Cosmic Dust and the 2010 Lindau Nobel Meeting on Elementary Particles in Cosmology

Background
The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is of interest to astronomers because elementary particles are thought related to Big Bang cosmology through dark matter and energy in an expanding Universe. Indeed, the recent Lindau Meeting discussed the topic “Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and the LHC.” See http://www.lindau-nobel.org/PublicMeetingProgram.AxCMS?M …  

Scientists George Smoot and John Mather who won the Nobel prize for the Cosmic Background Explorer were joined by physicists David Gross, Carlo Rubbia, Gerard t’Hooft, and Martinus Veltman. Consistent with the theme of the Lindau Meeting on cosmology, Nobel Laureate George Smoot stated:

“The properties of the tiniest particles should dictate what the Universe looks like…”

Meeting Discussion
With regard to dark matter, Smoot himself did not follow through by describing the mechanism by which tiny particles dictate what the Universe looks like, yet claimed cosmologists can model the Universe with gas, photons, and neutrinos giving a Universe of mostly dark matter of which only about 27 percent is visible, while dark energy is expanding the Universe at an accelerated rate. See  http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/07/astronomy-an …

Introducing himself as “I’m a measuring kind of guy,” Mather also ignored Smoot’s comment avoiding the mechanism by which tiny particles dictate what we observe in the Universe and instead discussed how astronomers were pinning down the properties of dark matter by gravitational lensing surveys that quantity the distribution of dark matter in the Universe. Ibid

Only Veltman called dark matter “bullsh*t,” but then like Smoot and Mather did not identify the mechanism of how Smoot’s tiny particles dictate what we see and instead proposed an alternative dark matter candidate MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics). Only Rubbia connected with Smoot’s statement by suggesting the tiny particles are Weak Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) of dark matter in sterile neutrinos, a heavy version of the three familiar flavors of this particle. Ibid

Cosmic Dust
Cosmology is only beginning to recognize that redshift in submicron cosmic dust significantly alters how the Universe looks to us. Redshift in cosmic instead of by the Doppler effect allows one to entertain the cosmology of a static Universe without any need for dark matter and energy.  Given that our knowledge of the Universe by seeing is unequivocally altered by absorption in cosmic dust, Smoot’s comments may be rephrased by:

”The properties of cosmic dust should dictate what the Universe looks like…”

Yet the Lindau Meeting excluded discussion on cosmic dust in cosmology, instead focusing on dark matter based on the anticipated discovery of exotic WIMPs from the LHC experiments. But cosmic dust is of greater importance to cosmology because light from a distant galaxy is redshift upon absorption in cosmic dust without the Doppler shift. Therefore, the redshift Hubble measured in 1929 was most likely caused by cosmic dust having nothing to do with an expanding Universe. Hence, there is no need for dark energy to explain an expanding Universe that is not expanding. Moreover, MOND and surveys of gravitational lensing that support the presence of dark matter are also negated by cosmic dust. See http://www.nanoqed.org at “Dark Energy and Cosmic Dust” and “Reddening and Redshift,” 2009; and “Cosmology by Cosmic Dust -Update,” 2010.

QED induced Redshift in Cosmic Dust
QED induced redshift in cosmic dust is a consequence of QM constraints placed on the conservation of absorbed energy in submicron particles. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics and QM for quantum mechanics.  QM precludes submicron cosmic dust particles (DPs) from having the specific heat capacity necessary to conserve absorbed galaxy photons by an increase in temperature. Instead, conservation proceeds by the creation of QED photons from the total internal reflection (TIR) confinement of the absorbed galaxy photon within the solid DP. But the TIR allows those QED photons normal to the DP surface to leak out redshifted relative to the absorbed galaxy photon – all of this occurring without the Universe expanding. Ibid

How DPs redshift galaxy light may be understood from QM by the QED induced creation of photons of wavelength Lo by supplying EM energy to a QM box with walls separated by Lo/2. For a galaxy photon absorbed in a spherical DP of diameter D, the QED photons are created at a wavelength Lo = 2nD, where n is the index of refraction. In the Universe, the DPs are generally amorphous silicate having n = 1.45 and diameters D < 0.5 microns. For D = 0.25 microns, the QED created photons has Lo = 0.745 microns, and therefore an absorbed Lyman-alpha photon having L = 0.1216 microns is redshift to Z = (Lo – L)/L. ~ 5. If the QED redshift in DPs is interpreted by the Doppler shift, the galaxy recession velocity is 95 % of the speed of light when in fact the galaxy is not receding at all. Ibid

Conclusions
QED induced redshift holds in question the Hubble redshift as proof the Universe is expanding beginning with the Big Bang suggesting a return to a static Universe in dynamic equilibrium once proposed by Einstein. Moreover, astrophysical measurements that rely on Hubble redshift by the Doppler effect grossly over-estimate the rotational velocities of spiral galaxies are far faster than allowed by Newtonian mechanics, thereby suggesting the presence of dark matter to hold the galaxies together. Indeed, redshift in cosmic dust instead of by the Doppler effect answers most of the outstanding problems in cosmology Ibid. The conclusions are.

Dark Energy not needed to explain a Universe that is not expanding
Period-luminosity relation qualified in Cepheid stars
Dark Matter not involved in Gravitational Lensing
Galaxy Rotation Problem resolved without Dark Matter
No need for MOND to explain Galaxy Rotation Problem
Tolman Surface Brightness reduction by (1 + Z)
Explain the Independence of Redshift in Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effect
Light Curve dilation in Supernovae Explosions

The Lindau Meeting on cosmology by elementary particles is trumped by cosmic dust. There is no connection between any findings forthcoming from the LHC on how WIMPS or other exotic particles are related to dark matter. Smoot’s comment on how tiny particles dictate what the Universe looks like was misinterpreted by all of the attendees including Smoot himself because no one considered the tiny particles to be submicron cosmic dust. Hubble’s redshift by the Doppler Effect held for 80 years needs to be set aside and superseded by QED induced redshift in cosmic dust, an unpleasant, but necessary action by astronomers if cosmology is to move forward.

Redshift by Cosmic Dust trumps Hubble and Tired Light Theories

Hubble and Tired Light Theories
In 1929, Hubble formulated a law that the velocity of a receding galaxy is proportional to its distance to the Earth. The Hubble relation held in all directions suggesting to de Sitter that the Universe was consistent with the expansive metric of Einsteins theory of general relativity. However, others thought the Hubble redshift was caused by mechanisms without Universe expansion. Zwicky proposed that galaxy photons redshift because they lose energy as they scatter upon collision with cosmic dust particles (DPs) before entering the Earth, a redshift theory called Tired Light. See www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tired_light. Recently, Ashmore extended Tired Light to loss of energy in galaxy photons upon collisions with electrons. See www.lyndonashmore.com/.

Objections to Tired Light theories are generally based on the argument that scattered light should blur the galaxy image, and therefore are dismissed because the images are clear and not blurred. See www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm. However, claims that Tired Light theories do not explain all the predictions of Big Bang cosmology should be set aside because there is no mandate in science that any theory must totally stand alone, e.g., the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) in the current epoch may be simply explained by the static Universe in the current epoch having nearly uniform temperature everywhere of about 2.726K.

Alternative QED Induced Light Theory
An alternative to the Hubble and Tired Light theories is the theory of QED induced redshift caused by the absorption of galaxy light in DPs. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics. See http://www.nanoqed.org/ at “Dark Energy and Cosmic Dust” and “Reddening and Redshift”, 2009. QED theory asserts the redshift Z is spontaneous upon the absorption of light. Here Z = (Lo – L)/L, where L is the wavelength of galaxy light and Lo is the wavelength of the light emitted from the DP.

QED induced redshift may be understood by treating the absorbed galaxy photon as electromagnetic (EM) energy confined within the DP geometry. Recall from quantum mechanics (QM) that photons of wavelength Lo are created by supplying EM energy to a QM box with walls separated by Lo/2. For a spherical DP of diameter D, the QED photons are produced at a wavelength Lo = 2Dn, where n is the index of refraction which for the typical DP of amorphous silicate has n = 1.45. Hence, DPs having D = 0.25 microns redshift the Lyman-alpha line at 0.121 microns to a red line at 0.725 microns with Z ~ 5. If the QED induced redshift in DPs at Z = 5 is erroneously interpreted by the Hubble law, the galaxy recession velocity is 95 % of the speed of light when in fact the Universe is not expandingl.

Tolman Test and Supernovae Spectra Aging
Shortly after the Hubble discovery, Tolman devised a test to distinguish between a static and expanding Universe. See www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman_surface_brightness_test. In a static Universe, the light intensity of an object drops inversely with the square of its distance from the observer, but the apparent area of the object also drops inversely with the square of the distance, so the brightness given as the intensity per unit area of the object is independent of the distance. However, if the Universe is expanding, astronomers claim the brightness is reduced by the fourth power of (1+Z). In 2001, Lubin and Sandage showed the redshift gave a reduction in brightness by the cube of (1+Z). Although the brightness is not reduced by the fourth power of (1+Z), the conclusion was the brightness test is consistent with the reality of Universe expansion.

However, there is a problem with the Tolman test because the brightness B of an object in the static Universe is not assumed reduced by absorption in DPs. By QED theory, a single interaction with a DP emits light at wavelength Lo = (1+Z)L. Therefore the brightness Bo at the observer is Bo = hc/Lo = hc/L(1+Z) = B/(1+Z), or the object brightness is reduced by (1+Z), but not by the cube of (1+Z) as measured. Closer agreement is found for multiple interactions, e.g., for N interactions, B drops inversely with the product (1+Z1)(1+Z2)…(1+ZN), where ZK is the redshift for interaction K.

The Tolman test aside, the aging of Supernovae spectra is found to drop inversely with (1+Z) at the observer. See Blondin et al. at www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm. For spectra defined by brightness/unit area, Bo = B divided by the respective wavelength. Equivalence is found by Bo/Lo = B/L(1+Z). Hence, QED theory for the spectra at the Supernovae is consistent with the measured spectra showing an inverse drop by (1+Z).

Time Dilation of Supernova Light Curves
Tired Light theories are claimed unable to explain the observed time dilation of Supernova light curves at high Z redshift, i.e., nearby supernovae that take 20 days to decay will take 40 days to decay when observed at redshift Z =1 See e.g., www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm. However, redshift in the QED theory differs from Tired Light in that it is proportional to the number of DPs in the light path that in turn is proportional to the total dust mass emitted in the Supernova explosion. Time dilation in observing Supernova explosions is nothing more thermal cooling of the dust mass, i.e, at high Z the Supernovae having larger dust mass takes a longer time to cool than at low Z. Hence, QED redshift theory based on DPs is consistent with Supernova light curves.

ISM Lights
A more compelling argument that DPs are the source of redshift of galaxy light is found on a far larger scale everywhere by the visible (VIS) light observed throughout the Universe. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation is known to permeate the Universe including the interstellar medium (ISM). Indeed, astronomers explain the infrared (IR) spectra measured in the ISM by the thermal emission following the increase in temperature in DPs upon the absorption of single UV photons. But this is unlikely, because an increase in DP temperature is negated by the QM restriction that the specific heat of DPs vanishes. Also unlikely is VIS light produced in DPs by photoluminescence (PL) because a single UV photon is more likely to be absorbed anywhere in the DP than at the PL color center.

Without thermal emission and PL, the IR and VIS spectra can only be produced by QED induced redshift upon the absorption of single UV photons in DPs. VIS colors in the ISM require DPs having D < 0.5 microns while IR spectra depend on larger DPs found in molecular clouds. Similar to the Hubble redshift of galaxy light, the vivid ISM colors observed are produced without Universe expansion, e.g., single UV photons at 0.15 microns absorbed in a D = 0.125 to 0.25 micron silicate DPs, blue to red light corresponding to wavelengths from 0.362 to 0.725 microns is produced at redshift Z from 1.41 to 3.83. ISM light does not depend Universe expansion.

Conclusions

1. The measured Hubble redshift Z is caused by DPs and has nothing to do with an expanding Universe. DPs make moot the existence of dark energy because it is no longer necessary in a static Universe.

2. Tired Light theories based on scattering are likely to produce blurring of the object image. QED theory based on absorption and not scattering do not produce blurring.

3. QED theory does not agree with brightness reduction to the cube of (1+Z) in the Tolman test, but is found in agreement with the (1+Z) reduction in aged Supernovae spectra.

4. QED theory based on redshift of DPs is consistent with the observed time dilation of Supernova light curves.

5. The vivid VIS color variations in the ISM are caused by variations in DP diameter D and far less likely by PL from the chemical composition of the DPs. Larger DPs necessary to produce the IR spectra are found in molecular clouds.

Redshift in cosmic dust resolves the galaxy rotation problem without dark matter and MOND

Background  The Tully-Fisher relation based on Newtonian mechanics requires the rotation velocity of spiral galaxies to vary inversely with the square root of the distance from the galactic center. See http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Tully-Fisher_relation  However, observations of galaxy rotation velocities obtained with the Doppler shift show the velocity is nearly constant with distance suggesting the presence of a substantial amount of dark matter in a halo surrounding the galactic center. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve

Dark matter halos are an important feature of the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (LCDM) model of the Universe, but dark matter lacks experimental verification, and remains an unsolved problem in physics. The question may be asked:

Is dark matter responsible for the difference between galaxy rotation velocities given by Newtonian mechanics and those observed, or is there another explanation?  

MOND
MOND asserts the galaxy rotation problem may be resolved by assuming the physics of gravity changes at the large scale allowing rotation velocities in galaxies to remain constant with distance from the galactic center instead of decreasing as required by Newtonian mechanics. But like dark matter, MOND lacks experimental verification. Moreover, MOND requires motions of galaxies around a galactic center, and therefore fails to explain the collapse of cluster galaxies having motion emanating from  other points. See Clowe, et al. ApJ Letters, 648, L109, 2006 in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics. However, the failure of MOND to explain collapsing galaxies is not proof dark matter exists, as other explanations are possible.

Redshift in Cosmic Dust
Redshift in cosmic dust claims the galaxy rotation problem is caused by Doppler shift and is resolved by replacing the latter with a theory called QED induced radiation. See “Dark Energy and Cosmic Dust” at http://www.nanoqed.org  By this theory, the validity of the Doppler shift as the measure of velocities in the Universe is held in question by the redshift that accompanies the absorption of light in submicron dust particles (DPs). It is important to note that the redshift upon the absorption of light in DPs differs from scattering in that the latter does not redshift light. The impact of DPs on velocity measurements in cosmology is significant in that the very first redshift measurements by Hubble giving recession velocities of galaxies are refuted leaving the notion of an expanding Universe without experimental verification. Astronomers are therefore required to find other ways of proving Universe expansion or abandon the cosmology of the expanding Universe including the Big Bang. No matter how unpleasant these options may be, the fact remains the Universe is only observed by light, and therefore the significance of absorption of galactic light by cosmic dust may by default require astronomers to return to the cosmolog of a static Universe once proposed by Einstein.

Indeed, the redshift measurements by Hubble and interpreted by the Doppler shift were most likely caused by QED induced redshift and have nothing to do with the recession velocities of galaxies. In fact, cosmological events that produce large amounts of debris have large redshifts because of the proportionality of submciron DPs that form to the debris produced. In this regard, QED induced redshift of galaxy light in DPs observed by Hubble may be almost insignificant compared to the large quantities of  DPs produced in Supernovae Type 1a explosions. See http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/8209-redshift-cosmic-dust-trumps-hubble-and-tired-light-theories-26678.html The interpretation of Supernova light curves and respective time dilation therefore cannot proceed without considering the absorption of light in DPs.

Cosmic Dust and Galaxy Rotation Curves
Similar to light from receding galaxies and Supernovae explosions, astronomers use the Doppler shift of light from different parts of a spiral galaxy to determine its rotation velocities. In the plane of rotation, the galaxy is described by spiral arms of stars emanating from the galactic center while the edge view shows a bulge at the center of a thin disk.  In edge view, galaxy rotation consists of half of the disk moving away from us leaving a trailing cloud of DPs in the light path to us. However, there are far less DPs present in the half moving toward us. Our edge view of a rotating galaxy is therefore altered by an asymmetric cloud of DPs.

Light from the galaxy passing through the asymmetric cloud of DPs undergoes more QED induced redshift on the half moving away than that moving toward us. Away from the galaxy, the DPs in the light path to us induce the same QED redshift for both halves of the disk, but compared to the cloud of trailing DPs may be neglected. The asymmetry in QED induced redshift if interpreted as a Doppler shift suggests the galaxy is rotating faster than it actually is. Since the trailing cloud of DPs is always present at any distance from the galactic center, the galaxy rotation appears to be flat with distance. By QED induced redshift, the galaxy rotation problem is resolved by treating the Doppler shift as anomaly of cosmic dust having nothing to do with rotation velocities, thereby allowing the dynamics of spiral galaxies to be governed solely by Newtonian mechanics.

Conclusions
1.  Cosmic dust refutes velocities determined by Doppler shift leaving Newtonian mechanics alone to govern the Tully-Fisher relation for spiral galaxy rotation curves. Rotation velocities inferred from Doppler shifts should be not used in explaining galaxy dynamics, and instead treated as anomolies of cosmic dust . There is no need for dark matter and MOND to explain the galaxy rotation problem.
2. The failure of the LCDM model to explain galaxy rotation curves began with Hubble who proposed the observed redshift of galaxies be interpreted as recession velocities given by the Doppler shift instead of by absorption in cosmic dust.
3. Astronomers may want to consider abandoning the LCDM model in favor of a static Universe once proposed Einstein.

Olbers paradox is explained by cosmic dust instead of the Big Bang

Background

The German astronomer Heinrich Olbers in 1823 is credited with the paradoxical observation that the night sky is dark, but in a static infinite universe the night sky should be bright. Indeed, Olbers paradox is often cited as evidence for the Big Bang theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers’_paradox

In a static infinite Universe, the observer would see a nearby galaxy in one region of the sky and another galaxy in a more distant region. Although the nearer galaxy would appear brighter, there would be more galaxies in the more distant region of the sky. Therefore, the total light from the nearer region of the sky would be the same as that from the more distant region. No matter where the observer looks in the sky, the total light coming from every line-of-sight would be the same. Olbers paradox concludes the night sky should be bright and not dark if the Universe is infinite.    http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/caryl/a10/lec15_2d.html

Astronomers explain Olbers paradox as an artifact of a finite and expanding Universe In the Big Bang. By Hubble’s law, distant galaxies in an expanding Universe are moving away from us faster than nearby galaxies, i.e., a galaxy at distance d from us moving away at velocity V = Hd, where H is Hubble’s constant. Hence, light from distant galaxies is redshift so much that visible light is moved to the infrared and microwave regions that are invisible to the observer.

An alternative to the Big Bang explanation of Olbers paradox is that the static and infinite Universe is not transparent, and the light from distant galaxies is absorbed by cosmic dust, so that there is a bound on the distance from which light can reach the observer. However, astronomers dismiss this explanation based on the second law of thermodynamics that states there can be no material hotter than its surroundings that does not give off radiation. Hence, there is no material which can be uniformly distributed through space and yet able to absorb galaxy light without increasing in temperature. Therefore, the cosmic dust would heat up and soon reradiate the energy that again results in intense uniform radiation as bright as the collective of the galaxies themselves, once again giving a bright night sky which is not observed.  http://www.crystalinks.com/olber’s_paradox.html

Problem

The problem with Big Bang explanation of Olbers paradox is that the Universe is unequivocally not transparent because of ubiquitous submicron cosmic dust, and therefore the distance from which galaxy light can reach the observer is indeed bounded. The second law is not violated, however. In fact, QED induced redshift based on QM allows submicron cosmic dust to redshift visible light to infrared and microwaves regions of the EM spectrum without increasing in temperature. QM stands for quantum mechanics, QED for quantum electrodynamics, and EM for electromagnetic. Therefore, a static infinite Universe without the Big Bang explains Olbers paradox.

QED redshift in Cosmic Dust instead of Hubble’s Doppler shift

QED induced redshift is a consequence of QM constraints placed on the conservation of energy in submicron dust particles. QM precludes cosmic dust from having the specific heat capacity necessary to conserve absorbed galaxy photons by an increase in temperature. Photons are created from the EM confinement of the absorbed galaxy photon within the dust particle. See http://www.nanoqed.org at “Dark Energy and Cosmic Dust” and “Reddening and Redshift,” 2009.

QED induced redshift may be understood from QM by the creation of photons of wavelength Lo upon supplying EM energy to a QM box with walls separated by Lo/2. For a galaxy photon absorbed in a spherical particle of diameter D, the QED photons are created at a wavelength Lo = 2nD, where n is the index of refraction of the particle. Cosmic dust is generally amorphous silicate having n = 1.45 and diameters D < 0.5 microns. For example, at D = 0.25 microns, the QED created photons has Lo = 0.745 microns, and therefore an absorbed Lyman-alpha photon having L = 0.1216 microns in galaxy light is redshift to Z = (Lo – L)/L. ~ 5. If the QED redshift is interpreted by Doppler shift, the galaxy recession velocity is 95 % of the speed of light when in fact the Universe is not expanding at all, thereby negating any and all need for the Big Bang to explain our Universe.

Moreover, QED redshift in cosmic dust has been suggested to explain brightness in the Tolman test and time dilation in Supernova explosions. In this regard, a critique of Doppler redshift from Hubble theory in relation to QED induced redshift is given in http://www.nanoqed.org/resources/Press_Release/Redshift%20by%20Cosmic%20Dust%20trumps%20Hubble%20and%20Tired%20Light%20Theories.htm  Moreover, QED redshift in cosmic dust resolves the galaxy rotation problem and negates the need for MOND. See http://www.nanoqed.org/resources/Press_Release/Redshift%20in%20cosmic%20dust%20resolves%20the%20galaxy%20rotation%20problem%20without%20dark%20matter%20and%20MOND.htm

Conclusions

1. Olbers paradox need not rely on the Doppler redshift in light from distant galaxies in a finite and expanding Universe.
2. QED redshift of galaxy light by submicron cosmic dust explains Olbers paradox in an infinite and non-expanding static Universe.
3. Given the fact the Universe is permeated by cosmic dust, it is highly likely that the redshift measured by Hubble was QED induced redshift having nothing to do with the Big Bang and an expanding Universe.
4. In a static infinite Universe, there is no gravitational collapse and no need for the cosmological constant or the Big Bang.

Redshift by cosmic dust supports the death of the Big Bang Theory

The death of the Big Bang Theory predicted by Zwicky in 1929 and proclaimed by Marmet 20 years ago is supported today by QED induced redshift of galaxy light in cosmic dust that negates Hubble’s expanding Universe based on the Doppler shift

Background
The Big Bang theory is supported by (1) an expanding Universe based on the interpretation of redshifts of galaxy light as Doppler shifts, (2) the abundance of light elements like helium-4 and deuterium, and (3) the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation at a temperature of about 3K as the relic of the Big Bang.

In 1990, Paul Marmet published an article in 21st Century, Science and Technology entitled “Big Bang Cosmology meets an astronomical death.” See http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/bigbang/index.html Marmet argued that the abundance of light elements are produced during galaxy formation by nuclear reactions in the stars; the CMB radiation is simply Planck’s blackbody radiation emitted by an unlimited Universe at a temperature of about 3 K; and galaxy photons undergo a non-Doppler redshift and lose energy based on the Photon-Atom Theory.

Photon-Atom Theory is a variant of the Tired Light Theory proposed by Zwicky immediately after Hubble reported his redshift measurements in 1929. Zwicky contended that the redshift measured was caused by galaxy photons losing energy in colliding with cosmic dust particles (DPs) in the intergalactic medium (IGM). Zwicky’s contention that the interpretation of Hubble’s redshift as a Doppler shift was fatally flawed marked the beginning of cosmological death of the Big Bang.

Criticism of Tired Light Theories
The absorption of galaxy photons in Marmet’s atoms and molecules is similar to that in Zwicky’s DPs in that both are Tired Light theories. See http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tired_light Critics dismiss Tired Light Theories by confusing the reddening of light by scattering with redshift caused by absorption. See http://www.viswiki.com/en/Tired_light. The argument that scattered light is reddened and blurs images is valid, but critics need to understand that absorbed photons redshift galaxy light. Unlike scattered light, the light absorbed and re-emitted by gas molecules and DPs does not blur images.

Objects on Earth do not appear blurred even though light undergoes an uncountable number of absorptions with air molecules. Hence, Marmet claimed that most of galaxy light is absorbed and not scattered, and therefore photons lose energy by repeatedly being absorbed and re-emitted by atoms or molecules in the IGM. Marmet therefore concluded the non-Doppler redshift by IGM molecules was the likely explanation of the redshift observed by Hubble and not that by a Doppler shift leading to an expanding Universe in the Big Bang Theory.

QED Induced Redshift in Cosmic Dust
QED induced redshift supports the death of the Big Bang Theory predicted by Zwicky and proclaimed by Marmet. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics. QED induced redshift is a consequence of constraints on the conservation of energy imposed by quantum mechanics (QM). QM precludes submicron DPs from having the specific heat capacity necessary to conserve absorbed galaxy photons by an increase in temperature. Photons are created from the electromagnetic (EM) confinement of the absorbed galaxy photon within the solid DP. See thumbnail. This may be understood from QM by the QED induced creation of photons of wavelength Lo by supplying EM energy to a QM box with walls separated by Lo/2. For a galaxy photon absorbed in a spherical DP of diameter D, the QED photons are created at a wavelength Lo = 2nD, where n is the index of refraction of the DP. In the IGM, the DPs are generally amorphous silicate having n = 1.45 and diameters D < 0.5 microns. For D = 0.25 microns, the QED created photon has Lo = 0.745 microns, and therefore an absorbed Ly-alpha photon having L = 0.1216 microns is redshift to Z = (Lo – L)/L ~ 5. If the QED redshift in DPs is interpreted by Doppler shift, the galaxy recession velocity is 95 % of the speed of light when in fact the Universe is not expanding at all. See http://www.nanoqed.org at “Dark Energy and Cosmic Dust” and “Reddening and Redshift,” 2009.

Comparison of QED Redshift with Tired Light Theory
Marmet and Zwicky contended that the redshift of galaxies generally increases with distance based on galaxy light continuosly losing energy by successive collisions with IGM molelcules. But QED redshift is prompt upon absorption of the galaxy photon in a single DP. QED redshift is therefore a more likely occurrence than the enormous number of collisions necessary to produce the same redshift by Photon-Atom Theory. Marmet estimated the energy loss in a single photon collision to be about 10 ^ -13 of the absorbed photon energy. For the Ly-alpha photon having a Planck energy of 10.2 eV, the energy loss per collision is about 10 ^ -12 eV. By QED redshift at Z = 5, the 0.25 micron diameter silicate DP redshifts the Ly-alpha photon to a red photon having Planck energy of 1.7 eV. By QED theory, the net redshift of 8.5 eV takes place in a single absorption. However, the Photon-Atom Theory requires about 8.5×10 ^12 collisions which is far more unlikely than a single collision by QED induced redshift.

QED redshift in DPs explain brightness in the Tolman test and time dilation in Supernova tests. In this regard, a critique of Doppler redshift from Hubble theory including Tired Light theories in relation to QED induced redshift is given in http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/8209-redshift-cosmic-dust-trumps-hubble-and-tired-light-theories-26678.html Moreover, QED redshift in DPs resolves the galaxy rotation problem and negates the need for MOND. See http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/8209-redshift-cosmic-dust-resolves-galaxy-rotation-problem-without-dark-matter-and-mond-27333.html

Difference of QED Redshift and Tired Light Theory
The wavelength Lo emitted by a DP depends on the diameter and refractive index, and therefore the relative change in the wavelength L of the galaxy photon (Lo – L)/L is not constant: However, Tired Light theories claim a constant relative change in wavelength for all galaxy photon wavelengths consistent with Hubble’s Doppler shift. But there is no reason that non-Doppler and Doppler redshifts need to be the same. Nevertheless, QED redshift is still a Tired Light Theory. For galaxy photons of wavelength L redshift to Lo in a DP, the number of QED redshift photons created is the ratio of Lo/L and although greater than one is not likely an integer, and therefore QED redshift is similar to Tired Light Theories in that some galaxy photon energy is lost in DP absorptions as depicted in the thumbnail of Press Release in http://www.prlog.org/10568265-redshift-by-cosmic-dust-supports-the-death-of-the-big-bang-theory.html

QED Redshift of the Sun
Since 1907, spectroscopic measurements made of light from the Sun show the light from the limb to be redshift relative to that from center of the Sun’s disk beyond that which can be explained by the Doppler shift of the Sun’s rotation. Marmet claimed the redshift arises from the greater number of photon-atom collisions in the greater distance the light has to pass near the limb. Similarly, QED redshift also predicts the light form the limb to be redshift more than at its center because the greater distance contains a proportionally greater number of DPs.

Conclusions
1. The cosmological death of the Big Bang Theory proclaimed by Marmet about 20 years ago from the predictions by Zwicky some 60 years earlier is supported today by QED induced redshift in DPs.

2. Hubble’s redshift measurements have nothing to do with an expanding Universe.

3. QED redshift in a single DP interaction is far more likely than the enormous number of collisions required for the same redshift in the Photon-Atom Theory.

4. Tired Light Theories based on scattering produce blurring of the object image. Both Marmet’s Photon-Atom Theory and Zwicky’s DPs avoid this problem by the re-emission of absorbed galaxy photons. Similarly, QED redshift based on photon absorption in DPs does not produce blurring

Cosmic dust holds in question the period-luminosity relation in Cepheid stars

The Cepheid period-luminosity relation that claims stars with long periods are brighter than those with short periods including measurements of the distance to the star based on the Baade-Wesselink method are placed in question by cosmic dust.

Period-Luminosity Relationship
The Cepheids are stars 5-20 times as massive as the sun with dim to bright periodic pulsations. In the early 1900’s, the period-luminosity relationship of Cepheids was first reported by Henrietta Leavitt at the Harvard Observatory. See http://outreach.atnf.csiro.au/education/senior/astrophysics/variable_cepheids Stars with longer periods were thought brighter than those with shorter-periods. Since the stars in the same distant clouds are about the same distance from the Earth, any difference in apparent magnitude was therefore thought related to a difference in absolute magnitude.

Helium Heat Engine Mechanism
In 1917, Eddington proposed the mechanism for the Cepheid pulsation was a heat engine using helium as the working fluid. See thumbnail (TN) showing the dim and bright images from the Cepheid’s cycle. But Zhevakin in 1953 identified doubly ionized helium as the valve for the engine. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Alexandrovich_Zhevakin At the dim part of a Cepheid’s cycle, the ionized gas in the outer layers of the star is considered opaque, and so is heated by the star’s radiation, and due to the increased temperature, begins to expand. As the helium expands, it cools, and so becomes less ionized and therefore more transparent, allowing the radiation to escape. Then the expansion stops, and reverses due to the star’s gravitational attraction. The process then repeats itself.

Problem
The problem with the Cepheid mechanism is that ionized helium is not opaque, at least not to red light. The TN shows the dim part of the cycle to be clear and distinct with a faint red halo while the bright part is red-spotted and fuzzy. Neutral or ionized helium atoms should produce clear and distinct images for both dim and bright parts of the cycle. Only the lumpiness of the mass ejected from a Cepheid explosion would make the bright image spotted and fuzzy. In this regard, the Cepheids find similarity with the explosions of Supernova where the redshift of light emission is proportional to the mass ejected. See http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/8209-redshift-cosmic-dust-trumps-hubble-and-tired-light-theories-26678.html

Proposed Cepheid Mechanism
The proposed mechanism of Cepheid pulsation is similar to the explosion of Supernova, except Cepheid explosions are smaller in magnitude and periodic. The visible (VIS) light in the TN is not produced by the Cepheid radiation heating the ejected mass, but rather by QED induced radiation in submicron cosmic dust particles (DPs) that accompany the ejected mass. Ibid. But unlike the Supernovae, the mass ejected from the Cepheid is returned by gravitational attraction, except for a small fraction of DPs that produce the faint red halo in the dim image of the TN. In contrast, the fuzziness in the bright image is caused by lumpiness of the mass ejected from the Cepheid. Infrared (IR) radiation is also produced by QED induced UV radiation in larger micron sized DP. By this theory, the dim part of the Cepheid cycle is clear and distinct because the DPs have mostly been returned to the star surface by gravity. IR from thermal radiation by heating DPs with UV to produce the 40-500 K temperatures necessary to explain the excess in IR is not necessary because QED induced emission creates the IR from DPs without an increase in temperature.

QED Induced Redshift in Cosmic Dust
QED induced radiation produces VIS and IR photons from the redshift of UV radiation from the Cepheid. Upon the absorption of UV photons at wavelength L by the DPs, QED creates photons of wavelength Lo = 2nD, where n is the refractive index and D the diameter of the DP. E.g, the red photons of wavelength Lo = 0.675 microns in the TN are created from UV at L = 0.25 microns absorbed in DPs having D = 0.25 micron and n = 1.35. The red photon is created by redshifting the UV photon to Z = (Lo-L)/L = 1.7. In larger DPs having D > 1 micron, the UV is induced by QED to create IR photons with Lo > 1 micron at Z >3. All QED induced VIS and IR radiation is produced in DPs without an increase in temperature.

Similarity of DPs in Cepheids with Supernova Explosions
The mass ejected from Cepheids is similar to that from Supernova explosions. See Deasy and Butler, “Evidence for mass loss from IRAS observations of classical Cepheids,” http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v320/n6064/abs/320726a0 Unlike Supernova, the Cepheid period-luminosity relationship does not include any explicit correction for DPs. Since the brightness of a star is inversely proportional to the concentration of DPs in the mass ejected, stars having the maximum absolute magnitude should produce greater quantities of DPs that tend to reduce brightness. It is therefore not obvious that the Cepheid period-luminosity relationship is valid. In fact, Cepheids with long and short periods most likely have absolute magnitudes that may be far greater than observed. Only in the unlikely event DPs are not present in the Cepheid surroundings is the period-luminosity relationship valid. DPs therefore hold in question the period-luminosity relationship.

Cepheids in Distance Measurements
The Baade-Wesselink method is used to determine the distance of a Cepheid by measuring the radial velocity of the star surface from the Doppler shift of spectral lines. See http://www.eso.org/gallery/v/ESOPIA/illustrations/phot-30a-04-normal.jpg However, the redshift in spectral lines is in fact caused by absorption in DPs and has nothing to do with the radial velocity of the star surface. Instead, the spectral lines from DPs can only be proportional to the motion of ejected mass from Cepheid explosions.

The Doppler shift of spectral lines as a method to determine the surface velocity of a Cepheid has misled astronomers for some time. In Astronomy: A Physical Perspective, by Kutner (1987), the inward radial surface velocity of the star surface is shown out of phase with the outward moving star radius. If the spectral lines are interpreted by QED induced redshift in DPs that are proportional to mass emission, both the radial surface velocity and the star radius would only then correctly be in phase with each other.

Conclusions
In general, the negation of Doppler shift velocities by cosmic DPs has concerned astronomers since Hubble. See http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/8209-redshift-cosmic-dust-resolves-galaxy-rotation-problem-without-dark-matter-and-mond-27333.html Applied to Cepheids, the conclusions are:

1. Cepheid pulsation cycles by UV heating are not caused by opaqueness of ionized helium. Fuzzy bright spotted images can only be caused by DPs.
2. Ejected mass in periodic explosions is the more likely Cepheid mechanism and is consistent with the one and only Supernova explosions. Gravitational attraction tends to return ejected mass to the Cepheid.
3. The Cepheid period-luminosity relationship is invalidated by DPs.
4. Baade-Wesselink spectroscopy provides a measure of mass emission rather the radial velocity of the star surface.

The Sunyaev- Zeldovich Effect is independent of Redshift because of Cosmic Dust

Cosmic dust explains why the intensity of the Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effect is independent of Redshift.

Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effect
Collapsing cluster galaxies are implosions producing extremely energetic electrons at temperatures of about 10^8 K. Astronomers believe CMBR photons passing through the collapsing galaxies gain energy by collisions with these electrons and blue-shift by the inverse-Compton effect. Measurement of CMBR in the direction of a cluster of galaxies shows a measurable, but almost imperceptible distortion called the Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effect (SZE). See e.g., www.astro.uchicago.edu/sza/primer.html

The SZE shows the 20 to 1000 GHz microwave emission from collapsing cluster galaxies is virtually identical to the CMBR. The SZE spectrum shows a decrease in intensity at frequencies lower than around 218 GHz with an increase in intensity at higher frequencies. Although electrons at 10^8 K emit X-rays, the thermal distortion of the CMBR is only of the order of one-thousandth of a Kelvin in temperature. At a given frequency, the SZE intensity varies in brightness in proportion to the mass distribution within the cluster. The SZE is usually only associated with massive objects such as clusters of galaxies, i.e., a single galaxy has insufficient mass to cause measurable distortions in the SZE.

However, the most remarkable finding is the SZE intensity is independent of redshift Z

QED induced Redshift in Cosmic Dust
Standard cosmology finds difficulty in explaining the independence of the brightness of the SZE intensity with Z. The SZE brightness during implosive cluster collapse should be no different than that from the explosive Supernova (SN) Type 1a expansion known to be proportional to Z. In fact, any time variation of light in any form including brightness of the SZE should be proportional to 1/(1+Z). See Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology, 1972 and Blondin et al. at www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm.

Opinions are diverse of why this is so. Some astronomers think there is no redshift in the SZE because the inverse-Compton process based on scattering does not produce redshift. However, this cannot be correct because the CMBR photons are not redshift, but rather are blueshift in the SZE. In fact, the redshift measured in the SZE can only be caused by the optical and X-ray emission from the cluster galaxy collapse. The question may be asked:

Why do the explosive SN show redshift proportional to their magnitude while the implosive collapsing cluster galaxies do not show proportionality of the SZE to redshift?

In alternative cosmology, the question for collapsing galaxies may be answered by QED induced redshift of absorbed optical and X-ray photons in cosmic dust particles (DPs). Similar arguments have been made to explain the redshift from SN explosions. See www.nanoqed.org and www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/8209-redshift-cosmic-dust-trumps-hubble-and-tired-light-theories-26678.html

By QED induced redshift in DPs, there is no conceptual difference between the Z of an exploding SN and an imploding cluster galaxy as both emit optical and X-ray photons that are absorbed in DPs. The DPs may be in or near the explosions or implosions including those distantly disposed in the light path to the observer. The only difference is the SN produce DPs that are proportional to the dust emission or magnitude of the SN explosions. In contrast, implosive cluster galaxy collapse does not produce DPs because temperatures in excess of 10^8 K preclude any dust formation. See http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March02/Sarazin/Sarazin5_8_3.html .The Z in collapsing clusters is therefore independent of the SZE intensity because the absorption of optical and X-ray photons takes place in DPs removed from the collapse that are still in the light path to the observer. See www.prlog.org/10402850-cosmic-microwave-background-radiation-cmbr-from-collapsing-galaxies-instead-of-the-big-bang.html

Conclusions
1. Standard cosmology cannot explain why the redshift in collapsing cluster galaxies is not proportional to the magnitude of the implosion.
2. Alternative cosmology based on QED induced redshift of optical and X-ray emission upon absorption in DPs explains both collapsing cluster galaxies and Supernova explosions.
3. The redshift in collapsing cluster galaxies is not proportional to the magnitude of the implosion because DPs cannot form in the high temperatures. In contrast, Supernovae explosions do produce DPs in proportion to the mass ejected.