Evidence for a Non-Expanding Universe: Surface Brightness Data from HUDF Eric J. Lerner Lawrenceville Plasma Physics.

Evidence for a

Non-Expanding Universe:

Surface Brightness Data

from HUDF

Eric J. Lerner

Lawrenceville Plasma Physics

GEOMETRICAL TESTS OF TWO HYPOTHESES

1) FRW Expanding universe (Big Bang)

Euclidean non-expanding universe with

z=(H/c)distance, as in local universe

(non-geometric cause of redshift)

Galaxy size and

surface brightness

Big Bang Prediction: z~(z+1)F(z)

Euclidean non-expanding: z is constant

Big Bang Prediction:

Surface brightness (ABMag)~1/(1+z)3

Euclidean non-expanding:

Surface brightness is constant

DATA SETS

HIGH z:

HUDF “z” 850 nm

Photometric z:

i drops z~6

v drop z~4.9

NICMOS z=2.5-4

LOW z:

GALEX FUV 155 nm NUV 230 nm

Medium Sample MIS

Spectroscopic z from SDSS

SAMPLE SELECTION

SB~1.5, at-galaxy must be closely matched

SB~M0.6 , match M

Lower size cutoff 0.07” for Hubble, 1.8” for SDSS+GALEX,

must match rz=R

Sufficient sample size

UNITS:

Absolute luminosity defined here as:

M=m(AB)-5 log z

M(abs)=M-43Milky Way L= 1.5x1010L

s

M= 23.26

Surface brightness in magnitudes/arsec2

r=half light radius

SB=m+2.5 log(r2)

Milky Way SB= 24 magnitudes/arsec2

At z=6 SB for BB is down by 343

HIGH Z-LOW Z PAIRS

z obs. gal log r(kpc) N M

6 910 130 -0.91 34 23.5-24.5

0.165-0.205 154 121 -0.91 60

4.9 910 154 -0.82 61 23.5-24.5

0.135-0.165 154 130 -0.82 50

2.5-4 910 217 -0.58 32 23.5-24.5

0.135-0.165 232 205 -0.58 76

COMPARE NUV HUDF SAMPLES

USING FWHM/2 AS RADIUS MEASURE

z obs. gal N M

3.3 910 212 12 23.5-24.5

2.7 775 209 13 23.5-24.5

1.9 606 209 15 23.5-24.5

2.7 775 209 13 24.5-25.5

1.9 606 209 24 24.5-25.5

1.1 435 207 11 24.5-25.5

RESULTS

Z Log SB

6 -0.06+0.03

4.9 -0.13+0.07

3.2 0.30+0.12

=k(z+1)0.17+0.25

=k(z)0.09+0.15

BIG BANG EVOLUTION HYPOTHESIS

GALAXIES ARE ACTUALLY HUNDREDS OF

TIMES BRIGHTER

AND MUCH SMALLER

BUT THIS PRODUCES HYPOTHETICAL

GALAXIES THAT ARE HAVE 40-100 TIMES THE

SB OF ANY EXTANT GALAXIES AND ARE

PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

log r(kpc)

(A

B M

ag/A

rcse

c2)

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

IR (AB Mag/Arcsec2)

FU

V

(A

B M

ag/A

rcse

c2)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

IR (AB Mag/Arcsec2)

IR/F

UV

(

mag

)

SURFACE BRIGHTNESS DATA EXCLUDES BIG BANG

GEOMETRY BUT IS AN EXCELLENT FIT TO

EUCLIDEAN NON-EXPANDING GEOMETRY

Implications:

Observable universe is infinite in spatial and temporal extent

Redshift-distance relationship is non-geometric in origin.

Laboratory test of relationship should be possible with modified

LIGO

WHY DO WE NEED A NEW WORLD

MODEL?

1) BB requires increasing numbers of hypothetical entities

without observational evidence—inflation, non-baryonic

matter, dark energy—and free parameters. Reduces

predictive power.

2) BB violates well-confirmed physical laws—conservation of

baryon number

3) Basic predictions BB makes

are contradicted by observation:

a) light element predictions are wrong-Li in particular

b) geometric–size, surface brightness—predictions wrong

c) age of universe is wrong—voids at least five times too old,

high z galaxies are too old

d) Gaussian CBR is wrong

BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF PLASMA COSMOLOGY

SINCE THE UNIVERSE IS NEARLY ALL PLASMA,

ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES ARE EQUAL IN

IMPORTANCE WITH GRAVITATION

SINCE WE NEVER SEE EFFECTS WITHOUT

CAUSES, WE HAVE NO REASON TO ASSUME AN

ORIGIN IN TIME FOR THE UNIVERSE—AN

EFFECT WITHOUT A CAUSE

SINCE EVERY PART OF THE UNIVERSE WE

OBSERVE IS EVOLVING, WE ASSUME THAT THE

UNIVERSE ITSELF IS EVOLVING AS WELL.

PLASMA SCALE INVARIANTS

VELOCITY IS SCALE INVARIANT

TIME SCALES AS LENGTH

1 Gy, 30kpc scales to

3s, 10 cm

PLASMA FILAMENTATION

AND STRUCTURE FORMATION

Pinch effect draws currents in plasma at all scales into

force free filaments, concentrating matter

and magnetic fields

Gravitation acts on condensed matter in filaments to

compress it further. As gravitational condensation

rotates through filament field, new, smaller set of

filaments set up.

Filaments act to drain angular momentum from

condensation, allowing further compression.

LARGE SCALE STRUCTURE

Plasma filamentation model:

No time problem

Instability theory:

Filament Formation V=(m/M)c= 160km/s

Stable filament V=(m/M)3/4 c= 1070 km/s

Orbital velocity of condensed objects

160km/s<V<1070 km/s

Plasma must be collisional

for gravitational condensation

nR=1019/cm2

PLASMA FOCUS AS LABORATORY MODEL FOR QUASARS

Model of quasars based on the dense plasma focus device show how dense, magnetically

confined plasmoids (toroidal vortex) can produce tightly collimated beams of electrons

and ions:

Good quantitative agreement with observations of density, velocity, B field, radius,

radiation spectrum

GALACTIC PRODUCTION OF He, D

M = 1.8n-2

Intermediate mass stars

4<M<12

Produce He, very little CNO

Throughout proto-galaxy

He=.21-.23

p+p->d+3.3mb 2% of thermonuclear power

prediction (1989) 2.2x10-5

PLASMA MODEL OF CBR

CBR energy produced by first generation stars in galaxies

UV energy absorbed and thermalized by dust

microwave energy isotropized, thermalized by electrons in magnetized plasma filaments emitted

by QSOs, AGNs, Herbig Haro objects

KEY PREDICTION OF PLASMA CBR MODEL:

universe not transparent at >100-200 microns

Using IR-21cm correlation for 301 IR bright galaxies, we

find evidence(1993)

for absorption at 8

Confirmed with 850 microns SCUBA data(SLUGS)

More confirmation:

WMAP alignment with supercluster

Lieu observations of SZ effect

A Flux-Number Test of Absorption

For IR and optical sources ,excluding the brightest ones,

N~S-1.1

Implies fractal distribution N~D2.2 n~D-0.8

For radio sources, excluding the brightest ones,

N~S-0.9

S~D-2.44

Implies absorption A~D.44 compared with D.32 up to 300 Mpc

Today, virtually all financial and experimental resources in

cosmology are devoted to big bang studies. Funding comes

from only a few sources, and all the peer-review committees

that control them are dominated by supporters of the big

bang. As a result, the dominance of the big bang within the

field has become self-sustaining, irrespective of the scientific

validity of the theory.

To redress this, we urge those agencies that fund work in

cosmology to set aside a significant fraction of their funding

for investigations into alternative theories and observational

contradictions of the big bang. To avoid bias, the peer review

committee that allocates such funds could be composed of

astronomers and physicists from outside the field of

cosmology.

Armenzano Observatory

Astronomical Institute, St. Petersburg State University

Danish Space Research Institute

Escola Municipal de Astrofísica, Brazil

European Southern Observatory

Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics

High Altitude Observatory, NCAR

Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica

Max-Planck-Institute Fur Astrophysik

Observatoire de Lyon

Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden

Service d'Astrophysique, CEA

Space Research Institute, Russia

Special Astrophysical Observatory of RAS

Università di Bari

Cambridge University

College de France

Cornell University

Indian Institute of Technology

Padua University

Los Alamos National Laboratory

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Jet Propulsion Laboratory