THE BOOK!

"Big Bang Blaste

The story of the expanding universe and how it was shown to be wrong




'New Tired Light' is an alternative theory to that of the expanding Universe. This theory explains the experimental evidence without resorting to the 'cosmological constants' or 'vacuum energy' that are essential to the theory of the expanding Universe. 'New Tired Light' is totally different to Zwicky's old theory and matches all observational results.

Experiment tells us that photons of light from distant galaxies have a longer wavelength on arrival than when they set off. Since red light has a longer wavelength than blue light, we say that they have been 'redshifted'. The Theory of the Expanding Universe explains this as space expanding and stretching the photons as it does so. In New Tired Light we say that the photons lost energy during their journey to us by bumping into electrons on the way.

The New Tired Light Theory (that redshift is due to electron interaction) is supported by the fact that measured values of the Hubble constant, H are exactly equal to a combination of the parameters of the electron. This is known as 'Ashmore's Paradox'. If, in the expanding Universe, the expansion is not related to the electron then why is the Hubble constant found experimentally to be related to the electron?

Interested? If you want to know more then click on the following pages.

Ashmore's Paradox

New Tired Light Theory

New Tired Light and the CMB

Predicting line broadening

Debunking The Big Banger's CMB Curve!

The Implications of Ashmore's Paradox

Just what is Ashmore's Paradox All About!

New Tired Light Explains Supernovae Time Dilation



The paper has been published in the peer reviewed journal:

"Galilean Electrodynamics" Vol. 17, Special Issues 3. Summer, 2006.



GALIILEAN ELECTRODYNAMIICS 41
Experience, Reason, and Simplicity Above Authority
Summer 2006 (Vol. 17, Special Issues No. 3), © by Galilean Electrodynamics
Published by Space Time Analyses, Ltd., 141 Rhinecliff Street, Arlington, MA 02476-7331, USA
Editorial Board
GED Editor in Chief: Cynthia Kolb Whitney, Visiting Industry Professor, retired
Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts
GED Associate Editor: Howard C. Hayden, Professor Emeritus of Physics
University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut
GED-East Editor: Jaroslav G. Klyushin, Chair of Applied Mathematics
Academy of Civil Aviation, St. Petersburg, RUSSIA
CONTENTS
From the Editor: ‘What is this Special Issue?’, Cynthia K. Whitney..................................................................................................................2
Correspondence:
‘Inconsistancies in the Comological Concept of the Origin of the Universe’, D.S. Robertson (Mr.) ...............................................2
Ruggero Maria Santilli,
“Nine Theorems of Inconsistency in GRT with Resolutions via Isogravitation”...................................................................................43
Lyndon Ashmore,
“Recoil Between Photons and Electrons Leading to the Hubble Constant and CMB”......................................................................53
Correspondence:
‘E.A. Milne and the Universes of Newton and Relativistic Cosmology’, Jeremy Dunning-Davies..............................................57
From the Editor: ‘An Agenda Concerning Gravity’, Cynthia K. Whitney ....................................................................................................60
EDITORIAL POLICY
Galilean Electrodynamics aims to publish high-quality scientific papers
that discuss challenges to accepted orthodoxy in physics, especially
in the realm of relativity theory, both special and general. In particular,
the journal seeks papers arguing that Einstein's theories are unnecessarily
complicated, have been confirmed only in a narrow sector of physics,
lead to logical contradictions, and are unable to derive results that must
be postulated, though they are derivable by classical methods.
The journal also publishes papers in areas of potential application for
better relativistic underpinnings, from quantum mechanics to cosmology.
We are interested, for example, in challenges to the accepted Copenhagen
interpretation for the predictions of quantum mechanics, and to the accepted
Big-Bang theory for the origin of the Universe.
On occasion, the journal will publish papers on other less relativityrelated
topics. But all papers are expected to be in the realms of physics,
engineering or mathematics. Non-mathematical, philosophical papers
will generally not be accepted unless they are fairly short or have something
new and outstandingly interesting to say.
The journal seeks to publish any and all new and rational physical
theories consistent with experimental fact. Where there is more than one
new theory that meets the criteria of consistency with experiment, faultless
logic and greater simplicity than orthodoxy offers, none will be favored
over the others, except where Ockham's razor yields an overwhelming
verdict.
Though the main purpose of the journal is to publish papers contesting
orthodoxy in physics, it will also publish papers responding in defense
of orthodoxy. We invite such responses because our ultimate purpose
here is to find the truth. We ask only that such responses offer
something more substantive than simple citation of doctrine.
The journal most values papers that cite experimental evidence, develop
rational analyses, and achieve clear and simple presentation. Papers
reporting experimental results are preferred over purely theoretical
papers of equally high standard. No paper seen to contradict experiment
will be accepted. But papers challenging the current interpretation for
observed facts will be taken very seriously.
Short papers are preferred over long papers of comparable quality.
Shortness often correlates with clarity; papers easily understandable to
keen college seniors and graduate students are given emphatic preference
over esoteric analyses accessible to only a limited number of specialists.
For many reasons, short papers may pass review and be published
much faster than long ones.
The journal also publishes correspondence, news notes, and book
reviews challenging physics orthodoxy. Readers are encouraged to submit
interesting and vivid items in any of these categories.
All manuscripts submitted receive review by qualified physicists,
astronomers, engineers, or mathematicians. The Editorial Board does not
take account of any reviewer recommendation that is negative solely
because manuscript contradicts accepted opinion and interpretation.
Unorthodox science is usually done by individuals working without
institutional or governmental support. For this reason, authors in Galilean
Electrodynamics pay no page charges, and subscription fees heavily
favor individual subscribers over institutions and government agencies.
Galilean Electrodynamics does not ask for taxpayers' support, and would
refuse any government subsidies if offered. This policy is based on the
belief that a journal unable to pay for itself by its quality and resulting
reader appeal has no moral right to existence, and may even lack the
incentive to publish good science.
Summer 2006 GALILEAN ELECTRODYNAMICS 53
Recoil Between Photons and Electrons
Leading to the Hubble Constant and CMB
Lyndon Ashmore, B.A. (hons), M. Phil.
C/O Dubai College, P.O.Box 837, Dubai, U.A.E.
e mail: ashmore@emirates.net.ae
This paper proposes a recoil interaction between photons and electrons in the plasma of intergalactic
space as a mechanism that could lead to the observed Hubble constant and cosmic background radiation. It
begins from the Hubble diagram for type Ia Supernovae, which gives the value of the Hubble constant, H as
64±3 km/s Mpc-1. In SI units, H is 2.1 × 10-18 s-1, equal to ‘
hre / me per cubic meter of space’, where h is
Planck’s constant,
re is radius of the electron and
me is the mass of the electron. This coincidence suggests a
possible relationship between H and the electrons in the plasma of intergalactic space. Electrons act collectively
and oscillate if displaced. The possibility that light from distant galaxies is absorbed and re-emitted by
the electrons, with recoil on both occasions, is considered. A double Mössbauer effect leads to a red-shift in the
transmitted light. Introduction of the photo-absorption cross-section
2reλ leads to the relationship
H = 2nehre / me , giving H = 12 km/s Mpc-1 when
ne has the reported value of
ne = 10−7 cm-3. The small
amount of energy transferred to the electron by recoil is radiated as bremsstrahlung with a wavelength in the
microwave region.
Key Words: Hubble constant, Intergalactic Plasma, CMB, Redshift; Subject headings: Cosmic microwave background
--- Cosmology: Galaxies: distances and redshifts ---Intergalactic medium
1. Hubble Constant vs. Electron Paradox
Whilst the conventional interpretation of observed cosmological
red-shifts is an Expanding Universe, some researchers
have expressed doubts that the red-shifts are caused by expansion
alone [1-6]. Marmet [7] proposed a recoil interaction between
photons of light and the hydrogen atoms in Inter-Galactic
(IG) space, but this idea would seem to have problems when one
considers the discrete nature with which atoms absorb and reemit
photons. However, no researchers have previously reported
the remarkable coincidence between the Hubble constant
and the parameters of the electron (
H = hre / me per cubic meter
of space). Nor, until now, has anyone derived a possible relationship
between the two.
The Hubble diagram for type Ia Supernovae gives the value
of the Hubble constant, H as 64±3 km/s Mpc-1 or (2.07±0.1) × 10-
18 s-1 [8]. The quantity ‘
hre / me ’ where h is the Planck constant
(6.626 × 10-34 Js),
re is the classical electron radius (2.818x10-15 m)
and
me is the electron rest mass (9.109 × 10-31 kg) is equal to
(2.05 × 10-18 m3s-1) and so ‘
hre / me per cubic meter of space’ has
the same magnitude and dimensions as the Hubble constant.
The HST key Project result for H of 72+/- 8 km/s per Mpc [9]
gives a range of (2.1–2.6) ×10−18 s-1 is remarkably close to
hre / me ‘per cubic meter of space’ when one considers that, if
we are to believe in an Expanding Universe, H could have had
any value from zero up to the speed of light, and is not supposed
to be related to the electron. We must ask the question, “why is
the measured value of H so close to a simple combination of the
parameters of the electron if they are not related?”
These are not isolated results. Table 1 shows recent experimental
values of the Hubble constant, H as selected by the ADS
database. To select an unbiased sample the words ‘Hubble’ and
‘constant’ and ‘measurements” were fed into the database, and
‘return 100 items’ chosen. Of these, all the papers giving an actual
value for H were selected and should include the most recent
results. The results for H are given in terms of
hre / me
per cubic meter of space. To do this the symbol k was assigned
to represent the constant ‘
hre / me per cubic meter of space’.
The average of all the results was then taken. It should be
noted that uncertainties were not taken into account, and for
those papers giving a range of values for H the middle value
was taken. The average of all these values for H , found by several
different techniques, is equal to 1.0k i.e.
hre / me per cubic
meter of space. It is therefore proposed that this relationship
between the Hubble constant and the electron is not a chance
event.
2. The Medium with which Light Interacts
This coincidence could suggest a relationship between H
and the electrons in the plasma of IG space,
ne ≈ 10-7cm-3 [10].
Electrons in the plasma interact simultaneously with other electrons
by means of long-range Coulomb forces giving rise to a
collective behavior. Significantly, a displaced electron in the
plasma of IG space will perform Simple Harmonic Motion [12]
and a system of electrons that is able to oscillate is able to absorb
and emit electromagnetic radiation. It is possible that photons
from distant galaxies could interact with these electrons.
54 Ashmore: Photons, Electrons, Hubble, CMB Vol. 17, SI No. 3
Author Date Bib. Code Method Used Value of H in units of
hre / me
Cardone et al.
Freedman et al.
Tikhonov et al.
Garinge et al.
Tutui et al.
Freedman et al.
Itoh et al.
Jensen et al.
Willick et al.
Koopmans et al.
Mauskopf et al.
Sakai et al.
Tanvir et al.
Tripp et al.
Jha et al.
Suntzeff et al
Iwamoto et al.
Mason et al.
Schaefer et al.
Jha et al.
Patural et al.
Wantanabe et al.
Salaris et al.
Hughes et al.
Cen et al.
Lauer et al.
00/2003
00/2003
07/2002
06/2002
10/2001
05/2001
05/2001
04/2001
02/2001
00/2001
08/2000
02/2000
11/1999
11/1999
11/1999
03/1999
00/1999
00/1999
12/1998
12/1998
11/1998
08/1998
07/1998
07/1998
05/1998
05/1998
2003acfp.conf..423C
2003dhst.symp..214F
2002Ap…45…253T
2002MNRAS.333..318G
2001PASJ..53..701T
2001ApJ..553..47F
2001AstHe.94.214I
2001ApJ.550..503J
2001ApJ.548..564W
2001PASA..18..179K
2000ApJ..538..505M
2000ApJ..529..698S
1999MNRAS.310..175T
1999ApJ..525..209T
1999ApJS..125..73J
1999AJ..117.1175S
1999IAUS..183..681
1999PhDT…29M
1998ApJ..509..80S
1998AAS..19310604J
1998A&A..339..671P
1998ApJ..503..553W
1998MNRAS..298..166S
1998ApJ..501..1H
1998ApJ..498L..99C
1998ApJ..449..577L
Grav. Lens
HST – Cepheids
HST – Stars
Xray emission
CO line T-F
HST Cepheids
Xray emission
SBF
HST Cepheids
Grav. lens
Xray emission
HST Cepheids
HST Cepheids
Ia Supernovae
Ia Supernovae
Ia Supernova
Ia Supernovae
Xray emission
Ia Supernovae
Ia Supernovae
HIPPARCOS
Galaxies T-F
TRGB
Xray emission
Xray emission
HST SBF
0.91k
1.1k
1.2k
0.89k
0.94k
1.1k
0.94k
1.2k
1.3k
(0.94 – 1.1)k
0.92k
1.1k
1.0k
0.97k
1.0k
1.0k
1.0k
1.1k
0.86k
1.0k
0.94k
1.0k
0.94k
(0.66 – 0.95)k
(0.94 – 1.3)k
1.4k
Average of all the values 1.0k
3. Proposed Red-Shift Mechanism
When photons travel through any transparent medium they
are continually absorbed and re-emitted by the electrons in the
medium. French [13] states “the propagation of light through a
medium (even a transparent one) involves a continual process of
absorption of the incident light and its reemission as secondary
radiation by the medium.” Feynman [14] describes the transmission
of light through a transparent medium simply as “photons
do nothing but go from one electron to another, and reflection
and transmission are really the result of an electron picking up a
photon, ”scratching its head”, so to speak, and emitting a new
photon.”
The plasma of Intergalactic space acts as a transparent medium
and photons of light, as they travel through space, will be
absorbed and re-emitted by the electrons in this plasma. At each
interaction where the momentum of the photon is transferred to
the electrons, there will be a delay. So the electron will recoil
both on absorption and reemission - resulting in inelastic collisions
[15].
A double Mössbauer effect will occur during each interaction
between photon and electron. Some of the energy of the photon
will be transferred to the electron, and since the energy of the
photon has been reduced, the frequency will reduce and the
wavelength will increase. It will have ‘undergone a red-shift’.
Energy lost to an electron [16] during emission or absorption
is equal to
Q2 / 2mec2 , where Q is the energy of the incoming
photon ( hc / λ ),
me is the rest mass of the electron and c is the
speed of light.
This energy calculation must be applied twice for absorption
and re-emission. Hence, total energy lost by a photon is
Q2 / mec2 = h2 / λ2me (energy before interaction) – (energy after)
= h2 / λ2me
hc / λ − hc / λ′ = h2 / λ2me
where λ is the initial wavelength of the photon and λ′ is the
wavelength of the re-emitted photon. Multiplying through by
λ2λ′me and dividing by h gives:
λλ′mec − λ2mec = hλ′
Increase in wavelength is δλ = λ′ − λ , so:
λ(δλ + λ)mec − λ2mec = h(δλ + λ)
⇒ λmecδλ + λ2mec − λ2mec = hδλ + hλ
⇒δλ(λmec − h) = hλ
Summer 2006 GALILEAN ELECTRODYNAMICS 55
Then since
h << λmec ,
δλ = h / mec
On their journey through IG space, the photons will make
many such collisions and undergo an increase in wavelength of
h / mec each time. On this basis red shift becomes a distance
indicator and the distance - red shift relation becomes: photons of
light from galaxies twice as far away will travel twice as far
through the IG medium, make twice as many collisions, and thus
undergo twice the red shift.
Conservation of linear momentum will ensure the linear
propagation of light.
4. The Hubble Law
The process whereby a photon interacts with an electron and
gives all its energy to the electron is known as photo-absorption
and the photo-absorption cross section σ is known from the interaction
of low-energy X-rays with matter [17, 18, 19].
σ = 2reλf2
where
f2 is one of two semi-empirical atomic scattering factors
depending, amongst other things, on the number of electrons in
the atom. For 10 keV to 30 keV X-rays interacting with Hydrogen,
f2 has values approximately between 0 and 1, ‘0’ meaning
that the photon was absorbed and an identical photon re-emitted,
and ‘1’ meaning that the photon has been absorbed and the electron
remains in an excited state [13].
Since the photon frequency of light from distant galaxies is
far removed from the resonant frequency of the electrons in the
plasma of IG space, the photons will always be re-emitted. The
collision cross section for the recoil interaction considered here is,
therefore,
2reλ since
f2 only ‘modulates’
2reλ for the atom.
On their journey through the IG medium, photons of radiation
at the red end of the spectrum will encounter more collisions
than photons at the blue end of the spectrum and thus undergo a
greater total shift in wavelength. For a particular source, the ratio
Δλ / λ will be constant. The collision cross section for a particular
photon will not be constant, but will increase every time it
interacts with an electron. The photon travels shorter and shorter
distances between collisions as it travels further and further, and
it is this phenomenon that makes the red shift relation go nonlinear
for large red shifts. If the initial wavelength is λ, then it
will be (
λ + h / mec ) after one collision, (
λ + 2h / mec ) after two
collisions, (
λ + 3h / mec ) after three collisions and so on.
The mean free path of a photon in the plasma of IG space is
given by
(neσ)−1 or
(2nereλ)−1 since
σ = 2reλ . If the photon
makes a total of N collisions in traveling a distance d , the sum
of all mean free paths is d , or
(2nereλ)−1 + [2nere (λ + h / mec)]−1 + [2nere (λ + 2h / mec)]−1
+[2nere (λ + 3h / mec)]−1 + ... + {2nere [λ + (N − 1)h / mec]}−1
= d
or
λ−1 + (λ + h / mec)−1 + (λ + 2h / mec)−1
+(λ + 3h / mec)−1 + ... + [λ + (N − 1)h / mec]−1
= 2nered
or
λ + x(h / mec) ⎡⎣
⎤⎦
x=0
N−1 Σ −1
= 2nered
Since N is large and
h / mec is small (2.43 × 10-12m), this approximates
to:
λ + x(h / mec) ⎡⎣
⎤⎦
−1
0
N−1 ∫ dx = 2nered
or
1 + h(N − 1) / mecλ = exp(2nehred / mec)
N = λ exp(2nehred / mec)(h / mec)−1 + 1 − λ(h / mec)−1 (1)
The total increase in wavelength, Δλ = Nδλ , or
Nh / mec .
Δλ = λ exp(2nehred / mec) + h / mec − λ
The red shift, z is defined as Δz = Δλ / λ , which implies
z = exp(2nehred / mec) + h / mecλ − 1
Since
h / mecλ is small for all wavelengths longer than X-ray
wavelengths,
z = exp(2nehred / mec) − 1
Using the power expansion of the exponential, i.e.
ex = 1 + x / 1!+ x2 / 2!+ x3 / 3!+ ...
gives:
z = (2nehre / mec)d / 1!+ (2nehre / mec)2d2 / 2!
+(2nehre / mec)3d3 / 3!+ (2nehre / mec)4d4 / 4!+ ...
In Hubble’s Law, the radial speed, v , is given as
v = cz = c(2nehre / mec)d + c(2nehre / mec)2d2 / 2
+c(2nehre / mec)3d3 / 3!+ c(2nehre / mec)4d4 / 4!+ ...
56 Ashmore: Photons, Electrons, Hubble, CMB Vol. 17, SI No. 3
Since
2nehre / mec is very small, the terms involving powers of
two and above can be ignored until d becomes very large. That
is, for nearby galaxies, the expression approximates to
v = (2nehre / me )d
and, as v = Hd ( H being the Hubble constant), comparing the
two equations gives
H = 2nehre / me (2)
Consequently we have:
v = Hd / 1!+ H2d2 / 2!c + H3d3 / 3!c2 + H4d4 / 4!c3
or
v = c[exp(Hd / c) − 1] (3)
and
z = exp(Hd / c) − 1 (4)
It should be noted that this relationship between redshift, z and
distance, d is identical to that first proposed by Zwicky in 1929
[20].
5. Comparison with Experimental Results
This theory predicts by Eq. (2) that
H = 2nehre / me , or
H = 4.10 × 10−18ne s-1.
As cited earlier,
ne ≈ 10-7cm-3 [10,11], and using this value to
predict H gives:
H ≈ 0.41 × 10-18 s-1 ( H ≈ 12 km/s Mpc-1)
This is in good agreement with the experimental values ([8] i.e.,
H = (2.1±0.1) × 10-18 s-1.
To match the experimentally derived H of 2.1 × 10-18s-1 (64±3
km/s Mpc) requires
ne ≈ 5 × 10-7 cm-3 compared to the cited
value of
ne ≈ 10-7cm-3. Light of wavelength 5x10-7 m would have
a collision cross-section of 2.8 × 10-21 m2, and each photon would,
on average, make one collision with an electron in the plasma of
IG space every 75,000 light years.
Published statistical tests on redshift data show that the Hubble
diagram is straight up to z ≈ 0.1, goes nonlinear at z ≈ 0.8, is
quadratic at z ≈ 2.8 – 3.6 and for redshifts above this, follows a
non simple power law ([8, 21, 22, 23]. However, it has recently
been shown [24] that data from the Calan/Tololo Supernova survey
can verify this exponential law with a value of H of 72
km/s per Mpc, i.e. 1.13
hre / me per m3 (
ne = 5.7 × 10−7 cm-3) if
the data is not ‘corrected’ for the relativistic effects of expansion
first. That is the data fits this theory’s predicted exponential
Hubble law provided that we do not assume that the Universe is
expanding and manipulate the data accordingly. This theory’s
predicted exponential Hubble curve is shown in Fig 1 for comparison.
6. Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB)
The recoiling electron will be brought to rest by Coulomb interactions
with all the electrons contained within a Debye sphere
of radius
λD . The decelerating electron will emit transmission
radiation (TR) i.e. bremsstrahlung. There are two emission channels
of the system, ‘intrinsic emission’ by the decelerating electron,
and ‘emission by the medium’, where the background electrons
radiate energy.
Intrinsic radiation arises when the recoiling electron exchanges
a virtual photon with the external field (set up by the
large number of coulomb centers) with momentum q and emits
a quantum with momentum k . The medium or external field in
which the recoiling electron is moving radiates when the virtual
photon of momentum q results in the production of radiation
by background electrons contained within the Debye sphere [25].
The interactions between light and the electrons are nonrelativistic
and the initial and final states of the electron belong to
the continuous spectrum. The photon frequency of the transmission
radiation
fCMB is given by:
hfCMB = 1
2
(p2 − p′2) / me
where
p = mev and
p′ = me v′ are the initial and final momentum
of the electron [26].
The electron returns to rest after absorption and reemission
and so the wavelength of the transmission radiation
λCMB is
given by:
λCMB = 2meλ2c / h
Light of wavelength 5 × 10-7m gives rise to TR of wavelength
0.21m. In IG space, the dominant background photons are microwaves,
having peak energy of 6 × 10-4eV and a photon density
of about 400 per cm-3 [27,28]. In this theory, these background
photons ( λ = 2.1 × 10-3 m) would be given off as TR by a photon
of wavelength 5x10-8 m (i.e. ultra violet radiation) interacting with
an electron.
Figure 1.
Summer 2006 GALILEAN ELECTRODYNAMICS 57
7. Discussion
This proposed theory has successes in predicting values of
H and
λCMB that have the same magnitude as experimental
values. As to whether this proposed interaction makes up the
whole of the red-shift or just a part of it will not be known until
ne has been determined to a greater accuracy. The theory also
shows a relationship between H and ‘
hre / me per cubic meter’
which could explain the remarkable coincidence between their
magnitudes. As scientists, we must always be suspicious of
quantities that are equal but do not appear to be related. The
theory still has to explain the ‘surface brightness test’ [29] and the
time dilation in supernova light curves [30-34].
However, the value of H quoted here (64±3 km/s Mpc-1) is
only one value, and other techniques and other workers give
differing values. A value of 70±7 km/s Mpc-1 can be said to represent
present data from all areas [35], and thus all agree that
values of H lie in the range 1.0 to 1.2 times ‘
hre / me per cubic
meter of space’. With the ‘Big Bang’ theory, H could have had
any initial value (as far as we know) and the effects of gravity
and ‘vacuum energy’ make H time dependent, changing in
magnitude from this original value. How probable is it that the
first time we measure H with some accuracy it has the same
value as ‘
hre / me per cubic meter of space’ (especially when
these constants carry such importance in the scattering of light).
To complicate matters further, the age of the Universe is often
quoted as H−1 , which we now realize to be equal to between 0.8
and 1.0 times
me / hre - this is a test that the Expanding Universe
‘fails’ and now has to explain.
References
[.1.] Burbridge et al. 1971 ApJ, 170, 233 – 240
[.2.] Z. Mari, M. Moles, and J.P. Vigier, Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 18, 269 –
276 (1977).
[.3.] H. Arp, 1987 Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies. (Interstellar
Media, Berkeley)
[.4.] Cohen et al. Ap. J 329, 1–7 (1988).
[.5.] H. Arp, Nature, 346, 807-812 (1990).
[.6.] H. Arp, Ap. J., 430, 74-82 (1994).
[.7.] P. Marmet, Physics Essays, 1 (1) 24-32 (1988).
[.8.] Reiss, Press, Kirshner. Ap. J. 473, 88 – 109 (1996).
[.9.] W. Freedman, et al dhst. symp. 214 - 222F (2003).
[10] P.J.E. Peebles, Principles of Physical Cosmology (1993).
[11] C. Deffayet, D. Harari, JP. Uzan, M. Zaldarriaga, Phs. Rev. D
66d3517D 6 pages (2002).
[12] M. Mitchner, C.H. Kruger, Partially Ionized Gases (Wiley,
p138.USA, 1973).
[13] A.P. French, Special Relativity (p. 128. Nelson. London, 1968a).
[14] R. Feynman, Q.E.D.- the Strange Story of Light and Matter, p. 76.
Penguin.London.1990.
[15] V.B. Berestetskii, E.M. Lifshitz, L.P. Pitaevskii, 1982a Quantum
Electrodynamics Volume 4, second edition, pp. 161 & 221. (Butterworth
Heinemann, Oxford. UK.).
[16] A.P. French, Special Relativity, p. 176-182 (Nelson, London,
1968b).
[17] B.L. Henke, E.M. Gullikson, J.C. Davis, Atomic Data and Nuclear
Data Tables 54, p181-342 (1993).
[18] B.L. Henke, E.M. Gullikson, J.C. Davis, X-Ray Data Booklet, Chapter
1, pp. 44/52 (LBNL/PUB-490 Rev. 2 Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, University of California, Berkely, CA, 2001).
(also at: h t tp://www-cxro.lbl.gov/optical constants/intro.htm l )
[19] J.H. Hubbell, W.J. Veigele, E.A. Briggs, R.T. Brown, D.T. Cromer,
R.J. Howerton, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 4, 471-538 (1975); erratum
in 6, 615-616 (1977).
[20] F. Zwicky, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 773–785 (1929).
[21] Sandage, Kristian, Westphal. Ap. J. 205, 688-695 (1976).
[22] I.E. Segal. MNRAS. 237, 17–37 (1989).
[23] R.M. Soneira, Ap. J. 230, L63–L65 (1979).
[24] K. Khaidarov, http:/bourabai.narod.ru/universum.htm
[25] K.Yu. Platonov, G.D. Fleishman, 2002 Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk
172 (3) 241–300
[26] V.B. Berestetskii, E.M. Lifshitz, L.P. Pitaevskii, Quantum Electrodynamics,
Volume 4, p. 389 (second edition, Butterworth Heinemann,
Oxford, U.K., 1982b).
[27] P.J.E. Peebles, D.N. Schramm, R.G. Kron, E.L. Yurner, Nature 352,
769–776 (1991).
[28] M. Nagano & A.A. Watson, July Reviews of Modern Physics 72 (3)
689-732 (2000).
[29] A. Sandage, Ap. J. 370, 455-473 (1991).
[30] A.G. Reiss, A.V. Filippenko, D.C. Leonard, Astronomical J. 114,722-
729 (1997).
[31] Perlmutter et. al., Nature 391 51–54 (1998).
[32] S. Perlmutter, et al., Ap. J. 517, 565–586 (1999).
[33] A.G. Riess et al., AJ 116, 1009–1038 (1998).
[34] A.G. Reiss et al ., ibid., 560, 49 (2001).
[35] R.P. Krishner, The Extravagant Universe”, p. 98. (Princeton University
Press. Princeton, N.J., 2000).
Correspondence
E.A. Milne and the Universes of Newton
and Relativistic Cosmology
This note reviews the 1930’s work of Milne on the relationship
between the universes of relativistic cosmology and those
that follow from Newtonian theory. The extension to the case of
non-zero pressure is considered also. In each case, any assumptions
made are noted, and the thermodynamic implications of
these are explored in the final Section.
Introduction
In the 1930’s, Milne [1] initiated an investigation into the relationship
between the universes of relativistic cosmology and
those that may be considered using only Newtonian theory.
McCrea [2] later joined in this work. Milne then gathered together
all the results in his book on relativity, gravitation and
world structure [3]. It seems somewhat surprising that this work
does not appear well known today. One reason for this may be