or anisotropy – as demonstrated in data collected by the aptly-named Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP).

Really, the most remarkable thing about the CMB is its large scale isotropy and finding some fine grain anisotropies is perhaps not that surprising. However, it is data and it gives theorists something from which to build mathematical models about the contents of the early universe.
Some theorists speak of CMB quadrupole moment anomalies. The quadrupole idea is essentially an expression of energy density distribution within a spherical volume – which might scatter light up-down or back-forward (or variations from those four 'polar' directions). A degree of variable deflection from the surface of last scattering then hints at anisotropies in the spherical volume that represents the early universe.

For example, say it was filled with mini black holes (MBHs)? Scardigli et al (see below) mathematically investigated three scenarios, where just prior to cosmic inflation at 1×10-36 seconds: 1) the tiny primeval universe was filled with a collection of MBHs; 2) the same MBHs immediately evaporated, creating multiple point sources of Hawking radiation; or 3) there were no MBHs, in accordance with conventional theory.

When they ran the math, scenario 1 best fits with WMAP observations of anomalous quadrupole anisotropies. So, hey – why not? A tiny proto-universe filled with mini black holes. It's another option to test when some higher resolution CMB data comes in from Planck or other future missions to come. And in the meantime, it's material for an astronomy writer desperate for a story.
Black Hole Remnants in the Early Universe - F Scardigli et al

Post Reply