**Matti Pitkanen** (*matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi*)

*Sat, 21 Aug 1999 09:12:49 +0300 (EET DST)*

**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Next message:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 588] About the problem of disappearing time"**Previous message:**WDEshleman@aol.com: "[time 586] Re: [time 543] Many-Worlds Communication"

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

redshifts?

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."

[MP]

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

comments.

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."

[MP]

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). "

[MP]

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.

Best,

MP

**Next message:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 588] About the problem of disappearing time"**Previous message:**WDEshleman@aol.com: "[time 586] Re: [time 543] Many-Worlds Communication"

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3
on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:30 JST
*