User:Wolfgang Tervuren/The Alternative Physics of Cosmic Redshift

The Alternative Physics of Cosmic Redshift Wolfgang HEBEL *

Abstract Light propagates straight from the source to the receiver according to the laws of classical optics. Light rays received on Earth from distant stars show redshift, being attributed conventionally to the well-known Doppler-effect of wave dynamics. The present study suggests that the phenomenon of cosmic redshift rather is an effect of the straight (linear) propagation of light particles or photons as explained in the book of Nobel Laureate Richard FEYNMAN on quantum electrodynamics (QED) [2]. This alternative physics of cosmic redshift is fundamentally different from the conventional Doppler shift and does not need the imaginative Big-Bang idea for explanation.

Conventional theory of cosmic redshift In 1929, Edwin HUBBLE discovered that light from distant stars exhibits longer wavelengths or reduced frequencies than that from similar radiation sources on Earth. All specific frequency lines in the electromagnetic spectrum of distant cosmic radiation sources appeared shifted towards the red end of the visible spectrum. His discovery therefore was called astronomic redshift defined by the redshift ratio z = λ / λo 			(1) λ represents the elongation of a specific wavelength and λo the original wave length of emission at the source. Frequency n and wavelength λ of the radiation are correlated by the velocity of light in vacuum (c) 		 			         		c = n x λ			(2) Since its discovery, the astronomic or cosmic redshift has been attributed principally to the well-known Doppler-effect of wave dynamics, manifest when source and receiver of waves move relative to each other. HUBBLE’s discovery, therefore, proved as it were that all distant stars (galaxies) were escaping from Earth i.e. that our Universe was expanding. The apparent radial recession velocity away from Earth can be calculated following the Doppler equation, n / no = (1-v/c)			(3) n representing a given specific frequency of the arriving light, no the corresponding frequency of emission at the source, v the recession velocity of the source and c the velocity of light in vacuum. Simultaneously, HUBBLE had discovered that the apparent recession velocity of cosmic radiation sources increases proportionally to their distance r from Earth:	 			       v = H x r			(4) H representing the famous HUBBLE constant currently estimated at about 70 km/s per megaparsec or per 3.26 million light-years. HUBBLE’s discoveries soon led to our current view of the Universe, assuming that it came into existence by a gigantic explosion, the Big Bang, which happened spontaneously out of a tiny volume of unimaginable high temperature followed up by adiabatic expansion and the condensation of matter while cooling down. Apparently, this expansion process is still going on today. Following HUBBLE’s law (4), the escape velocity of an extremely distant galaxy could ultimately reach light velocity in vacuum, meaning its redshift ratio equals theoretically unity. Physically of course this is impossible; however, redshift ratios of z=5 and even z=7 have been observed in recent years showing supernova explosions apparently further away from Earth than the postulated age of the Universe (~14 billion light-years). In addition, as well known, various other inconsistencies weigh upon the Big Bang idea and many a scientist therefore questions it.

Alternative physics of cosmic redshift Richard FEYNMAN received the Nobel Prize of physics in 1965, for his pioneering studies on quantum electro-dynamics, explaining among other things the interactions of photons with matter. In his book on “QED – The Strange Theory of Light and Matter” published in 1985 [2], he also explains the quantum mechanism of the linear propagation of light. He shows that photons emitted by a radiation source produce then the biggest effect when they travel straight and in narrow company from the source to the receiver, i.e. when they travel this distance within the shortest possible time. All other photons taking longer, winding paths need more time and are therefore insignificant to the receiver. A straight ray of photons traveling from a given cosmic radiation source to the Earth will meet countless celestial bodies before arriving on Earth. These bodies as stars, planets, comets, meteorites, grains, etc. are swirling around in the Universe at typical velocities of some hundred kilometers per second and are impermeable to photons. When those bodies cross a straight ray, it will be interrupted shortly and all photons dropping onto the bodies will be removed from the ray independently of their individual energy or frequency. The photons coming thereafter travel further and after countless interruptions only the remaining photons of the ray will arrive at the receiver on Earth. The observer will remark that all typical spectral lines of this ray of photons exhibit lower frequencies than ordinary, because the knocked-out photons did not show up in time. The ray lost a good deal of its original photons and shows a redshift ratio, which is proportional to its traveling distance through the Universe. In other words, the alternative redshift physics confirms HUBBLE’s discovery, establishing that the cosmic redshift ratio indicates how far a distant star is away from Earth.

HUBBLE’s law still implies another connection. When replacing in equation (4) the recession velocity v by the product z x c, i.e. by a fraction of the ultimate velocity of light, an interesting correlation arises, z = H/c x r			     (5) The constant factor H/c may be regarded as a modified Hubble-constant, which amounts to 0.00023 per megaparsec or 0.00007 per million light-years. This modified Hubble-constant signifies the loss of photons suffered by a beam of light, which has traveled one million light-years through the Universe. It is in fact a very small loss of photons over such big distance, confirming our experience that the Universe is largely empty of solid matter. The reciprocal of the modified Hubble constant i.e. 1/0.00007 gives 14 billion light-years, in accordance with the postulated age of our Universe following the traditional theory. However, the meaning is different. It shows namely that ordinary starlight cannot propagate further through the Universe than 14 billion light-years. All photons grouped in a straight light beam from the source to the Earth would have got lost due to the absorption effect of celestial matter. Usually, we cannot look deeper into the Universe than this distance, corresponding theoretically to a redshift ratio of unity. However, what about those bigger redshift ratios of z=5 or even z=7, which have been observed in recent time?

We know from nuclear physics that energetic radiation penetrating through a shielding medium will be absorbed according to the general correlation, 							                               	E = Eo x e-m.r			     (6) E representing the radiation energy behind the shield, Eo the energy of emission at the source, m the absorption coefficient of the shielding medium and r the traveling distance through the medium. In the present case, it makes sense to regard the modified Hubble constant H/c as a cosmic photon absorption coefficient and r as traveling distance of a ray of photons through the Universe. The energy of photons emitted by a heat source corresponds to the well-known correlation				                                     E = k x T 			(7) T represents the surface temperature of the source and k the BOLTZMANN constant. On the other hand, the photon energy corresponds to PLANCK’s equation E = h x n			       (8) h is the PLANCK constant and n the frequency of the photons. From equations (6), (7), and (8) follow the correlations n/no=T/To and E / Eo = e-H/c. r 		(9) Referring to the previous equations (1) and (2), one finds that the cosmic redshift ratio correlates thus to			                             z = e H/c.r – 1			(10) The distance of a cosmic radiation source therefore can be estimated from its redshift ratio according to			                             r = 1 / H/c x ln (z + 1)		(11) with H/c = 0.00007 per million light-year. For a redshift ratio of z=1, for instance, one finds 9.9 billion light-years, and for z=5 the cosmic distance is 25.6 billion light-years.

Conclusion In contrast to the traditional redshift theory, the present alternative physics of cosmic redshift doesn’t show any upper limit of z or any restricted age of our Universe respectively. Referring to the aforementioned equations, the cosmic redshift ratio also correlates to 	z = To/T – 1 			(12) i.e. to the ratio between the surface temperature of a cosmic radiation source To and its apparent temperature T observed on Earth. The light from a remote cluster of galaxies at an average surface temperature of about 5800°K as our sun would show the apparent temperature of 970°K on Earth, when arriving from a cosmic distance of z=5 or 25.6 billion light-years. This cluster, of which most of the photons got lost on the way to Earth, would be invisible to ordinary optical telescopes. However, cosmic radiation sources of much higher surface temperatures or bigger emission energy like supernova explosions would still be visible over such extraordinary distances, which largely exceed the postulated age of our Universe according to the Big-Bang hypothesis. In contrast to the traditional theory of cosmic redshift, the present alternative physics does not include any difficulty in principle to explain such observations. In addition, the alternative physics of cosmic redshift offers another interesting conclusion that namely the well-known phenomenon of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) can be regarded as the thermodynamic background radiation of a Universe without frontiers. This ubiquitous background radiation noise suggests that countless stars exist in the remote Universe far beyond the practical limits of detecting individual sources.

R e f e r e n c e s :

[1] Paul Davies: The New Physics Cambridge University Press, New York, 1989 [2] Richard P. Feynman: “QED – The Strange Theory of Light and Matter” Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1985 [3] Craig J. Hogan: Revolution in Cosmology Scientific American, p. 27-49, January 1999 [4] Ann Finkbeiner (ed): Seeing the Universe’s red dawn SCIENCE, p. 392, 16 Oct. 1998 [5] Floyd E. Bloom: Breakthroughs 1998 SCIENCE, p. 2193, 18 Dec. 1998 [6] Wolfgang Hebel: The Mystery of Life – Does Science hold the Key? German University Press (GUP), Baden-Baden, 2007