H2 and non-doppler redshift

[Cris]

I just noticed that Paul Marmet died in 2005. Why is that relevant? He and I exchanged some email in 1998-1999 concerning BB. I was trying to explore the possibility of bubble theories and he simply responded that there was no BB. Until then I hadn't considered that BBs might not have occurred and that set me thinking along different lines.

This is old stuff but I haven't kept up to date recently on whether there has been any change here. I'm hoping some of you who follow cosmology more closely will bring me up to date.

This is Paul's proposal for an alternative explanation to doppler redshift. Essentially where we might consider large voids he proposes a more likely scenario of large volumes of transparent molecular Hydrogen that essentially slows photons and hence results in the same degree of redshift as would result from doppler.

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/index.html

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/BIGBANG/Bigbang.html

Is this still dismissed or is it a possible alternative to the dark matter/energy hypothesis. At least he seemed to have some empirical support for his proposal. Can I assume that DM/DE still remain undetected?

[Cris]

Another comment I found -

We detect the amount of H+ in nearby star systems and galaxies easily - it is very responsive to electromagnetic radiation, we do this because it is an indicator to the likelihood of all forms of stellar recycling. But, one thing we have extreme difficulty finding is H2. This is because it is rather unresponsive, but in using the European Space Agency's Infrared Space Observatory, we have obtained data that has been greatly ignored.

It may be that since molecular hydrogen is very abundant in our universe, it may actually be what is mistaken to be Dark Matter.

Molecular hydrogen may also explain the redshift. Instead of radiation travelling across huge distances to become longer in wavelength, it may be that it is simply travelling through lots of molecular hydrogen and being absorbed and released at lower and lower wavelengths. It may reveal why the anomalies in Newtonian Mechanics are apparent, a rival theory named MOND has been suggested.

Studies on 'Dark Galaxies' have revealed that they contain large amounts of unseen molecular hydrogen.

OK - go ahead tear me apart :-)

[Xylene]

Have you heard of Halton Arp, Cris? He had the same idea about red-shift.

[Cris]

Yes, I read the summaries of his suggestions some time ago. I think that was the "tired light" proposal that has been dismissed.

[Cris]

Hmm - OK - Intrinsic Redshift seems to be the more appropriate term.

[Trippy]

Another comment I found -

We detect the amount of H+ in nearby star systems and galaxies easily - it is very responsive to electromagnetic radiation, we do this because it is an indicator to the likelihood of all forms of stellar recycling. But, one thing we have extreme difficulty finding is H2. This is because it is rather unresponsive, but in using the European Space Agency's Infrared Space Observatory, we have obtained data that has been greatly ignored.

It may be that since molecular hydrogen is very abundant in our universe, it may actually be what is mistaken to be Dark Matter.

Molecular hydrogen may also explain the redshift. Instead of radiation travelling across huge distances to become longer in wavelength, it may be that it is simply travelling through lots of molecular hydrogen and being absorbed and released at lower and lower wavelengths. It may reveal why the anomalies in Newtonian Mechanics are apparent, a rival theory named MOND has been suggested.

Studies on 'Dark Galaxies' have revealed that they contain large amounts of unseen molecular hydrogen.

OK - go ahead tear me apart :-)

Milgrom, the guy who wrote MOND, stated that MOND only reduced the amount of dark matter completed, it only changes the amount required, and the scale of its distribution.

MOND does not accurately predict gravitational lensing (hence the development of TeVeS - which looses the simplicity of MOND).

If neutral hydrogen was responsible for red-shifting, then there should be some sort of latitudinal dependence to galactic redshifts - IE, the closer to the galactic plain, the more neutral hydrogen there is to see through, the greater the redshift.

I have seen no indication that such a trend exists, nor have I seen any papers indicating such a trend.