2011 Nobel Mistake in Physics

The 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics based on calculations using the redshift from Supernovae that showed the Universe is expanding at an accelerated rate was a mistake because the redshift was caused by absorption in cosmic dust
By: Thomas Pevenslik
 
 
Supernova - Redshift in Dust ?
Supernova - Redshift in Dust ?
 
Spread the Word
Listed Under

Tags:
2011 Nobel Prize
Physics
A. G. Reiss
B. P. Schmidt
S. Pearlmutter
Supernovae
Redshift
Dust

Industrys:
Research
Science
Technology

Location:
Youngwood - Pennsylvania - US

Oct. 11, 2011 - PRLog -- Background

In 1929, Hubble formulated a law based on the redshift of spectral lines that by the Doppler Effect showed the Universe is expanding. However, others thought the spectral redshift was caused by mechanisms without Universe expansion. Zwicky proposed that galaxy photons redshift because they lose energy as they scatter upon collision with cosmic dust before entering the Earth, a redshift theory called Tired Light. An alternative to the Hubble and Tired Light theories is the theory of QED induced redshift caused by the absorption of galaxy light – not scattering - in cosmic dust.  QED stands for quantum electrodynamics. See http://www.prlog.org/10388030-redshift-by-cosmic-dust-trumps-hubble-and-tired-light-theories.html  

QED induced redshift in Ia Supernovae (SN) explosions is a consequence of QM constraints placed on the conservation of absorbed EM energy in submicron dust particles. QM stands for quantum mechanics and EM for electromagnetic.  QM precludes submicron cosmic dust from having the heat capacity necessary to conserve absorbed SN photons by an increase in temperature. Instead, conservation proceeds by the creation of QED photons inside the dust particle under the geometric constraint of TIR confinement. TIR stands for total internal reflection. Under TIR, the QED photons are redshift relative to the SN photon – without any recession of the SN from the Earth, thereby negating Hubble’s law based on Doppler shift.

How dust redshifts SN light is simple enough for anyone to understand.  If EM energy is supplied to a QM box with walls separated by Lo/2, QED induces the EM energy to be converted to photons of wavelength Lo. For the SN photon absorbed in a spherical dust particle of diameter D, the QED photons are created at a wavelength Lo = 2nD, where n is the index of refraction of the dust. In the Universe, the dust distribution is submicron with D < 0.5 microns. For amorphous silicate dust having n = 1.45, the QED photons created in a D = 0.25 micron dust particle have Lo = 0.725 microns, and therefore an absorbed Lyman-alpha photon having L = 0.1216 microns is redshift to Z = (Lo – L)/L. ~ 5. If Z is interpreted by the Doppler shift, the SN recession velocity is 95 % of the speed of light when in fact the SN is not receding from the Earth at all !!!

Problem

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2011 was awarded to Saul Perlmutter, Brian P Schmidt and Adam G Riess for discovering the accelerated expansion of the Universe.

Discussion

The discovery of an accelerated expanding Universe was based on the redshift [1] from type Ia SN. Over 50 SN having light weaker than expected was taken as a sign that the expansion of the Universe was accelerating.
See http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2011/oct/04/nobel-...

What this means is the Nobel prize was awarded for something not expected, for if it was expected it would not have been a scientific discovery. However, the Nobel laureates including the High Z-team working for years interpreting the redshift from SNs could not have not expected an accelerated Universe expansion, and therefore one can safely dismiss any scientific discovery. Peter Coles, an astrophysicist at Cardiff University, in Nature said: “Nobody really knows what it is that has been discovered." Ibid

Moreover, in a telephone interview with Adam Riess, recorded shortly after he was told he had won the Nobel Prize in Physics. He says of the moment he realized his data were showing the expansion of the Universe was accelerating:

"I remember thinking, I've made a terrible mistake and I have to find this mistake." Ibid

Robert Kirshner from Harvard University, who supervised Schmidt and Riess when they were PhD students, quoted by Physics World, welcomed the decision by the Nobel committee:

“We did a lot of foundational work at Harvard and my postdocs and students made up a hefty chunk of the High-Z Team … [Riess] did a lot after the initial result to show that there was no sneaky effect due to dust absorption.” Ibid

Conclusions

Reiss did make a mistake. The redshift used in his calculations had nothing to do with the weaker light than expected from the SN, but rather was that of QED induced redshift from the SN dust. Simply put, the dust from the SN explosion made the light appear weaker than expected.

However, QED induced redshift in dust holds in question not only observations of SN explosions, but also all astrophysical measurements that rely on Hubble redshift by the Doppler Effect. Interpreting redshifts of spectral lines based on Hubble’s law has grossly over-estimated distances and recession velocities. Recently, the Shaw Prize in Astronomy [2] was awarded to Costa and Fishman for claims gamma-ray bursts with redshift Z = 8.2 are the most distant explosions in the Universe, but are also likely over-estimated based Hubble redshift because of cosmic dust. Similarly, rotational velocities of spiral galaxies based on Hubble redshift are faster than allowed by Newtonian mechanics, and on this basis, dark matter is erroneously thought to exist to hold the galaxies together. Indeed, QED redshift in cosmic dust instead of the Doppler Effect explains [3] most of the problems in cosmology:

Dark Energy not needed to explain a Universe that is not expanding
Period-luminosity relation qualified in Cepheid stars
Dark Matter not involved in Gravitational Lensing
Galaxy Rotation Problem resolved without Dark Matter
No need for MOND to explain Galaxy Rotation Problem
Tolman Surface Brightness reduction by (1 + Z)
Explain the Independence of Redshift in Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effect
Light Curve dilation in Supernovae Explosions

References

[1] A.G. Riess et al., “Type Ia Supernova Discoveries at Z >1 from the Hubble Space Telescope Evidence for Past Deceleration and constraints on Dark Energy Evolution,”  607, 665, 2004.
[2] E. Costa and G. J. Fishman, “Gamma-Ray Bursts: The Largest and Most Distant Explosions in the Universe,” The 2011 Shaw Prize in Astronomy, HKUST, 30 September, 2011. See http://www.ust.hk/eng/news/press_20110930-906.html
[3] T. Prevenslik, See various papers on QED Redshift in Astronomy and Cosmology at  http://www.nanoqed.org , 2009-2011

# # #

About QED Induced EM Radiation: Classically, absorbed EM energy is conserved by an increase in temperature. But at the nanoscale, temperature increases are forbidden by quantum mechanics. QED radiation explains how absorbed EM energy is conserved at the nanoscale by the creation of nonthermal EM radiation.
End
Email:***@yahoo.com Email Verified
Zip:15697
Tags:2011 Nobel Prize, Physics, A. G. Reiss, B. P. Schmidt, S. Pearlmutter, Supernovae, Redshift, Dust
Industry:Research, Science, Technology
Location:Youngwood - Pennsylvania - United States
Account Email Address Verified     Account Phone Number Verified     Disclaimer     Report Abuse
Page Updated Last on: Oct 15, 2011



Like PRLog?
9K2K1K
Click to Share