UV Galaxy Surface brightness says no expansion

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of the universe's expansion, specifically questioning the validity of redshift measurements and their implications for cosmological models. Participants explore various papers and theories that challenge the standard cosmological view, including the Tolman surface brightness test and observational anomalies related to galaxy redshifts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference a paper by Eric J. Lerner that claims to provide observational evidence contradicting the expanding universe model, particularly regarding the relationship between redshift and surface brightness.
  • Others argue that any static model must account for redshift, Tolman’s surface brightness test, and cosmological time dilation, suggesting that the evidence supporting expansion is overwhelming.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about Lerner's credibility, associating him with controversial figures in the field and suggesting that his claims lack rigorous support.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of critically evaluating Lerner's understanding of FRW models and the observations he presents, advocating for a thorough examination of his claims.
  • Some participants discuss a separate paper on the population of galaxies from 9 to 12 billion years ago, suggesting it may provide insights into early galaxy formation and star formation rates, potentially aligning with or contradicting Lerner's findings.
  • There is mention of additional papers that may relate to the discussion, including studies on the Cosmic Infrared Background and implications for reionization, indicating a broader context for the debate.
  • A participant notes that Lerner's analysis appears methodologically sound and raises questions about the foundational assumptions of redshift measurements, suggesting a growing skepticism about traditional interpretations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some supporting Lerner's claims and others firmly opposing them. There is no consensus on the validity of the arguments presented, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the evidence cited.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for careful consideration of the assumptions underlying redshift measurements and the relationship between redshift and surface brightness, indicating that these areas may require further investigation.

  • #31
I dont' see the point in talking about what happened to photons before the last surface of scattering of CMB photons. They have no effect on CMBR studies, aside from contributing to the power spectrum.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
26K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K