Age of universe at 26.7B years, nearly twice as old as previously believed

Re:Age of universe at 26.7B years, nearly twice as old as pr... by cygx on Friday July 14, 2023 @04:49AM (#36721166)

He's proposing a hybrid model that does incorporate tiered light, cf https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stad2032

"While tired light (TL) models have been shown to comply with the JWST angular galaxy size data, they cannot satisfactorily explain isotropy of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) observations or fit the supernovae distance modulus vs. redshift data well. We have developed hybrid models that include the tired light concept in the expanding universe."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Age of universe at 26.7B years, nearly twice as old as pr... by raattgift on Sunday July 16, 2023 @01:14PM (#36749299)

He sure has a lane. He's staying in it. Aiming for a coefficient on one coupling constant or another or an ensemble ... so far though nothing but \Lambda on the LHS of the EFEs. I'm sure he'll get there. Theres an admirable sort of methodicalness to his publication record, e.g.:

https://arxiv.org/search/?query=Gupta%2C+Rajendra&searchtype...

and honestly I don't hate it. And his institution (byline at the link at the very top is "by Bernard Rizk, University of Ottawa"; turns out he's a Media Relations Officer there [1]; great journalism, phys.org) hyping an adjunct's paper is novel.

[1] This really fascinates me. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bernard+rizk+university+of+ottawa&... Good stuff, phys.org.

[ Parent | on HN ]