Observational evidence against expanding universe in MNRAS

[elerner]

For each and every GALEX MIS3-SDSSDR5 galaxy, how did you determine the "angular radius"?

The GALEX catalog provides a 50% flux radius--half light radius--for both FUV and NUV. We used those for this calculation. So, yes first we eliminated the >0.4 stellarity entries and then we plotted the numbers. there was a sharp fall-off at the minimum measurable radius.

 

[Jean Tate]

Thanks.

The GALEX catalog provides a 50% flux radius--half light radius--for both FUV and NUV. We used those for this calculation. So, yes first we eliminated the >0.4 stellarity entries and then we plotted the numbers. there was a sharp fall-off at the minimum measurable radius.

Searching the GALEX Schema Browser, I found the following Column names, Units, and Descriptions which seem to match your description (the Tables in which they appear in curly brackets):

NUV_FLUX_RADIUS_2, {blank}, Fraction-of-light radius ( 0.5000) {PhotoObjAll, VisitPhotoObjAll}
FUV_FLUX_RADIUS_2, {blank}, Fraction-of-light radius ( 0.5000) {PhotoObjAll, VisitPhotoObjAll}
fuv_ncat_flux_radius_2, {blank}, FUV FLUX_RADIUS #2 (-fd-ncat)(px)[0.50] {PhotoObjAll, VisitPhotoObjAll}

Can you please confirm that what you used was NUV_FLUX_RADIUS_2 and FUV_FLUX_RADIUS_2?

L14 has HUDF and SDSS references, but apparently no GALEX ones. Only if you can fit it in (otherwise feel free to skip this question), may I ask why you did not include a GALEX reference?

The sentence immediately after the one I quoted in my last post is ("this cutoff" refers to "the lower-cutoff angular radius"):

We took this cutoff to be the point at which the abundance per unit angular radius falls to 1/5 of the modal value.

I guess "abundance" means something like number, or relative frequency. For GALEX - NUV and FUV - what were the units of angular radius that you used? Why did you choose "1/5 of the modal value"?

This seems - to me - to be strange and arbitrary.