Classical Physics

   

Lorentz Effects on Observed Distance and Lookback as a Function of Cosmic Redshift

Authors: Martin Johnson

The Universe is generally considered to be about 14 billion years old. There was an ‘inflationary period’, in which it underwent instant expansion, then abruptly slowed down to a more gentle rate which persists to the present day. This motion picture of the observable Universe derives from a ‘Hubble parameter’ H: A star’s radial recession rate v, divided by its ‘proper distance’ d; H = v/d . Both observed v and observed dobs from starlight are supposed to increase with cosmic redshift z, and v does, but for z > 1, dobs drops off. The current correction for this is to take the expansion of space over time into account, via integration. Integration is also used to calculate ‘lookback’ (t0 - t). Herein, the author shows that both d and (t0 - t) are calculable without integration, via the Lorentz factor γ: d = dobsγ and (t0 - t) = dobsγ2/c. This method is proper: Time does not elapse at the speed of light c, so space doesn’t expand for light. The Universe’s (t0 - t) is found this way as at least 170 billion years old. We also examine the slowdown of time in an increasingly dense Universe. Time came to a halt at a certain density.

Comments: 13 Pages. (Note by viXra Admin: Maximal replacement version reached)

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2025-03-03 19:52:19
[v2] 2025-03-05 22:29:41
[v3] 2025-04-05 23:30:18
[v4] 2025-06-12 22:34:18
[v5] 2025-07-06 21:28:14

Unique-IP document downloads: 840 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.

comments powered by Disqus