Supernovae evidence for foundational change to cosmological models

 Supernovae evidence for foundational change to cosmological models

Seifert et al. 2024

https://academic.oup.com/mnrasl/article/537/1/L55/7926647?login=false

https://phys.org/news/2024-12-dark-energy-doesnt-lumpy-universe.html

Another article on imaginary dark energy. Looks like theorists are finally admitting it is imaginary after all. But now fortunately we have new improved Timescape. Astrophysics has its latest excuse for the continued failure of the BBT to explain any of the data since the priest LeMaitre recycled the creation myth as an expanding universe. His attempt to explain why Hubbles observed redshifted light over distance was not consistent with Einsteins’ photon model. A photon model which incidentally, predicts that photons cannot change frequency over distance. 

It’s worth pointing out the fact that Hubble himself didn’t believe in expansion. Being a good scientist he knew that cosmological redshift must just be EMR changing frequency over distance rather than an imaginary divine event at the beginning of time. Because the fact is that the Sn1a data that led the BBT community to scratch their collective heads in 1998, is not showing any expansion at all let alone acceleration. 

Best chi fits of SN1a data to z=0 here show that the SN1a data best fits a non expanding model. 

And this contradiction between no observed time dilation in any data and imaginary dilation predicted by the BBT expansion was starting to look really bad for the BBT.

The best way out of this conundrum is to change the data to make it look like there’s a Big Bang, even when the JWST and other data shows there isn’t.

And now thanks to Timescape, a new improved better excuse has been invented and the BBT is safe again for a while. To account for observed non dilated lightcurves and various other BBT predictions recently refuted by the JWST data, Timescape offers the BBT a way out of its self induced mess. By saying that yes the universe is expanding, but it’s just that imaginary effects due to general relativity mean that it just doesn’t look like it’s expanding!! Which is why the data shows no expansion. 

All you need is faith.

Earth’s inner core may be changing shape

 Once again predictions made in my 2009 paper published here have been verified. Further confirming the predictions made by my Variable speed Inner Core Earth Dynamo model and outlined in the paper at the above link. To summarise: In the paper I proposed that earths inner solid core rotates at different speeds to the mantle and the more liquid outer core. Sometimes faster sometimes slower and creating the field reversals seen in the geomagnetic record. And that the inner cores rotation speed is dictated by an off centered asymmetric volume that changes over time to become elongated in the north south axis to flattened at the equator. It is this changing shape which dictates its relative speed to the outer liquid core and the mantle. In the same way that a spinning ballet dancer can increase or decrease their rotational speed by stretching out or retracting their arms to speed up or slow down their rotation.

The irony is that when I initially tried to publish in a peer reviewed journal in 2009, the paper was rejected because I had no evidence that the earths core was changing or had ever changed shape as my model had proposed! 

Quantum Theory refuted again

Looks like they discovered that the so called “ Space Quantisation” explanation for the Stern Gerlach theory was incorrect. The split beams can be explained classically. And the theoretical discreet jumps in an atoms reaction to an applied external field never materialised once technology was actually able to measure an effect so small. It seems that recent published research found that the atomic response to an applied field went up exponentially as described by a classical model. Rather than in discreet jumps as QT has erroneously claimed since 1922. More on this can be read here... https://phys.org/news/2024-12-particle-mass.html

“ When a magnetic field is applied to any material, the energy levels of electrons inside that material become quantized into discrete levels called Landau levels, Shao explained. The levels can only have fixed values, like climbing a set of stairs with no little steps in between. The spacing between these levels depends on the mass of the electrons and the strength of the magnetic field, so as the magnetic field increases, the energy levels of the electrons should increase by set amounts based entirely on their mass—but in this case, they didn't.

Using the high-powered magnet in Florida, the researchers observed that the energy of the Landau level transitions in the ZrSiS crystal followed a completely different pattern of dependence on the magnetic field strength. Years ago, theorists had labeled this pattern the "B2/3 power law," the key signature of semi-Dirac fermions. “ Yinming Shao et al 2024