Alternative cosmology: the arp-narlikar's variable mass theory

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the variable mass hypothesis proposed by Arp and Narlikar, which aims to explain discordant redshifts in cosmology. Participants express skepticism about the theory's relevance, noting that many observations since its proposal have not supported its claims. They highlight that the expanding universe model has successfully predicted various phenomena, while Arp's ideas have not adapted to new data. The conversation also touches on the challenges of high redshift galaxies and metallicity levels, indicating ongoing gaps in the current cosmological model. Ultimately, the prevailing scientific consensus favors evidence-based theories over alternative models lacking robust support.
  • #31
JimJast, as Wallace has said, personal theories are allowed only in the Independent Research Forum. You have been sent a Personal Message with more details.
 

Similar threads

I Does the Cosmological Principle in any way underpin Big Bang Theory?
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
A Black hole mass coupled to expansion -- astrophysical source of dark energy?
  • · Replies 134 ·
5
Replies
134
Views
11K
I How do you get to the conclusion that there is accelerating expansion?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
I Have I got the right picture for cosmological redshift?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Observations fit poorly with the Standard Model of Cosmology
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
I Is the Brans-Dicke Vacuum Cosmology Theory Still Relevant?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Cosmic Event Horizon – Does it have any real effects?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
I New research puts age of the Universe at 26.7 billion years
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
I Is high redshift data a problem for ΛCDM?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
A Forecast with Fisher formalism : loss or gain of information
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K