Authors: Richard Dvorsky
Another cosmological redshift mechanism could exist in general relativity, as is differences in the global metric field gμν between the radiation source in the past, and the observer in the present, known as gravitational redshift in massive stars. In this paper, we present a fully conformal global metric model with time scaling that would lead to the above alternative interpretation of the cosmological redshift. It is based on a relatively simple global solution of Einstein's gravitational equations without the cosmological term, and the analysis also shows other interesting astrophysical implications. The model naturally solves the problem of critical density and spatial flatness, as well as the problem of cosmological redshift in the spectra of distant astrophysical sources, and the problem of Olbers' and Seeliger's paradox. At the same time, it replaces the strict causal horizon principle with a much softer formulation-the region of the practically observable universe. Confrontation with astrophysical data provides interesting agreement with the spatial distribution of astrophysical radiation sources such as γ-ray bursts and quasars. However, probably the most important consequence is the new, generalized formulation of Hubble's law z(r) = (exp(Hr/c)-1), which shows good agreement R 2 ≈ 0.9824 with experimental data even for very distant sources. The paper also physically justifies in principle the modification of Newton's law of gravity for infinite space proposed by Seeliger. The modifying exponential term exp(-Hr/c) is uniquely quantified by the Hubble parameter and the speed of light.
Comments: 13 Pages.
Download: PDF
[v1] 2023-03-02 01:52:44
Unique-IP document downloads: 119 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.