Tired light red shift hypothesis

Question

Have there been any recent attempts to falsify the tired light hypothesis alternative to the Doppler shift explanation for the red shift, or is it simply ignored like the pilot wave quantum mechanical hypothesis alternative to the Copenhagen hypothesis of quantum mechanics has been? What new evidence would it take to get the tired light hypothesis for the red shift reexamined as the recent fluid dynamics oil drop experiments have done for the pilot wave hypothesis of quantum mechanics?

Answer 1

I don't think any new means to falsify "tired light" are required, as the present ones are sufficient. I believe the strongest is the following - which is recent in the sense that it has become very strong evidence in the last 15 years.

The light curve peaks of Type Ia supernova become broader at higher redshifts. The amount of broadening is exactly in proportion to the amount of redshift $(1+z)$. i.e the cosmological time dilation works as expected for an expanding universe, see for example Blondin et al. (2008). A "gradual redshifting" of light as it travelled a distance cannot explain this time dilation.

The plot below shows how the measured "de-dilation factor" from supernova light curves depends on their redshift (from Blondin et al. 2008). It goes as $1/(1+z)$, exactly as expected (well to within 10%). The horizontal dashed line is what would be expected from "tired light" and is rejected at 10 sigma.

This method was proposed by Wilson (1939) as a test of the expanding universe theory rather than the "gradual dissipation of photonic energy" (aka "tired light"). The test has been passed with flying colours.

Any alternative hypothesis for why the redshift of galaxies is proportional to their distance (for small $z$; it is a more complicated relationship at high $z$) must also explain why the duration of type Ia supernovae is also stretched by the same factor $(1+z)$. Or, if it is not to be some arbitrary change in the properties of type Ia supernovae with time, then an alternative theory must explain why photons emitted at the start of a supernova explosion appear to take take less time to get to us than those emitted towards the end of the supernova. Both appear to be a stretch, if you'll forgive the astrophysicists's pun.

Further evidence of cosmological time dilation comes from the intrinsic variability timescale of quasars as a function of redshift. This was examined by Lewis & Brewer (2023) who found that this timescale varied as $(1+z)^n$ with $n= 1.28^{+0.28}_{-0.29}$, again in accord with the expectations of standard cosmology, and again tired light would have no explanation for this.

Answer 2

Tired light certainly can explain the galaxy with a Z of 11.1. This observation is not explainable by the big bang. There are several papers that refute SN 1a time dilation problems. (Here's one http://rxiv.org/abs/1203.0062 ) Most tired light theories would suggest that there is an acceleration of the red shift with distance which means that the z 11 galaxy is closer than just a direct application of Hubble's law would suggest, thus explaining it's apparent brightness. http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/Hubble_latest_web.htm

Answer 3

Then greater the observation distance then more mass the source has to have to be detectable. That's why the sources from very large distances certainly have much larger gravitational potential than on earth. And that is the reason they emit photons with redshifted frequencies. So the relative distance between the spectral lines of hydrogen is the same like on earth but the emission from masses greater the earth's mass is redshifted. This phenomenon is observable on earth too (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound-Rebka_experiment).

Photons will not lose energy during their travel in space, they are indivisible units.