Observations contradict galaxy size and surface brightness predictions that are based on the expanding universe hypothesis
Eric J. Lerner

TL;DR
This paper challenges the expanding universe model by showing that galaxy size and surface brightness data align better with a static universe hypothesis, contradicting conventional size evolution predictions.
Contribution
The study provides empirical evidence that galaxy size and surface brightness observations do not support the size evolution predicted by the expanding universe model.
Findings
Galaxy surface brightness data are compatible with a static universe model.
Galaxy size data contradict size evolution predictions of the expanding universe.
Telescope resolution effects make galaxy radius relationships consistent with a static universe.
Abstract
In a non-expanding universe surface brightness is independent of distance or redshift, while in an expanding universe it decreases rapidly with both. Similarly, for objects of the same luminosity, the angular radius of an object in a non-expanding universe declines with redshift, while in an expanding universe this radius increases for redshifts z>1.25. The author and colleagues have previously shown that data for the surface brightness of disk galaxies are compatible with a static universe with redshift linearly proportional to distance at all z (SEU hypothesis). In this paper we examine the more conventional hypothesis that the universe is expanding, but that the actual radii of galaxies of a given luminosity increase with time (decrease with z), as others have proposed. We show that the radii data for both disk and elliptical galaxies are incompatible with any of the published…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
