Register to reply 
Curvatue Cosmology for a static stable universe 
Share this thread: 
#1
Mar1710, 07:52 PM

P: 10

Curvature Cosmology is a cosmology based on two hypotheses. The first,
curvature redshift, is an interaction between photons and curved spacetime and produces the observed Hubble redshift. It can also explain the anomalous Pioneer 10 acceleration. The second, curvature pressure, is a reaction between spacetime and a hot plasma such that the hotter the plasma the higher the pressure that tries to flatten the space curvature. This pressure provides a stable static universe. The net result is a tired light cosmology that is in excellent agreement with observations without needing expansion, inflation, dark matter or dark energy. All of the standard objections to tired light models are fully overcome. The basic model has one free parameter, the average density of the universe. The model predicts a Hubble constant of 64.4 km/s/Mpc and a cosmic microwave background temperature of 2.62 K. Much of the theory has been published in major journals. In 2006 I wrote a book "Curvature Cosmology", BrownWalker Press, which describes this cosmology. Since then I have corrected some theoretical errors and greatly expanded the observations that have been used to test the model. A free copy of this second edition is available on my web site: http://www.davidcrawford.bigpondhosting.com The pdf document has 150 pages and its size is 1.14 Mbytes. I would be delighted to receive comments or criticisms especially after you have read the book. 


#2
Mar1710, 09:33 PM

Astronomy
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 23,232

Dr. Crawford, thanks for telling us about the revised edition of your book. You have a substantial list of publications in professional journals plus unpublished papers available on arxiv. I noticed that the list includes some published and unpublished writings on your static universe concept, so I went through and picked out what I thought might be relevant to this discussion. Please point me to any I missed, especially if they are available on arxiv, or are otherwise online.
D.F. Crawford, "Photon Decay in Curved Spacetime", Nature, 277(5698), 633635 1979. D.F. Crawford, "Photons in Curved SpaceTime", Aust. J. Phys. 40, 449457 1987. D.F. Crawford "A New Gravitational Interaction of Cosmological Importance" Astrophys. J. 377 16 1991. D.F. Crawford "A Static Stable Universe" Astrophys. J.410 488492 1993. D.F. Crawford "Angular Size in a Static Universe" Astrophysics J.440 466 1995. D.F. Crawford "The Quasar Distribution in a Static Universe" Astrophys. J. 441 488 1995. D.F. Crawford "Curvature Pressure in a Cosmology with a Tiredlight redshift" Aust. J. Phys. 52 753 1999. D.F. Crawford "Curvature Cosmology", (BrownWalker Press), 2006. D. F. Crawford “No Evidence of Time Dilation in GammaRay Burst Data” arXiv:0901.4169. D. F. Crawford “Type 1a supernovae agree with a static universe” arXiv:0901.4172 I am not familiar with this static universe model, or perhaps only through secondhand hearsay. It gets my attention and respect your having published in NATURE and in ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL. I will take a look, though I may not have anything intelligent or enlightening to say (since it is pretty unusual, somewhat out of my ken, I suspect.) Good luck with it. 


#3
Mar1710, 10:18 PM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 1,275

Does your model predict/explain the CMB power spectrum?



#4
Mar1710, 10:39 PM

Astronomy
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 23,232

Curvatue Cosmology for a static stable universe
Dr. Crawford, I had a look at your recent arxiv posting
http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.4172 and was surprised by this in section 11, on page 13: "Curvaturecosmology (Crawford, 2006, 2009a) is a complete cosmology that shows excellent agreement with all major cosmological observations without needing dark matter or dark energy." You see since the whole thing is quite unfamiliar to me, I had assumed right off that it was a "tired light" type of model where, because of some curvature effect the photons lose energy and become redshifted as they travel over long distances. But if you propose to dispense not only with expansion but also with dark matter, then it seems to be a more ambitious program. You will have had to address observed phenomena such as gravitational lensing by clusters, the bullet cluster collision and such, the mapping of dark matter clouds by weak gravitational lensing, the stability of clusters and so forth. I suppose this is covered in the online (second) edition of your book. I intend to have a look at the book as time permits. 


#5
Mar1710, 11:05 PM

P: 10

Regards David 


#6
Mar1810, 01:21 AM

P: 166

Questions:
1) Of the resources available on the subject, which would you recommend for the layman? EDIT: After reading the first 6pages of the introduction, I see that 1) the book is the most updated, relevant resource and 2) it is written in very simple language that should not loose a layman willing to do additional research as needed. I will have to skip some of the math sections. Based on the introduction, the book seems to be very organized and like it will lead the reader through these new ideas easily. 2) Do any of the resources address the reasons so many people are saying, per the WMAP, that spacetime is flat and not curved? EDIT: I'm still curious about this question. (And, just out of personal curiosity, does a "static, stable universe" imply a spacetime that existed before the big bang? ) EDIT: After reading the first 6pages, I see that the question of "emergence" is moot in curvaturecosmology because there was no "bang" in curvaturecosmology for spacetime to either preceed or emerge from. 


#7
Mar1810, 01:29 AM

P: 2,456

Whats about entropy? If Universe exists forever, then we face old Boltzman questions about the heat death... Where do you take supply of Hydrogen in the Enternal Universe?



#8
Mar1810, 04:03 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 3,273

I understand hot plasma to have positive density, pressure and energy contents, all of which under GR would 'increase curvature', not flatten it. the Einstein static model would require either a cosmological constant (unstable) or negative pressure [itex]p = \frac{1}{3}\rho [/itex]. Garth 


#9
Mar1810, 03:24 PM

P: 10

about increase in entropy is flawed when applied to the universe. All the elements are continually recycled. The very high temperature intergalactic plasma breaks down heavier elements into lighter ones. 


#10
Mar1810, 03:28 PM

P: 10

bad arguments. 


#11
Mar1810, 03:33 PM

P: 10




#12
Mar1810, 07:54 PM

P: 362




#13
Mar1810, 09:42 PM

P: 10




#14
Mar1810, 10:05 PM

P: 166

qsa,
Your question, "then where did matter come from" applies to any cosmological model. Where did matter come from in the Big Bang? That answer is no more easily found. Also, I don't see why his proposal should change the relativity of spacetime. I wouldn't expect it should need to. Finally, the "collapse" of the universe is just as much a mystery with the Big Bang as I would expect it is with Curvature Cosmology. With the Big Bang, we don't know if it will end in a rip, thus ending forever, or if it will cycle back with a "big bounce". I don't believe Dr. Crawford is trying to promote any "philosophical" ideas aside from the notion that the universe can be better explained without all of these "mysterious forces" like dark matter and dark energy. Curvature Cosmology is testable and, because he wants to know the truth as much as all of us, he welcomes the integriy of the idea to be challenged. Dr. Crawford is highly educated and published where it counts. He has provided a link to the first 150 pages of his book, free of charge. It is written very clearly. Let's be grateful that Dr. Crawford has reached out to us and make him feel welcome. Once we've read his book, I think he is open to productive confrontations that have direct relevance to specific ideas in the book. 


#15
Mar1910, 01:49 AM

P: 2,456

Whats about Black Holes?
You can say that they are recycled too via Hawking radiation. However, the rate of such evaporation is extremely very low. In static universe the rate of formation of Black Holes and their evaporation must be in equlibrium, while in the part of our universe we observe they are not balanced. How it is explained? Thank you 


#16
Mar1910, 04:40 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,452

I fail to see how you can dismiss dark matter, for example  the bullet cluster.



#17
Mar1910, 02:58 PM

P: 294

The standard and most powerful argument against 'tired light' theories is that they are inconsistent with evidence of socalled 'time dilation' of elapsed time between certain events of relatively standard duration, such as supernova durations, which increases in proportion to emission distance (z+1). See, e.g., Blondin et all 2008.
Dr. Crawford disagrees with the analsyses that have confirmed the existence of such time dilation, and has extensively documented his counteranalysis. However, to date there seems to be no acceptance of his counteranalysis as discrediting the primary research. The counteranalysis is far too complex for me (and I suspect most of us) to offer any independent judgment as to whether it has merit. So it will have to be sorted out by the experts. If there is in fact an increase in measurement times of 'standard events' which is proportional to distance (z+1), then it appears to me to be fairly conslusive proof that the universe is expanding and that Dr. Crawford's theory must be incorrect. By the way, I personally don't like the use of the term 'time dilation' in this context because it evokes the concept of SR time dilation which is irrelevent to the actual phenomenon. The effect is more aptly described as a time delay in receiving the second any two seriallyemitted photons. That delay should increase exactly in the same proportion as the expansion of the universe between the times of emission and reception; this coincides with the physical stretching of the radial length of the 2photon string itself, as measured in the observer's rest frame. 


#18
Mar1910, 03:23 PM

P: 10




Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Cosmology: Horizon of the universe  Advanced Physics Homework  1  
What if the Universe had this cosmology  Cosmology  6  
The Stable Universe  General Discussion  1  
Dark Matter need not be for a stable Universe! Sez'an'amateur...  General Physics  10 