A Could Re-Analyzing Redshifts Reveal New Physics?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter sbrothy
  • Start date Start date
sbrothy
Gold Member
Messages
1,131
Reaction score
1,025
(arxiv, Feb, 2024) LCDM Tensions: Localising Missing Physics Through Consistency Checks.

So, another article which - to me - looks intriguing but sadly passes pretty far over my head. I'm always a little sceptic about articles whose authors start out with a poetry quote - or, as is "often" the case - a Doglas Adams quote.

It seems to make a case for new physics to be found re-evaluating redshifts.

I then found this old paper: (arxiv, 2011) The New Physics of Cosmic Redshift which seems to say that there's nothing, or at least not much, new knowledge to be found there, but, ofcourse a lot of time has passed between the two.

I guess I can't expect anyone to read through all this just to give me their opinion, so I'll settle for an answer to this "simple" question:

Is it conceivable that there's new physics to be found hiding in the re-analysis of the redshifts of the objects out there?

I'll understand if my question is too naive or vague to merit a serious answer (much less one I can actually understand), It just seemed to me that they're talking about a relatively "simple" approach.

Regards.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top