Quote:
Originally Posted by speedfreek
Well, I'm probably out of my depth here, but there has been a lot of work done on the flatness of space in recent years, and it seems as if the observable universe is within 2% of being flat, across a comoving distance of 24 Gpc ( Extending the WMAP Bound on the Size of the Universe). The conclusion is that if space is curved, the radius of that curvature is far larger than our observable universe.
So, if that is the case and the curvature of space isn't the cause of the increase in the apparent angular diameter of galaxies with redshifts of z>1.6, doesn't that blow any ideas of a static universe as described by your model, out of the window? |
If "
the curvature of space isn't the cause of the increase in the apparent angular diameter of galaxies" it would be strange since the shape of the curve fits exactly a static curved space. The only thing that I have to explain yet is why the maximum of the curve is at Z=1.6 since I didn't calculate the exact position of maximum yet. My calculations are done only for nearly flat space (for Z<<1).
If my results for any Z turn out to be true then most likely the space is not expanding and so the results based on expanding universe model wouldn't have much meaning and they must be re-evaluated for the static universe.
For the time being the values of Z in "
The angular size redshift relation" indicate that the radius of the universe is bigger than 4.3 Gpc (and so that density is smaller then 6x10^{-27}kg/m^3 that follows from Hubble constant for the nearly flat space. I'll know all those things when I recalculate my results for a general case (for a curved space). I didn't do it yet since nobody is interested in a model that predicts several things from the first principles only (observation of accelerating expansion, reasonable density of space, near quasars, average size of pieces of dark matter, and even the 'anomalous' acceleration of Pioneers 10 and 11) but is eternal (no Big Bang).
If I manage to fit angular sizes of galaxies it wil be the sixth suxcessful prediction of Einstein's universe model. If not then it'll be its Waterloo
