|
|
|
|
|
|
by madaxe_again
3226 days ago
|
|
|
but I doubt it has a meaningful effect in deep-space. Don't underestimate how often unlikely events can happen in a big enough space... As to photon-photon scattering, I might be wrong, but I don't believe it's considered in any models for expansion - similarly, if you do build light momentum transfer into your model, then expansion goes away - but because we "know" expansion to be true, those results aren't considered or published. I think our givens are wrong. It'd hardly be the first time. I think I might be wrong. That'd hardly be the first time either. But, as a betting physicist, my money is on expansion (at the very least acceleration) being bunkum. |
|
|
That's true but the density of photons (from a given source) also drops of cubically as you move away from the source.
> imilarly, if you do build light momentum transfer into your model, then expansion goes away
I'm not really a cosmologist, but I know some physics (QFT in particular). If you have a derivation for a formula giving the impact of YY-scattering on redshift I'd love to read it.
> but because we "know" expansion to be true, those results aren't considered or published.
We know redshift to be true, and we have evidence for expansion based on measurements. Something that simply denies this will have a hard time being published. A theory that explains those findings without using expansion however would certainly make waves.
As and aside, since the cross-section of photon-photon scattering is energy dependent (and, as far as I can tell cosmological redshift is not), wouldn't that be a way to distinguish them? Scattering should occur more often at higher energies meaning that after a significant amount of scattering a bundle's spectrum should clump up more into the red.