Authors: David F. Crawford
Observations of the light curve widths and peak flux densities of type Ia supernovae are traditional measurements for investigating cosmology. It is shown that a static, tired light, cosmology theory predicts the same redshift dependence of width$\propto (1+z)$, as an expanding cosmology. A completely new analysis of 1,413 type Ia supernovae and 653,338 quasar magnitudes is used to investigate whether a static cosmology is viable.
The aim is to show that the observations are consistent with a simple model of type Ia supernovae and then to use the measurements of their light curve widths and magnitudes to compare a static cosmology with an expanding cosmology.} {The light curve widths of the type Ia supernovae are determined by the direct fit of the observed flux densities as a function of epoch to a standard template. This provides width and peak magnitude estimates for each supernova. Number density and magnitudes of quasars as a function of redshift provide additional data.
It is shown that the regression equation for the observed widths is $w=(1.043\pm0.006)+(0.948\pm0.027)z$. The regression of peak absolute magnitude as a function of redshift is $M(z) = -(19.088\pm0.012)-(0.124\pm 0.107)z$. Both regressions are consistent with both cosmologies. The number density and magnitudes of quasars provides additional evidence for a static universe.
Although an expanding universe could be valid, there is strong evidence that the universe is static.
Comments: 11 Pages. [Corrections are made by viXra Admin to comply with the rules of viXra.org]
Download: PDF
[v1] 2021-07-01 19:30:29
Unique-IP document downloads: 141 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.