Cosmology View

My views on Cosmology and Physics

site navigation menu


Claims by HDF

Claims About Hubble Deep Field z Values Demonstrate Cosmology Remains Confined To 2-D Or The Line Of Sight And Is Not Valid 3-D Physics

In general physics, velocity is measured by the change in an object's position over a time. The proper velocity is a value with a 3-D vector independent of any observer, while a line of sight velocity can cause a wrong assumption by another observer.

Cosmology must not be confined to only 2-D or linear line of sight measurements to be considered a valid part of 3-D Physics.

The motivation for this post was this quote from an Eric Lerner 2014 study of the HDF galaxy redshifts having z>5:

" Therefore, if the Universe is not expanding, the redshift of light with increasing distance must be caused by some other phenomena – something that happens to the light itself as it travels through space."

The phrase "something happens" should never occur in a paper after elementary school.

HST imaged thousands of faint galaxies in very long exposure images called the Hubble Deep Fields. HST claims to have measured redshifts of z > 5 in these faint galaxies.
These z redshift values from HST are are not consistent with the z calculation for other objects  Currently, using z for a value assumes  z is the ratio of:

a) a change in a specific wavelength to

b) its correct value.

The phrase "something happens" apparently is a photometric redshift.

Astronomers developed a method of calculating a galaxy redshift without the tedious process of analyzing a spectrum.

The new method is called photometric redshift.

Excerpt from Wikipedia:

A photometric redshift is an estimate for the recession velocity of an astronomical object such as a galaxy or quasar, made without measuring its spectrum. The technique uses photometry (that is, the brightness of the object viewed through various standard filters, each of which lets through a relatively broad passband of colours, such as red light, green light, or blue light) to determine the redshift, and hence, through Hubble's law, the distance, of the observed object.

(excerpt end)

Photometric redshift - Wikipedia


The stated goal is the recession velocity, which is always confined to the line of sight.
The color filters enable finding a similar visible wavelength distribution  in a different segment of the spectrum.  This comparison of narrow wavelength sets in the continuum cannot reveal any aspect (like value or direction) of the actual velocity of the galaxy.

This exercise with wavelength segments cannot reveal a velocity. This is a false claim. To confirm it, one must actually measure the proper velocity of the galaxy having the assigned velocity. One can be certain this was never done with any of the faint HDF objects.

This z being calculated from a line of sight spectrum can  never be a 3-D value.

Hubble's Law is mentioned and it is also invalid 3-D physics. There is no galaxy in the universe with a measured proper velocity to have a valid numerator for Hubble's Constant HC. When Cepheids are used for the distance calculation, the value is always from the statistical averaging resulting in significant margin of error for HC denominator.

Hubble's Law assumes a galaxy velocity can be found using the redshift of an atom in the line of sight, based on the Doppler effect.  The Doppler effect is explicitly only in the line of sight and cannot reveal any transverse motion, so it cannot be 3-D.

The notable problems in cosmology for valid Physics in 3-D:

a) Claiming a galaxy velocity requires its actual measurement, which requires many precise position measurements over a long duration to detect its motion in 3-D.

Until cosmology actually has a galaxy having a measured 3-D velocity, cosmology most certainly cannot make claims of a universe expansion, nor can it claim to measure a velocity in a manner suitable for valid 3-D physics.

Not only is cosmology limited to 2-D or the line of sight, but cosmology is a pseudo-science, lacking evidence for its claims. The concepts in cosmology having the word bang, dark, or hole are problematic.

Perhaps I over-reacted to "something happens"

I cannot find the link to the Lerner paper...

date posted 07/13/2021