Is the universe expanding? No!

Abstract

Some astronomers claim that there is observational evidence that the universe is expanding. They also claim that there are quasars receding away from us faster than the speed light. The purpose of this article is to show that such ‘observational evidence’ is nothing but misinterpretation of observational data.

Is the universe expanding?

If the universe is expanding uniformly, the recessional velocity (V) of an object far away from us should be proportional to its distance (D) from us. This is commonly known as Hubble’s Law:

V=HD              (where H is Hubble’s constant)

As the object goes further, it recedes with a higher velocity, so its kinetic energy increases. This violates the principle of energy conservation. For example, when a ball is thrown upward, as it gains potential energy, its kinetic energy decreases. However if the universe is expanding, it would imply that both kinetic energy and potential energy increases simultaneously.

Proponents of perpetual motion machines have never been able to create a working model. Likewise, physicists and astronomers will never be able to prove that Perpetua mobilia of the first kind exists in observation of far away objects.

Interpretation of the CMB

Some people have interpreted the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, a Planck spectrum of 2.7K to be actually radiation from hydrogen of 3000K that is receding from us at more than 1000 times the speed of light. They claim that this hydrogen formed when the universe was cold enough for electrons to recombine with protons to form hydrogen atoms. If this claim were true, we should see the Lyman and Balmer series redshifted by a similar factor superposed on a Planck spectrum. However, we have only observed a pure Planck spectrum, without any of the spectral features that are observed during recombination.

A natural interpretation for the CMB is that it is radiation from objects far away from stars. For example, consider solar particles ejected from the sun. As these particles keep moving away from the sun, what will be their steady state temperature? When they are sufficiently far away from the sun, they will receive starlight. The starlight that they receive will be re-radiated out as microwave radiation. Using certain assumptions, Eddington has shown that the average temperature of space is 3.18K.

The 2^nd law of thermodynamics states that heat always flows from hotter to colder objects. The temperature of space is the lowest temperature that particles can cool down to as they are ejected from stars and transported to lonely parts of space far away from stars.

Interpretation of high redshifts from quasars

The interpretation of high redshifts are ambiguous. If we don’t see the Lyman or Balmer series, there is no way we can be sure that we are observing a particular hydrogen line. The expected hydrogen lines are not seen in the spectra of redshifted galaxies. The reason we expect to see hydrogen lines is because hydrogen lines can be clearly seen in most stars.

For example, Schneider et. Al. (AJ Vol 121, pg 1232) claimed that quasar SDSSp J113559.94+002422.8 had z=4.04. We would expect to see the Hydrogen Lyman beta line at 1025.18*(1+4.04) A or 5166.9A.

The following graph is from Astronomical Journal Vol 121 pg 1235. I have edited the graph to show where the expected Hydrogen Lyman Beta line would be, but that line does not exist.

If only one of the many Hydrogen lines can be seen at the expected position, we cannot make any conclusion. For example, if I can see a line at 6563A, the most natural interpretation would be that this is the Hydrogen Balmer Alpha Line not Doppler shifted. But someone else can claim that this is a very a high redshifted Hydrogen Lyman Alpha Line with z=4.4, since (1+4.4)*Hydrogen Lyman Alpha Line = Non Doppler shifted H-Balmer Alpha Line.

We can easily find another line due another element having another redshift (or blue shift), at that wavelength!

Here is another example where they claimed z=4.49:

The Lyman Alpha and beta lines are at 1215.67A and 1025.18A. Multiply this with (1+4.49), and the expected positions would be 6674A and 5628A. Again, we don't see what we expect.