Static Universe

Observational evidence favors a static universe.
A major difference between cosmologies in an expanding universe
and that in a static universe is time dilation. Whereas a tired
light process could explain the energy loss of photons it cannot
produce the effect of time dilation on the rate of arrival of
photons.
In an expanding universe cosmology the equations for the distance
modulus and for the angular size include a term, (1+z), to allow for
time dilation. Since the similar equations for a static-universe
cosmology do include this term its presence (or absence) makes
a suitable test for determining whether the universe is expanding.

Recently I have published three papers in the Journal of Cosmology
that investigates this proposal. The references a
http://journalofcosmology.com/crawford1.pdf: 2022, JCos, 13, ?
http://journalofcosmology.com/crawford2.pdf: 2022, JCos, 13, ?
http://journalofcosmology.com/crawford3.pdf: 2022, JCos, 13, ?
A single file version that is essentially identical to the three
papers
is available at arXiv 1009.0953: http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.0953
It includes a table of contents,hyperlinks and several minor
corrections.
Be warned it has 96 pages and is about 1MB in length.

Part 1 shows that for all of the topicsTolman) surface brightness,
angular size, type 1a supernovae, gamma ray bursts, galaxy luminosity
distribution and quasar luminosity distribution the data are
consistent with a static universe. A Big Bang cosmology is
only consistent with the data if there is evolution both in angular
size and luminosity (for all objects) that in effect removes the time
dilation term. Since evolution is a local characteristic and has
nothing to do with the expansion this would be a remarkable
coincidence. Furthermore galaxy collisions and interactions should
reset the evolution clock for a significant number of galaxies.
Also quasar variability shows no dependence on redshift.

Although Part 1 used a static cosmology, curvature cosmology,
as a foil the results are valid for any reasonable static cosmology.
Parts 2 and 3 describe curvature cosmology that is consistent
with the observations and can explain part of the background X-ray
observations, the cosmic microwave background radiation and many
other observations. It accurately predicts the temperature of the
cosmic plasma, the Hubble constant and makes a good prediction of
the CMBR temperature. Finally it could explain the solar neutrino
deficiency and it can explain the anomalous acceleration of
Pioneer 10.

Regardless of the validity of curvature cosmology the observational
data strongly suggests that the cosmological paradigm be changed from
Big Bang to that for a static universe that has no inflation,
no dark matter and no dark energy.
David F. Crawford
(remove the bird)