mburns's Journal: Supernovae 1a Data

I studied the published graphs of supernovae Ia brightness versus redshift. So I came to accept that the comparison curve on what is expected in an empty universe is correct. This certainly makes interpretation on the deviations easier. (In Wikipedia the dimming due to redshift is stated incorrectly, so my doubts were not unfounded.) See http://www.pha.jhu.edu/~bfalck/SeminarPres.html#adeptsim

One plausible interpretation is that a few groups of supernovae binned by their redshift are 10% more distant than expected. But simple kinetics interprets that as deceleration of the observer. Cruising away from the starting point at speed gets you more separation than accelerating to speed after the starting point. Slowing to speed after the starting point gets you yet more separation.

Could obscuration by dust, nanofiber carbon produced in mass ejection from stars and accretion disks, increase to 20% and then decline by dilution? Divergent spacial curvature would cause this 20% dimming, but why does that dimming reach a peak? The extended conservation theorems, from the Bianchi identities applied to superluminal sources of gravity, imply that divergent curvature must decrease with time. These Bianchi identities, when used with a hard-fought insight into geometry, rule out any nonconserved version of dark energy.

These supernovae intrinsically vary by 20% due simply to their ragged shape and random orientation. Aboriginal supernovae may be as much as 10% brighter due to their lack of heavy elements. Recent supernovae may be brighter due to their rapid spin and cooler temperature that delay detonation.

--
Michael J. Burns