New Tired Light

[LYNDON]

Thanks, Lloyd
I know John well. great guy
When was this paper published?
Just a thought
lyndon

[crawler]

JP said in another thread a couple weeks ago that the discussion in this thread considers the Compton effect to be inapplicable to redshift because the effect would supposedly blur light. John Kierein explained that there is no Compton effect blurring problem at http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWR ... 0-2005.htm

I don't understand his explanation well, but hopefully others can understand it better. So I'll quote the abstract and the relevant section about blurring.

"Abstract: A background of very long wavelength radiation is predicted from a static universe with a Compton effect red shift. The interaction of this radiation with massive bodies produces gravity in a “push” process as suggested by Brush."

… "The Blurring Problem
"It has been suggested that the multiple scatterings of the Compton effect should cause stars to be blurred because the effect requires the photon to change direction to produce a red shift. The answer lies in the dual particle and wave nature of light. The Compton effect is entirely explained in terms of the conservation of energy and momentum. It is not dependent on the charge of the target. Compton (6) attributed the presence of an unshifted line in his data (in addition to the shifted line from the electron), to the scattering of the photon from the neutral atom in the target, which had too large a mass to produce a significant shift. The electric and magnetic vectors of the photons are undisturbed by these scatterings, so the ExH vector continues to travel in its original direction, but at a reduced velocity in this direction. This is the familiar effect that light has an ExH group velocity that is less than c in a transparent medium. The index of refraction of the medium is the ratio of the speed of the ExH wavefront in the medium to the speed of the photon in a vacuum. The wavefront of the group velocity is reconstructed from the scattering centers in the Huygens’ secondary wavelets and its wavefront velocity is the vectorial sum of the velocities of the group of photons in the direction of the ExH vector. Reber (10) performed a computerized random walk analysis that showed the photon stayed within a small circle along the direction to the source from multiple scatterings, so the difference between the group velocity and the speed in vacuum is very small for the rare intergalactic medium. The idea that the photon’s momentum-carrying particle-like velocity can be different from the velocity of its wave-like ExH vector explains how a single photon’s ExH vector can produce interference patterns when passing through a diffraction slit. We see the ExH vector of the wave in images and spectra, which contains the information about the source, while energy detectors can detect the energy and momentum of the individual photon. Because the ExH wavefront is reconstructed by the Huygens’ secondary wavelets in the transparent medium, there is no blurring even though there is multiple Compton scattering along the path. The scattering centers act as the centers of the Huygens’ secondary wavelets."

The paper explains the Compton effect mathematically and explains gravity etc as well.

I had a read of 3 of Kierein's papers today, very interesting. I notice that Kierein says that a photon's lost redshift energy increases the mass of an electron by virtue of E=mcc, & that if eventually an electron attains the mass of a neutron then it breaks into an electron & a proton, ie mass & energy are conserved. This would suffer the same problem as old tired light & new tired light in that if energy is conserved then it cant help us to explain Olbers' Paradox.

And i see that Kierein says that that kind of electron to neutron to electron plus proton recycling process will give us new stars. How? Thermodynamics says that in the long run things cool on average, so how can we have an endless procession of new hotspots?

Here is what Marmet says re Kierein's model. I don't understand this but it might apply to new tired light.
On the Interpretation of Spectral Red-Shift in Astrophysics: A Survey of Red-Shift Mechanisms - II
Louis Marmet∗ 24th January 2018 https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.07582
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.07582.pdf
9.6 Compton Effect Interpretation
In Kierein’s model, the Compton effect interpretation of astrophysical red shifts provides the mechanism for intrinsic red shifts of quasi-stellar sources, the solar limb, and other objects. The observed red shift is explained classically by considering the electrons to act as centers of Huygens’ secondary wavelets that reconstruct the wave front. The Compton effect does not depend on the electric charge of the electron, but rather is a consequence of conservation of momentum and energy. Thus, the E× H vector of the photon need not be altered by the Compton process. It is the E×H vector of the wave front that is seen and that contains the information that defines the wave front’s initial velocity vector[92].
Functional relationships:
z =? dA/(DH −dA/2), m−M = 5log10[dL/DH]+C, SB∝ (dA/dL)2, Fτ = 1+z.
Functional relationships for dL, ηz and ∆θ are not available.
Discussion and comments:
This mechanism is very similar to “Forward Scattering by Relativistic Electrons” described in §9.14. However, for photons in the visible the Compton scattering cross section is σ≈ 6.65×10−29m2, much too small by a factor one million for any significant red-shift produced by the low density of electrons in intergalactic space.

[LYNDON]

OK let's try this.
The Compton effect only works if the Photon has more energy than the electron.
If the electron has more KE than the photon then you get inverse Compton scatter where the electron gives energy to the photon.
This gives a blue shift.
Certainly, for radio this is true. So why aren't radio signal blue shifted?
So calculators out.
The 21cm hydrogen line. What's the frequency? c=f(lamda)
How much energy does this photon have? (E = hf)
What would be the temp of plasma be so that the electrons have this much energy on average? (E = 1.5kT)
Answers on a postcard please.
Mainstream gives temps of 50k??
so blueshifted according to Compton.
Cheers
Lyndon.
PS glad we have woken up here

[Michael Mozina]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-28/ ... r/12291788

I won't even bother commenting on how many times the mainstream has reported finding it's "missing baryons" over the last couple of decades, but it's worth watching the video to see how they supposedly "found" their missing baryons this time. Specifically they used FRB's and looked at how each wavelength was affected by it's interaction with the medium of spacetime.

Meanwhile the mainstream *also* wants us to believe that various wavelengths are *not* effected differently by the IGM.

If I recall correctly, Lyndon wrote a paper on the topic of FRB's and how they supported his model. This work would seem to confirm that.

[LYNDON]

Yep. I saw this paper. Need to look into it further but, Michael some of these FRb's are at a redshift of 0.7. I see they have manipulated the data so they include expansion by introducing a (1+z) factor but they seem to have ignored 'time dilation'.
I am still looking and don't want to comment but what do you think Michael?
DM is a pulse broadening. so it should be affected by time dilation if it exists.
so what happened to time dilation? have they forgotten this?
I am still looking for this in their paper
lyndon

[Michael Mozina]

Yep. I saw this paper. Need to look into it further but, Michael some of these FRb's are at a redshift of 0.7. I see they have manipulated the data so they include expansion by introducing a (1+z) factor but they seem to have ignored 'time dilation'.
I am still looking and don't want to comment but what do you think Michael?
DM is a pulse broadening. so it should be affected by time dilation if it exists.
so what happened to time dilation? have they forgotten this?
I am still looking for this in their paper
lyndon

I hope to have some time tomorrow to read through the paper, but wouldn't time dilation simply broaden the *length* of the signal rather than have any effect on the distribution of various wavelengths?

I find it odd that the mainstream willingly admits that different wavelengths *are* affected differently by it's interaction with the medium of spacetime. They've resisted that idea forever, and yet now they seem to be relying upon that premise to explain various features of FRBs. It's interesting.

[LYNDON]

I need time too. and there are several exciting things going on with observations and New tired light.
But I may be completely wrong (I'm not!) But disresion measure is....
You get a single pulse that traverses the universe and just as you send white light through a prism some frequencies arrive before others.
Pulse broadening.
Just like surernovae Ia.
Thats why in fibre optics they use one frequency. White light red travels fastest blue slowest, an individual pulse is broader on reception. Some may say it is time dilation. Others not.
i need time to look at this paper but they seem to be looking at DM (pulse broadening) without the time dilation that an expanding universe would expect.
But..... I need to look at it properly.
Other views?
Cheers
Lyndon