Shape of the Universe: Is it Infinite or Finite?

[bapowell]

Thank you for that summary and your politeness. I have more recently read that a proposed 'GUT' ('Subquantum Kinetics' 1994 - Paul A. LaViolette PhD.) does better than the SM 'expanding universe' theory on multiple cosmological tests when compared with the 'tired-light' hypothesis. Have you read this anywhere?

No. Which tests?

 

[TROU]

No. Which tests?

No. Which tests?

The Galaxy Number Count - Totani, "Near-infrared faint galaxies in the Subaru Deep Field".
The Tolman Galaxy Surface Brightness Test. Paper IV.
The "Galaxy Angular Separation vs Galaxy Cluster Redshift Graph" data taken from Hickson and Adams "evidence for cluster evolution".
The Hubble Diagram Test. data from Kristian, Sandage and Westphal.

 

[rootone]

Thank you for that summary and your politeness. I have more recently read that a proposed 'GUT' ('Subquantum Kinetics' 1994 - Paul A. LaViolette PhD.) does better than the SM 'expanding universe' theory on multiple cosmological tests when compared with the 'tired-light' hypothesis. Have you read this anywhere?

The 'Tired light' hypothesis is generally no longer considered as a reasonable explanation for cosmological red shift.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm
The currently most accepted model is that there is a 'Dark energy', causing the (accelerating) expansion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model
We don't know what the energy is, but this model fits the observations, tired light does not.

 

[bapowell]

The Galaxy Number Count - Totani, "Near-infrared faint galaxies in the Subaru Deep Field".
The Tolman Galaxy Surface Brightness Test. Paper IV.
The "Galaxy Angular Separation vs Galaxy Cluster Redshift Graph" data taken from Hickson and Adams "evidence for cluster evolution".
The Hubble Diagram Test. data from Kristian, Sandage and Westphal.

Links would be helpful, but I was able to find a few of these papers. None of them mention tired light or LaViolette's work. Can you provide references in which either of these two theories are shown to provide better fits to the data than the concordance LCDM model?

 

[Chronos]

TROU, your references appear to be an unvetted collection of popular press and journal publications of unqualified merit or relevance. Publication does not confer any measure of validity without peer review - i.e., concurrence by recognized experts in the field.