|
|
|
|
|
by gmane
619 days ago
|
|
Sorry, the conclusion in the paper really underlies how poorly the results fit the evidence: "The resulting almost doubling in the age of the Universe and increasing the formation times by 1 order of magnitude has been a subject of concern and requires that the new model also explain some critical cosmological and astrophysical observations" [0] Call me skeptical of the claims made. [0] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ad1bc6#... |
|
On the other hand, if the universe is older there are other things that will need more research to figure out.
You should be sceptical, but there is not as yet a reason to entirely reject it. I'm not really a fan of the tired light theories myself, but glad to see different ideas being explored.