Matti Pitkanen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sat, 21 Aug 1999 09:12:49 +0300 (EET DST)
I read the paper by Marmet about plasma model for cosmic redshifts
and want to represent some criticism.
1. Can inelastic scattering of light with atoms and molecules cause cosmic
The basic idea is that redshift is produced by inelastic scattering of
light with atoms and molecules. This effect is evidently real but works
only if the density of atoms is large enough. Quoting Marmet's paper.
"Is there enough matter in space to account the observed redshift in
terms of the theory offered here? An average concentration of about 0.01
atom/cm3 is required to produce the observed redshift, as given by the
Hubble constant (Marmet 1988b). This required density of matter in space
is larger that what has been measured experimentally until presently, but
our ability to detect such matter is still very imperfect."
If I remember correctly, the average recent density of matter is roughly
one proton per cubic meter (correct me if I am wrong!). This is by a
factor 10^-4 smaller than the needed density. This density would be over
critical by factor of order 10^3 whereas Hubble's results demonstrate that
density is subcritical by factor of order 10 at least (this is bad news
for inflation theorists).
This density would require totally new physics and one should give up
Einstein's theory totally in cosmological length scales. I do
not know whether recent experimental determinations of density
of matter can be consistent with density about 10^3 the critical one.
Unfortunately, the article did not consider the plasma model for galaxy
formation that Stephen mentioned. Article contains some empirical
anomalies as arguments against standard cosmology. TGD provides
explanation for these anomalies so I glue some of the arguments here with
2. Anomalous reshifts of Arp
"Arp's redshifts hift observations cannot be explained by the Doppler
theory. Astronomer Halton Arp's 1987 book Quasars, Redshifts and
Controversies provides an extensive review of them, as does a lengthy 1989
review article by the Indian astrophysicist J. V. Narlikar. A catalogue of
780 references to redshift observations inexplicable by the Doppler effect
was published in 1981 by K. J. Reboul under the title, "Untrivial
RedshiftsL A Bibliographical Catalogue." Many other papers indicate that
non-velocity redshifts have been observed."
I think it was just Arp who observed quantization of recession
velocities and the existence of 'God's fingers': series of astrophysical
objects in the line of sight. TGD provides explanation for these
objects as images of one and same object. The prediction is that
photons rotate in strong gravitational fields associated with the large
voids of size of order 10^8 light years. Photons coming observer in Earth
can rotate n=1,2,3,... times before detection and this means that redshift
is quantized and one sees a series of pictures on the line of sight.
This effect would be one experimental signature of TGD based model
of large voids surrounding cosmic strings and containing galactic cosmic
strings at their boundaries. Classical Z^0 force is in crucial role in
the physics of this model. Classical Z^0 force also prevents the
collapse of supernovas to blacholes, which General Relativistic models
tend to predict.
3. Cosmic background radiation
"The existence of the 3 K microwave radiation is no longer valid evidence
for the Big Bang. There is no need to assume, as Big Bang believers do,
that this background radiation came from a highly Doppler-redshifted
blackbody(3) at about 3,000. K - that is, from the exploding ball of
matter - when its density became low enough for energy and matter to
decouple. The background radiation is simply Planck's blackbody radiation
emitted by our unlimited universe that is also at a temperature of about 3
K (Marmet 1988). "
Can the model predict the temperature of the radiation correctly?
Also the observed anistropy (see below) should be predicted.
4. Anisotropy of 3 K radiation has been observed!
"Matter is concentrated in galaxies, in clusters and
super clusters of galaxies, and in what has been called the Great
Attractor (a tentatively identified but huge concentration of mass
centered 150 million light-years away). These important inhomogeneities in
the composition of the universe as
we see it today must have first appeared in the early universe (if it
exists). In fact, a comparable inhomogeneity must have existed in the
matter that emitted the 3 K radiation. That inhomogeneity must appear as a
distortion in the Hubble flow(4) (Dressler 1989) and must lead to
observable irregularities in the 3 K background. Inhomogeneities of the 3
K radiation has been looked for but nothing is compatible with the mass
observed in the Great Attractor. A. E. Lange recently reported that there
is no observable inhomogeneity even with a resolution of 10 seconds of arc
and a sensitivity in temperature as high as DT=ñ 0.00001 K (Lange 1989). "
[MP] The article was written in 1990. The results of Hubble telescope
however demonstrated an inhomogenuity of required magnitude in the
distribution of blackbody temperature. General order of magnitude estimate
is delta T/T =about delta rho/rho, where rho is density of matter.
Therefore this counter argument does not bite anymore.
5. Inconsistency in application of Einstein's theory.
Nor can Einstein's general theory of relativity be applied in a consistent
manner to the Big bang model. According to the model, when the universe
was the size of an electron and was 10-23 second old, it was clearly a
black hole - a concentration of mass so great that its self-gravitation
would prevent the escape of any mass or radiation. Consequently, according
to Einsteinian relativity, it could not have expanded. Therefore, one
would have to assume that gravity started
to exist only gradually after the creation of the universe, but that
amounts to changing the laws of physics arbitrarily to save the Big Bang
model. In contrast, an unlimited universe as suggested here agrees with
Einstein's relativity theory, taking into account the cosmological
constant(5) that he proposed in 1917.
[MP] Here I disagree. Cosmological solutions of Einstein's equations
are completely consistent mathematically. Momdent of big bang does *not*
correspond to blach hole. This is easy to see by imbedding
Robertson-Walker cosmolology to M^4_+xCP_2. One finds that only
*subcritical* cosmologies are imbedabble globally and *critical* cosmology
for a finite duration of time after the big bang. The fact that the recent
estimates for matter density are definitely sub-critical, support TGD
strongly. The moment of big bang corresponds to the boundary of
lightcone. This is not point singularity as often claimed. Neither it is
blackhole of finite size. What happens is that metric becomes effectively
two-dimensional since radial direction becomes null direction.
In TGD framework lightcone cosmology (and hence also Big Bang
cosmology) is absolutely crucial for the theory to exist mathematically.
Lighcone boundary is metrically two-dimensional and the conformal symmetry
of two-dimensional Riemann surfaces generalize. This makes it possible to
generalize the Super conformal invariance of string models to TGD context.
This occurs only in case of 4-dimensional Minkowski space.
6. Anomalously large redshifts
"In 1988, Simon Lilly of the university of Hawaii reported the discovery
of a mature galaxy at the enormous redshift of 3.4; that is, the amount of
the redshift for any spectral line from the galaxy is 340 per cent of the
line's proper wavelength (Lilly 1988). This puts the galaxy so far in time
that the Big Bang scheme does not allow sufficient time for
its formation! As a news report on Lilly's work in Sky & Telescope
expressed it, "The appearance of a mature galaxy so soon after the Big
Bang poses a serious threat . . ." (Aug. 1988, p. 124). ".
[MP] Manysheeted spacetime means fractal hierarchy of cosmologies.
Each spacetime sheet is characterized by its cosmological constant
and density which is the smaller the larger the spacetime sheet is.
This explains the apparent acceleration of the Universe observed by Hubble
telescope (the proposed explanation in terms of fifth
repulsive force has already now faced difficulties: nonsensically
precise fine tuning of parameters is needed).
The larger the spacetime sheet the faster the expansion.
The model predicts that photons can in principle come from much larger
distances than predicted by Einstein's cosmology: photons just come
along very large spacetime sheets. In particular, the model predicts
that the ages of astrophysical objects deduced from redshift can
be longer than the age of the universe. Only the lightcone proper
time which is longer than the proper time associated with
spacetime sheet obeying RW cosmology poses bound on the apparent
lifetime of astrophysical object.
7. Large voids with size of order 10^8 meters
"In 1989 cane the discovery of the "Great Wall" of galaxies, a sheet of
Galaxies 500 million light-years long, 200 million light-years wide, and
approximately 15 million light-years thick, with the dimensions of the
structure being limited only by the scale of the survey (Geller and Huchra
1989). It is located between 200 and 300 million light-years from Earth.
In an interview with the Boston Globe (Nov. 17 1989), Margaret Geller of
the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics offered some frank
comments on the implications of her discovery:..."
[MP] Does this refer to large voids with size of order 10^8 light years?
It is now established that Universe contains most of its galaxies at the
boundaries of large voids. Even larger structures have geen found. The
guess would be that Universe has quite generally fractal like structure.
TGD predicts fractality. The voids are spacetime sheets and the boundaries
of these sheets contain galaxies.
In the model of voids, classical Z^0 force drives galaxies gradually to
the boundaries of the large voids. Similar phenomenon would probably
occur in larger length scales.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:30 JST