In article ,
Eric Flesch writes:
A difficulty is that SN DMs are presented with the assumption that
redshift represents time dilation of the SNe.

Assumption? Light curves are consistent with time scales multiplied
by 1+z. Anything very different is inconsistent with the data.

That this yields that the most distant SNe have sub-par
luminosities seems to ring no alarm bells amongst the researchers.

Introducing an non-zero cosmological constant, when nearly everyone
up to then was convinced it was zero, isn't an "alarm bell?"

One of the models that I'm juggling treats time dilation as the
square root of the redshift,

Easily ruled out by the data.

If raw SNe data were published instead of the redshift-processed
stuff,

Raw data are published. For example, Astier et al. (2006 A&A 447,
31) give references to lots of light curves for nearby SNe. Reiss et
al. (2004 ApJ 607, 665; 2007 ApJ 659, 98) give light curves for z1
SNe. There are lots of others, though nowadays many groups publish
only distance moduli, not full light curves. It would take some
searching around to find more light curves, but quite a few are
available. You could probably get more if you asked for them.

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA