Posted by: M P 7 years, 9 months ago

(0 comments)

How long has this been going on???  :)

Figure 1. Plot showing Supernova Survey Data (+), Friedmann-Lemaitre Cosmology Model(...), Hypergeometrical Universe Model Predictions (...), Hubble predictions.  The two best fits are HU predictions.

The plot above shows where Type 1A Supernovae were located when they exploded long time ago. Only now their light is arriving at our telescopes and it is arriving spectrally redshifted.  The parameter z is the DeltaLambda/Lambda,  a fractional shift in frequency for spectroscopic lines.  The larger the redshift, the farther away the star is and the larger its recessing speed.

The data is measured by considering that these Supernova explosions have precursors that makes the process quite consistent (thus the name Stellar Candles given to these explosions).

The precursor is normally considered to be a White Dwarf and a companion. The White Dwarf steals mass from the companion until it reaches the Chandrasekhar Mass and Radius.  At that point, the White Dwarf reaches a threshold of Fatness.  The Gravitational Pressure is such that most energetic electrons are traveling at the speed of light to hold matter together.  In doing so, they are keeping up with their Fermionic Nature (one cannot have two electrons in the same energy level due to the Pauli exclusion principle).

When the White Dwarf reaches the Chandrasekhar mass it collapses increasing its temperature. At that point, the Dwarf starts burning Carbon and Oxygen (see reaction chain below) and producing Nickel. Starting from the core, the White Dwarf burns itself quickly releasing a flash of neutrinos that blasts its outer shell.  The ejecta traps (slows down) the scape of photons from the subsequent light burst.

That light comes from the decay of the newly produced Nickel. The Luminosity Peak is proportional to the rate of Nickel creation - which is driven by this reaction chain:

If Oxygen is abundant and the intermediate reactions are fast, the reaction rate can be approximated determined by the first equation (Magnesium creation). This is a second order reaction. The rate is proportional to the concentration [C] squared.

The concentration is proportional to the Dwarf's mass, so the Peak Luminosity is proportional to Mass Squared.

Are the Stellar Candles Standard or Normalizable Candles?

The distances are measured indirectly from the apparent luminosity. The Supernova Survey Team does a WLR (time scaling the Luminosity Profile) to standardize all Supernova explosions.

Strange Universe

The picture that comes out of these measurements is paradoxical.  They are plotted on the figure 1.  The scattered crosses are the Supernova explosions and they are mapped to be as far as 2.5 times the expected radius of the Universe (considering its age and things traveling at the speed of light).  The radius R0 is estimated to be around 14 billion light years.

To explain this paradox, Inflation Theory was created.  It states that the Universe expanded very quickly (faster than the speed of light) and later slowed down, resulting in what we see now.  It also allows for the introduction of Dark Energy to explain the continued expansion seem even today and Dark Matter to counterbalance the equation (fine tuning the fitting).  The data is used to extract parameters related to Dark Energy (Einstein's Famous Blunder Cosmological Constant) and the amount of Dark Matter.  Figure 1 also presents a Friedmann-Lemaitre fitting.  That misses the data by a mile.  This is the fitting from where those Dark Matter/Dark Energy fractions comes from..:)  Not reliable... not something to brag about..>:)

Correcting The Universe

The distances are measured by comparing the apparent luminosity, fine-correcting it through WLR (time scaling), and calculating how far the star should be for the luminosity to be so dim. 

That seems reasonable, despite of the unreasonable conclusions.  

In my hobby of thinking about the Universe, I created a theory where the Universe had an extra spatial dimension and the 3D Universe were a light-speed expanding hyperspherical hypersurface... or just the surface of a light-speed expanding ball..:)

Figure 2. Cross-section of the Hyperspherical Universe, showing how one see the past in 4D Space.  In the past, the Universe (seeing as a section of a circle) was smaller, denser.  Gravity was stronger. Stars lifetimes were shorter. Gravitation driven dynamics was faster.

The picture above shows how I consider we look into the past.  The past corresponds to smaller hyperspherical hypersurfaces.  

It just happens that in my theory, the gravitational constant G has to be inversely proportional to the 4D radius of the hypersphere. This means that G is stronger at early epochs.

The Chandrasekhar Mass and Radius varies with G^(-3/2) and G^(-1/2) respectively , that is, the White Dwarf is not a standard but instead it is dependent upon G, so it should be a White Dwarf(G). 

Let's consider that the Supernova Team perfectly adjusted the Apparent Luminosities for all Supernovae while considering them similar and G independent and that the Universe is G constant across epochs.

In my theory, far away Supernovas are systematically smaller (by G^-3 in luminosity terms). Under these conditions, there would be a systematic error introduced onto the Supernova Team data analysis just by not considering my scenario.

That means that an adjustment is needed to compare my predictions with the astronomical observations.  This parameter is G^(-3/2) for distances and G(-3) for Absolute Luminosity.

Now you can see that under this paradigm (Hypergeometrical Universe Theory), the Universe can fit without any problem in the expect radius, so there is no need for Inflation Theory nor Dark Energy/Matter.

Below are predictions (not fittings) using simple geometry 

Figure 3.  Perfect predictions by Hypergeometrical Universe Theory. This level of precision is not matched by any model (despite of their many parameters). In the literature there are different sets of parameters for each region of the survey.  (before Union2.1, there were subsets and they were fitted yielding different results).

and here is the error:

Figure 4. HU Prediction error distribution.

Not bad (in fact, the best match to reality from any model) for something I wrote in my New York Subway Commutes..:)

Conclusions:

This means that there is a model out there that can explain the Universe perfectly, without parametrization, Inflation, Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

What is Next:

Today I am giving up trying to influence Science.  All paths were closed to bringing this little article into the fold (to be part of the discussion).  It looks Science is so far from what it should be that nobody wants this idea to be discussed.

Given the opportunity, I will continue to develop this Branch of Science as my private Physics..:) There is a promise of radiation-free energy (Coherent Nuclear Fusion), space propulsion, etc..

QuantSapiens Energy will be the incubator for the technologies derived from this contrarian view. Reach out if you want to help me bringing a better future.

The article can be found here:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/hypergeo/static/media/uploads/pdfs/HU_Hubble_Law.pdf

The python and Mathematica scripts related to the pictures and the survey data can be found here:

Cheers,

MP

PS - With my model, I rejected the need for Inflation Theory, Dark Energy and Dark Matter. When you hear some famous scientific talking heads telling you how mysterious the Universe is, be assured I tried to correct them... They just didn't want to listen...:)  In fact, I rejected the need for Higgs Boson also in the complementary paper.

The other peeve I have is String Theory.  It turned out this theory from the 24th century has been pursued on the basis of this identity:

1+2+3+4...=-1/12

This is the value of Riemann Zeta(-1), a region where the series is divergent.  Since the genius Leonard Euler played with the idea in the past (to find out if there was a path where this would make sense), scientists engaged on a full-throttle pursuit of Numerology.

I can understand diddling around with something like this.  I fail to understand how such a wild goose chase could pose any resistance to a grounded theory such as mine.

Watch the touching confessions of a String Theorist in this video:

and see what I am talking about.  Not to mention, people whose claim of fame is to study "Black Holes", something derived from an equation that has a pole, thus clearly incorrect from the beginning.

I don't know how long has this been going on...:)  

ACE:  How long has this been going on?

How long has this been going on?
How long has this been going on?

Well, your friends with their fancy persuasion
Don't admit that it's part of a scheme
But I can't help but have my suspicion
'Cause I ain't quite as dumb as I seem

And you said you was never intending
To break up our scene in this way
But there ain't any use in pretending
It could happen to us any day

How long has this been going on?
How long has this been going on?

Oh, your friends with their fancy persuasion
Don't admit that it's part of a scheme
But I can't help but have my suspicion
'Cause I ain't quite as dumb as I seem

Oh, you said you was never intending
To break up our scene in this way
But there ain't any use in pretending
It could happen to us any day

And how long has this been going on?
How long has this been going on?
How long
How long has this been going on?
How long has this
How long has this been going on?
How long
How long has this been going on?

• ← No Giordano Bruno..:)
• You don't belong!!! →