Posted: Oct 27, 2011 3:06 pm
by Brain man
Jumbo wrote:
Brain man wrote:
Jumbo wrote:I'm not all that convinced by Arto Annilas work there.

It has the ring of tired light to it and also the data points don't seem to brilliantly fit the line struck through them. The change in the speed of light bit sets off alarm bells as well IMO. It may change direction close to a region of curvature but IIRC the speed remains the same.

Its worth noting that even if it is correct it only alters dark energy/matter. It does not rule out the big bang. In fact it requires a metric expansion of space to work.

it looks like a best fit for this kind of data. The scales and error margins are within limits. Its also a misrepresentation to say it requires expansion to work. What it does is help us understand the movement of energy (without inventing dark matter) which we have to agree exists or everything in the universe would just be completely static.

Without expansion you do not get the changed energy densities that the hypothesis requires (or at least not to the scales that it requires)

How exactly does the light travel on its least-time path? While the light is traveling, the expanding universe is decreasing in density. When light crosses from a higher energy density region to a lower energy density region, Maupertuis’ principle of least action says that the light will adapt by decreasing its momentum.

If there were no expansion then any density changes would be as often from high to low as they were low to high which would result in a rather different effect to the one described.

You need to read the paper. I had problems with some of the maths. In principle this does not have to be so macroscopic. It applies to any situation where light travels through relative differences in density.