Another Dissident Cosmologist

“Tired Light – an Explanation of Redshifts in a Static Universe,” by Lydon Ashmore, 2016

Ashmore’s basic insight is that the light-wave redshift observation is caused, not by ‘receding galaxies’ as claimed in the Big Bang theory (BB), but because light photons are weakened through collisions with electrons in loose plasma clouds in intergalactic space.  Hence the light becomes ‘tired’ - weaker when it reaches earth.  The reason this happens is because space is not a void or vacuum as some claim.  Another pillar of the BB is that the cosmic microwave background is a reflection of the BB’s initial explosion which created all matter. Ashmore makes quick work of this idea too, showing that photon to electron collisions actually lose and transfer energy ‘to the side’ in new weaker photons, creating the cosmic microwave background locally.  He also suggests that ‘dark matter’ – which has never been located by the BB – is actually this plasma around galaxies and in intergalactic space.

The tired light theory was first suggested in 1929 by Fritz Zwicky, who postulated that the photon redshifts from distant galaxy clusters were caused by the distance to the cluster through some ‘gravity drag,’ not by an expanding universe, as in the BB.  Ashmore has refined this through investigating recent cosmic data, lab experiments and 20 years of working on the math to prove his theory, which he now calls New Tired Light (NTL).  Its virtue is that it is simpler than the BB and it is derived from basic science methods, not relativity.  As an independent researcher he got the idea while teaching physics, noting the contradiction between the BB as accepted ‘truth’ and how medical X-ray photons work.  This contradiction made him think, illuminating the philosophic link between micro and macro matter/energy issues.  Even a setting sun going redder made him more curious.

Ashmore uses the term ‘static’ universe to describe the actual state of the universe, unlike ‘steady state,’ which is defined differently, as it borrows expansion and red-shift from the BB, but believed this process had stopped.  'Static' is also unlike an ‘expanding’ closed universe, as in BB.   As a result Ashmore considers the universe infinite, unlike BB and Einstein.  I think calling the universe ‘static’ is an error, as there is still dynamism in the universe, not ‘stasis’ as the word is commonly understood.  His theory fits neatly with Halton’ Arp’s observations of galaxy, quasar and galaxy cluster distances; Lerner and Alven’s understanding of intergalactic electro-magnetic plasma and with Abdul Malek’s dialectical point about micro and macro reality and scientific methods being many times on a continuum, closest to ‘Occam’s razor’ in simplicity.  

Hubble Ultra Deep Field View

The book is full of complex calculations and many cosmological abbreviations, so it is not only for general science readers.  I am not a physicist or mathematician so I can’t check the math. Ashmore’s papers have been peer-reviewed and published, so for awhile he was able to overcome the high walls of the corporate scientific establishment.  Although now independent researchers are not allowed to publish unless they are linked to an institution(!)  The archaic Big Bang theory is now almost 100 years old and still rules the cosmology establishment (just check out Wikipedia...) but its problems only multiply.  Ashmore goes into those multiple problems throughout the book – missing exotic particles, flatness, horizon issues, non-existent cooling, clumpiness, initial inflation, BB’s estimate of the universe’s age, lack of sufficient gravitational force, etc.  As far back as the data goes Ashmore can find no signs of universe expansion in 10,000,000,000 years, only a ‘static’ universe.

Ashmore shows how tired light solves many of BB’s problems.  He dispenses with objections like blurring, Tolman surface brightness and supernovae time dilation.  He estimates the amount of collisions photons go through in space and how denser plasma clouds do not create redshift, related to the Mossbauer effect.  He looks at dispersion measures, an adjusted Hubble Constant and fast radio bursts as support for NTL.  He takes data on electron number density which support NTL.  After all this he wrote the book “Big Bang Blasted” and the ‘rest is history’ according to him.

Another book from a line of dissident cosmologists.  You will not understand everything here but the plot-line is still clear!

Other prior blog reviews on this subject, use blog search box upper left:  “The Big Bang Never Happened,” (Lerner) “Seeing Red” (Arp) “The Philosophy of Space-Time,” “The Dialectical Universe,” “The Einsteinian Universe,” (all 3 by Malek); “Big Bang Goes Boom!”  “Reason in Revolt” (Woods-Grant); “The Big Bang is a Situation Comedy,” “Dialectical Materialism versus the New Physics” (Gimbel).

And I bought it at May Day Books!

Red Frog

May 8, 2020