Tolman Test from z = 0.1 to z = 5.5: Preliminary results challenge the expanding universe model

TL;DR

This study tests the universe's expansion using the Tolman surface-brightness test across a wide redshift range, finding results that challenge the standard expanding universe model.

Contribution

It combines UV data from GALEX and HST to perform a consistent Tolman test, providing preliminary evidence against the expanding universe paradigm.

Findings

The Euclidean non-expanding model fits the data better than the LCDM model.

Significant magnitude discrepancy between LCDM predictions and observations.

Results suggest the need to reconsider the universe's expansion evidence.

Abstract

We performed the Tolman surface-brightness test for the expansion of the universe using a large UV dataset of disk galaxies in a wide range of redshifts (from 0.03 to 5.7). We combined data for low-z galaxies from GALEX observations with those for high-z objects from HST UltraDeep Field images. Starting from the data in publicly- available GALEX and UDF catalogs, we created 6 samples of galaxies with observations in a rest-frame band centered at 141 nm and 5 with data from one centered on 225 nm. These bands correspond, respectively, to the FUV and NUV bands of GALEX for objects at z = 0.1. By maintaining the same rest-frame wave-band of all observations we greatly minimized the effects of k-correction and filter transformation. Since SB depends on the absolute magnitude, all galaxy samples were then matched for the absolute magnitude range (-17.7 < M(AB) < -19.0) and for mean absolute magnitude. We performed homogeneous measurements of the magnitude and half-light radius for all the galaxies in the 11 samples, obtaining the median UV surface brightness for each sample. We compared the data with two models: 1) The LCDM expanding universe model with the widely-accepted evolution of galaxy size R prop H(z)-1 and 2) a simple, Euclidean, non-expanding (ENE) model with the distance given by d=cz/H0. We found that the ENE model was a significantly better fit to the data than the LCDM model with galaxy size evolution. While the LCDM model provides a good fit to the HUDF data alone, there is a 1.2 magnitude difference in the SB predicted from the model for the GALEX data and observations, a difference at least 5 times larger than any statistical error. The ENE provides a good fit to all the data except the two points with z>4.