Is the universe static? (1804.10274v7)

Abstract: A fundamental property of an expanding universe is that any time dependent characteristic of distant objects must appear to scale by the factor $(1+z$). This is called time dilation. Light curves of type Ia supernovae and the duration of Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRB) are the only observations that can directly measure time dilation over a wide range of redshifts. An analysis of raw observations of 2,333 type Ia supernovae light-curves shows that their widths, relative to a standard template, have a power-law exponent as a function of ${(1+z)}$, of (0.083 +/- 0.024) which is consistent with no time dilation and inconsistent with standard time dilation. In addition, it is shown that the standard method for calibrating the type Ia supernovae light curves (SALT2) is flawed, which explains why this lack of time dilation has not been previously observed. \par Nearby observations show that the peak absolute magnitude of type Ia supernovae is also constant. Here it is shown that the peak absolute magnitude is independent of redshift if a static universe cosmology, Curvature Cosmology, is used to provide the distance moduli. Furthermore, it is explained why the modified $\Lambda$-CDM model provides similar results. \par Analysis of the duration of GRB shows that they are consistent with no time dilation and have no support for standard time dilation. Consequently, this paper argues for a fundamental change from the current paradigm of an expanding universe to one for a static universe. Some of the major consequences of Curvature Cosmology are listed.

• The paper critically examines observational data from Type Ia supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursts, presenting evidence that contradicts the expected time dilation in an expanding universe.
• Analysis of 2,333 supernovae light curves shows negligible time dilation (exponent 0.083 +/- 0.024), challenging standard cosmology and suggesting calibration methods like SALT2 may mask this effect.
• The study proposes Curvature Cosmology as a static universe alternative, arguing it fits observed data and could eliminate the need for dark energy and dark matter concepts.

An Analysis of the Static Universe Hypothesis

The paper presented by David F. Crawford critically examines the long-held assumption that the universe is expanding. Contradicting the standard model that predicts time dilation proportional to $(1+z)$, the paper presents a wealth of observational analyses to argue for a static universe model, specifically Curvature Cosmology. The focal point of the argument rests on the absence of anticipated time dilation in the datasets involving Type Ia supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) and critiques the calibrations deployed in traditional analyses.

Examination of Observational Data

The paper rigorously analyzes Type Ia supernovae light curves, notably those of 2,333 supernovae, to challenge the standard paradigm. It asserts that based on raw observations, the time dilation associated with redshift is negligible, with a power-law exponent of (0.083 +/- 0.024). This result starkly contrasts with an expanding universe prediction where the exponent should be one, indicating pronounced time dilation. Furthermore, it highlights a critical flaw in the SALT2 calibration method, which purportedly masks this lack of time dilation by inadvertently removing redshift-dependent variations through its averaging process over a spectrum of intrinsic wavelengths.

Additionally, the paper extends its analysis to GRBs, finding no supportive evidence for time dilation in the T90 duration of these bursts over varied redshifts. This aligns with previous observations and critiques stating the absence of time dilation effects.

Challenges to the ΛCDM Cosmology

Further in the analysis, the paper investigates the implications when assuming a static universe model—Curvature Cosmology—which proposes that redshifts result from photon energy losses rather than universal expansion. A comparative paper of the derived peak absolute magnitudes of Type Ia supernovae revealed concordance with Curvature Cosmology predictions, asserting itself as a compatible alternative. This is juxtaposed against the ΛCDM model which, according to the paper, has been adjusted to reflect a preference for expanding universe assumptions.

Implications and Future Directions

The implications of accepting a static universe are profound. The dismissal of an expanding universe negates the necessity of concepts such as dark energy, ubiquitous under the accelerating universe model, and suggests a re-interpretation of cosmic phenomena like the CMBR and galactic dynamics sans dark matter, relying instead on inherent qualities of Curvature Cosmology.

Future developments in cosmology based on this hypothesis could entail re-evaluating current methodologies used to gauge cosmological parameters. Suggested steps include re-calibrating observational data excluding any pre-assumed time dilation, thereby potentially transforming our understanding of the universe.

Conclusion

This paper's arguments serve as a significant challenge to prevailing cosmological doctrine, inviting further scrutiny into the foundational assumptions underlying modern cosmology. While the paper's assertions require substantial verification through independent studies and analyses, they open the dialogue for an alternative view of the universe—a static cosmos governed by intrinsic properties rather than continuous expansion. Such discourse is essential for advancing theoretical understanding and observational corroboration in the field of cosmology.