A good day today in physics.
Here comes an excellent piece of work that could finally help us get rid of that monstruosity that is the theory of dark matter and dark energy: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-10-sup ... -dark.html
In a new study, that’s what Arto Annila, Physics Professor at the University of Helsinki, is doing. The basis of his argument, which is published in a recent issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, lies in the ever-changing way that light travels through an ever-evolving universe.
“The standard model of big bang cosmology (the Lambda-CMD model) is a mathematical model, but not a physical portrayal of the evolving universe,” Annila told PhysOrg.com. “Thus the Lambda-CMD model yields the luminosity distance at a given redshift as a function of the model parameters, such as the cosmological constant, but not as a function of the physical process where quanta released from a supernova explosion disperse into the expanding universe.
“When the supernova exploded, its energy as photons began to disperse in the universe, which has, by the time we observe the flash, become larger and hence also more dilute,” he said. “Accordingly, the observed intensity of light has fallen inversely proportional to the squared luminosity distance and directly proportional to the redshifted frequency. Due to these two factors, brightness vs. redshift is not one straight line on a log-log plot, but a curve.”
As a result, Annila argues that the supernovae data does not imply that the universe is undergoing an accelerating expansion.
...
Light curves past an anisotropy of energy density at a minimum
distance ro along the path where equal arcs rI (colored) are swept at equal
times, i.e., rZ is a constant
...
interesting paradigm. will be interesting to see if it catches on after a bit of acid testing.
that's a lot of numbers to re-crunch, graphs to redraw, etc, if he's right in his some of his conclusions (eg: size of universe, etc).
Using Maupertuis’ form of the principle of least action, Annila has calculated that the brightness of light from Type 1a supernovae after traveling many millions of light-years to Earth agrees well with observations of the known amount of energy in the universe, and doesn’t require dark energy or any other additional driving force.
Is there any correlation between this guy's analysis of supernova light and the Plasma Red-Shift theory that was bandied about in a recent thread? They seem to be based on very similar foundations (though the Plasma Red-Shift takes the ideas way out there), but I fear I'm just a caveman astronomer.