Scott and Olbers Paradox

[stargazer1985]

Scott explaining why the sky is not infinitely bright: "The sum stops (is truncated) at a radial distance of some 600+ light years for the typical star (and somewhere beyond that for even the brightest ones). There is an upper limit on the absolute brightness of a single star; there is no such thing as an infinitely brilliant star."

600+ lightyears for the typical star, ok.. and he states we can see a little more than 8000 stars with the naked eye.

But if redshift index is not a reliable indicator of distance, how exactly do we know how far away these stars really are since we cannot travel thence to confirm our measurements?

How can we calculate these distances? Can we even?

[Michael Mozina]

Scott explaining why the sky is not infinitely bright: "The sum stops (is truncated) at a radial distance of some 600+ light years for the typical star (and somewhere beyond that for even the brightest ones). There is an upper limit on the absolute brightness of a single star; there is no such thing as an infinitely brilliant star."

600+ lightyears for the typical star, ok.. and he states we can see a little more than 8000 stars with the naked eye.

But if redshift index is not a reliable indicator of distance, how exactly do we know how far away these stars really are since we cannot travel thence to confirm our measurements?

How can we calculate these distances? Can we even?

About the best you could hope to do is try to estimate an "average" redshift/distance formula but you'd also have to assume that space is relatively homogeneous in terms of intergalactic density, and that seems rather far fetched IMO. I think Lerner's work might offer you a way to try to estimate distances to various galaxies in a static universe based on brightness.

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _From_HUDF
https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.0275

[nick c]

For reference here is the link to Scott's article:
https://electric-cosmos.org/Olber.pdf

But if redshift index is not a reliable indicator of distance, how exactly do we know how far away these stars really are since we cannot travel thence to confirm our measurements?

Cosmic redshift would be used as a measure of the distance to objects on the galactic scale, for example: galaxies outside of our Local Group, quasars, Bl Lac objects, etc, (Arp presented a mountain of evidence that disputes that.)

But a star 600 light years away would be in our own galaxy and redshift would not be used to measure its distance from Earth. Six hundred light years is in our galactic neighborhood. Nearby stars are measured by the Stellar Parallax method. This method's accuracy decreases with distance but should be reasonably accurate for a star at a distance of 600 ly.