Stationary Universe Model (SUM) - Revision history

Admin at 13:16, 21 February 2026

2026-02-21T13:16:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:16, 21 February 2026
Line 177:		Line 177:

	To explain the Supernova-Ia data <ref>A.G. Riess et al. (High-z Supernova Search Team),		To explain the Supernova-Ia data <ref>A.G. Riess et al. (High-z Supernova Search Team),
	[http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/659/1/98/fulltext/ "''New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Supernovae at z ≥ 1: Narrowing		[http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/659/1/98/fulltext/ "''New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Supernovae at z ≥ 1: Narrowing Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy''"], ApJ 659, 98-121,
	Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy''"], ApJ 659, 98-121,
	2007</ref>		2007</ref>
	<ref>M. Kowalski et al. (The Supernova Cosmology Project), [http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/686/2/749/fulltext/ "''Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old, and Combined		<ref>M. Kowalski et al. (The Supernova Cosmology Project), [http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/686/2/749/fulltext/ "''Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old, and Combined Supernova Data Sets''"], ApJ 686, 749-778, 2008 </ref> on sufficiently large universal scales the model SUM does not need any 'dark energy' and thus is also different from the [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM_model\|Lambda-CDM model]] as standard model of today's cosmology. Deviations in the region ''z'' < 0.1 are here reduced to a local Hubble contrast as in order of magnitude actually obseved. The universal SUM [[wikipedia:distance_modulus\|distance modulus]] results from the stationary line element as usual yielding
	Supernova Data Sets''"], ApJ 686, 749-778, 2008 </ref> on sufficiently large universal scales the model SUM does not need any 'dark energy' and thus is also different from the [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM_model\|Lambda-CDM model]] as standard model of today's cosmology. Deviations in the region ''z'' < 0.1 are here reduced to a local Hubble contrast as in order of magnitude actually obseved. The universal SUM [[wikipedia:distance_modulus\|distance modulus]] results from the stationary line element as usual yielding
	:<math>		:<math>
	(m-M)_\mathrm{SUM} = 5 \log{[(1+z) \ln{(1+z)}} + 25+ 5		(m-M)_\mathrm{SUM} = 5 \log{[(1+z) \ln{(1+z)}} + 25+ 5

Admin at 13:14, 21 February 2026

2026-02-21T13:14:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:14, 21 February 2026
Line 10:		Line 10:

	After the science-fiction breaking Hossenfelder wake-up call <ref>S. Hossenfelder: "Lost in Math", Basic Books, New York 2018</ref> , the central question remains: What does the dilemma of today's mainstream physics mean in reality? Conclusions from SUM – completely new in contrast to the fictitiously asssumed big bang – allow for a solution in principle of the most puzzling questions of today's Lambda-CDM Concordance Cosmology, which after a paradigm shift to SUM might be resolved at one blow:		After the science-fiction breaking Hossenfelder wake-up call <ref>S. Hossenfelder: "Lost in Math", Basic Books, New York 2018</ref> , the central question remains: What does the dilemma of today's mainstream physics mean in reality? Conclusions from SUM – completely new in contrast to the fictitiously asssumed big bang – allow for a solution in principle of the most puzzling questions of today's Lambda-CDM Concordance Cosmology, which after a paradigm shift to SUM might be resolved at one blow:


	* matter-antimatter baryon asymmetry – is a natural fact in a stationary universe without need for justification.		* matter-antimatter baryon asymmetry – is a natural fact in a stationary universe without need for justification.

Admin at 13:13, 21 February 2026

2026-02-21T13:13:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:13, 21 February 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0230 Relativistic Deduction of a Stationary Tohu-va-Bohu Background Cosmology]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1408-1410, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot3_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>		<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0230 Relativistic Deduction of a Stationary Tohu-va-Bohu Background Cosmology]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1408-1410, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot3_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0219 Indication from the Supernovae Ia Data of a Stationary Background Universe]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1373-1375, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot2_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>		<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0219 Indication from the Supernovae Ia Data of a Stationary Background Universe]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1373-1375, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot2_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>
	in Paris (MG12 2009, and at the DPG-Frühjahrstagung		in Paris (MG12 2009, and at the DPG-Frühjahrstagung<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://independent-research.org/assets/07a.pdf Das relativistische Modell eines stationären Hintergrunduniversums und die Supernova-Ia-Daten]''"; DPG-Vortrag/GR-205.2, 2007</ref>
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://independent-research.org/assets/07a.pdf Das relativistische Modell eines stationären Hintergrunduniversums und die Supernova-Ia-Daten]''"; DPG-Vortrag/GR-205.2, 2007</ref>
	2007 Heidelberg before, first pre-prints are at arXiv.org).		2007 Heidelberg before, first pre-prints are at arXiv.org).
	In comparison with the due to excellent apparent confirmations for a long time prevailing [[wikipedia:standard_model\|standard model]] (''Concordance Model'') in form of the [[wikipedia:inflation_(cosmology)\|inflationary]] [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM_model\|Lambda CDM cosmology]] is SUM on base of a new line element representing a concept, which in contrast to the outdated [[wikipedia:Steady_State_Theory\|Steady State Theory]] seems compatible to current observational facts. Despite amazing unexpected successes the model doesn't reach the highly developed stand with regard to various details of the CCM, but is still in an initial phase; it is an encouragement in the sense of clearing up: "sapere aude!" (dare to think) and seems almost a miracle, that on basis of Einstein's equations the idea of an infinite stationary universe turns out to imply clear indication that individual cosmoses are of finite dimensions in space and time. It is in particular this conclusion that arises from the interplay of local special relativity (macroscopically representing quantum mechanics) and universal general relativity (representing gravitation). The unexpected feature is that – describing our evolutionary cosmos as part of a stationary multiverse – the same mathematical model is bringing ideas of various cultural areas to mind about existence of an eternal universe and the creation of cosmoses. While these ideas seem implausibly unbalanced in the prevailing western single-bang standard approach, the new concept SUM, if understood in sense of a Tao Cosmology, seems naturally incorporated into the picture of a multiverse as an oscillation of forces, which might philosophically also be named Yin and Yang. Preliminarily this tries to be a mainstream-breaking attempt to free human spirit from all dogmatic chains unfortunately limiting ubuntu science so far.		In comparison with the due to excellent apparent confirmations for a long time prevailing [[wikipedia:standard_model\|standard model]] (''Concordance Model'') in form of the [[wikipedia:inflation_(cosmology)\|inflationary]] [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM_model\|Lambda CDM cosmology]] is SUM on base of a new line element representing a concept, which in contrast to the outdated [[wikipedia:Steady_State_Theory\|Steady State Theory]] seems compatible to current observational facts. Despite amazing unexpected successes the model doesn't reach the highly developed stand with regard to various details of the CCM, but is still in an initial phase; it is an encouragement in the sense of clearing up: "sapere aude!" (dare to think) and seems almost a miracle, that on basis of Einstein's equations the idea of an infinite stationary universe turns out to imply clear indication that individual cosmoses are of finite dimensions in space and time. It is in particular this conclusion that arises from the interplay of local special relativity (macroscopically representing quantum mechanics) and universal general relativity (representing gravitation). The unexpected feature is that – describing our evolutionary cosmos as part of a stationary multiverse – the same mathematical model is bringing ideas of various cultural areas to mind about existence of an eternal universe and the creation of cosmoses. While these ideas seem implausibly unbalanced in the prevailing western single-bang standard approach, the new concept SUM, if understood in sense of a Tao Cosmology, seems naturally incorporated into the picture of a multiverse as an oscillation of forces, which might philosophically also be named Yin and Yang. Preliminarily this tries to be a mainstream-breaking attempt to free human spirit from all dogmatic chains unfortunately limiting ubuntu science so far.

Admin: Sections 12-14

2026-02-21T12:10:39Z

Sections 12-14

Admin: Sections 9-11

2026-02-21T11:50:25Z

Sections 9-11

Show changes

Admin: Sections 6-8

2026-02-21T11:27:35Z

Sections 6-8

Admin: Intro paragraph wiki links

2026-02-21T11:13:02Z

Intro paragraph wiki links

Admin: Sections 3-5

2026-02-21T11:07:01Z

Sections 3-5

Admin: Sections 1 & 2

2026-02-21T10:56:36Z

Sections 1 & 2

Admin: Intro paragraph

2026-02-21T10:44:19Z

Intro paragraph

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:10, 21 February 2026
Line 282:		Line 282:
	== The reconcilableness of relativity theory (RT) and quantum mechanics (QM) ==		== The reconcilableness of relativity theory (RT) and quantum mechanics (QM) ==

	Six years after the intermediate completion of [[wikipedia:~~Allgemeine Relativitätstheorie~~\|general relativity]] (GR) [[wikipedia:Albert Einstein\|Albert Einstein]] has confronted in ''Geometrie und Erfahrung''		Six years after the intermediate completion of [[wikipedia:general relativity\|general relativity]] (GR) [[wikipedia:Albert Einstein\|Albert Einstein]] has confronted in ''Geometrie und Erfahrung''
	<ref>A. Einstein, [http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol7-doc/431 "''Geometrie und Erfahrung''"] (erweiterte Fassung des Festvortrags), Julius Springer, Berlin 1921</ref>		<ref>A. Einstein, [http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol7-doc/431 "''Geometrie und Erfahrung''"] (erweiterte Fassung des Festvortrags), Julius Springer, Berlin 1921</ref>
	two mathematically possible interpretations and thereby explicitly admitted [[wikipedia:Henri Poincaré\|Poincaré]]'s claim of understanding the [[wikipedia:~~Nichteuklidische Geometrie~~\|non-euclidean geometry\|]]		two mathematically possible interpretations and thereby explicitly admitted [[wikipedia:Henri Poincaré\|Poincaré]]'s claim of understanding the [[wikipedia:non-euclidean geometry\|non-euclidean geometry]]
	<ref>H. Poincaré, [https://archive.org/details/wissenschaftundh00poin/"''Wissenschaft und Hypothese''"], autor. dt. Ausg. von F. und L. Lindemann , Teubner 1904 (Das Original “La Science et l’Hypothèse” wurde vor 1905 von Einstein gelesen und, wie von seinem Freund Maurice Solovine in der 'Akademie Olympia' wochenlang diskutiert).</ref>		<ref>H. Poincaré, [https://archive.org/details/wissenschaftundh00poin/"''Wissenschaft und Hypothese''"], autor. dt. Ausg. von F. und L. Lindemann , Teubner 1904 (Das Original “La Science et l’Hypothèse” wurde vor 1905 von Einstein gelesen und, wie von seinem Freund Maurice Solovine in der 'Akademie Olympia' wochenlang diskutiert).</ref>
	("''Sub specie aeterni in my opinion Poincaré is right with this interpetation''"). Therefore it is possible to ascribe the non-euclidean geometry of GR not to space and time itself, but to gravitationally affectable unit sticks, clocks, and to all other real physical objects		("''Sub specie aeterni in my opinion Poincaré is right with this interpetation''"). Therefore it is possible to ascribe the non-euclidean geometry of GR not to space and time itself, but to gravitationally affectable unit sticks, clocks, and to all other real physical objects
	and otherwise to keep [[wikipedia: euclidean geometry\|euclidean geometry]] for the one complete description of all natural event. This turns out to work with the help of [[wikipedia:Nathan Rosen\|Nathan Rosen]]'s ''bi-metric relativity''		and otherwise to keep [[wikipedia:euclidean geometry\|euclidean geometry]] for the one complete description of all natural event. This turns out to work with the help of [[wikipedia:Nathan Rosen\|Nathan Rosen]]'s ''bi-metric relativity''
	<ref>N. Rosen, "''Flat-Space Metric in General Relativity Theory''", Ann. of Physics 22, 1–11, 1963, [[doi:10.1016/0003-4916(63)90293-8]].</ref>.		<ref>N. Rosen, "''Flat-Space Metric in General Relativity Theory''", Ann. of Physics 22, 1–11, 1963, [[doi:10.1016/0003-4916(63)90293-8]].</ref>.
	On the other hand such a chance would even explain why in spite of big efforts like in ([[wikipedia:string theory\|string theory]], [[wikipedia:loop quantum gravity\|loop quantum gravity]]) no concept seems to have convincingly succeeded to quantize ''[[wikipedia:spacetime\|spacetime]]'' and thus to basically reconcile the conventional relativity theory with quantum mechanics in a [[wikipedia:~~allgemeine Relativitätstheorie#Quantenphysik~~\|unified theory of gravitation and quantum mechanics]]. According to SUM, however, seems possible as a matter of principle to allow valid statements in future to otherwise mere mathematical ''[[wikipedia:~~Singularität (Astronomie)~~\|singularities]] of GR or at least protect from misinterpretations. Besides the ''[[wikipedia:~~allgemeine Relativitätstheorie#Schwarze Löcher~~\|~~back~~ holes]]'' this also concerns the [[wikipedia:~~Singularitäten-Theorem~~\|singularity theorems]] ~~von~~ [[wikipedia:Stephen Hawking\|Hawking]] und [[wikipedia:Roger Penrose\|Penrose]], where in the absence of a consistent unified theory the detailed quantum structure of matter had to be neglected so far.		On the other hand such a chance would even explain why in spite of big efforts like in [[wikipedia:string theory\|string theory]], [[wikipedia:loop quantum gravity\|loop quantum gravity]] no concept seems to have convincingly succeeded to quantize ''[[wikipedia:spacetime\|spacetime]]'' and thus to basically reconcile the conventional relativity theory with quantum mechanics in a [[wikipedia:unified_theory\|unified theory of gravitation and quantum mechanics]]. According to SUM, however, seems possible as a matter of principle to allow valid statements in future to otherwise mere mathematical ''[[wikipedia:singularity\|singularities]] of GR or at least protect from misinterpretations. Besides the ''[[wikipedia:black_holes\|black holes]]'' this also concerns the [[wikipedia:Penrose%E2%80%93Hawking_singularity_theorems\|singularity theorems]] of [[wikipedia:Stephen Hawking\|Hawking]] und [[wikipedia:Roger Penrose\|Penrose]], where in the absence of a consistent unified theory the detailed quantum structure of matter had to be neglected so far.

	== Numerical hints to the existence of 24 elementary spin-1/2 torsion particles ==		== Numerical hints to the existence of 24 elementary spin-1/2 torsion particles ==
Line 336:		Line 336:
	Hiis attempt failed because he had searched a purely ''static'' solution, whose line element - as opposed to that of [[wikipedia:Alexander Alexandrowitsch Friedmann\|Friedmann]] as well as to about a hundred years later now to the line element of the stationary solution SUM - does not contain in the corresponding gravitational potentials ''g<sub>ik</sub>'' any coordinate of time. This also applies to the original form of [[wikipedia:De-Sitter\|De-Sitter]]'s model, which however allowed a transfer into the later Steady-state Theory by a mere coordinate transformation.		Hiis attempt failed because he had searched a purely ''static'' solution, whose line element - as opposed to that of [[wikipedia:Alexander Alexandrowitsch Friedmann\|Friedmann]] as well as to about a hundred years later now to the line element of the stationary solution SUM - does not contain in the corresponding gravitational potentials ''g<sub>ik</sub>'' any coordinate of time. This also applies to the original form of [[wikipedia:De-Sitter\|De-Sitter]]'s model, which however allowed a transfer into the later Steady-state Theory by a mere coordinate transformation.

	* Steady-state Theory: Under the name [[wikipedia:Steady State Theory\|Steady State Theory]], which tried to describe a steady expansion, in the year 1948 a model was presented (due to differing observational facts later failed in various versions) which in view of its authors because of permanent new creation of matter from nothing - in clear contrast to SUM - should have been regarded to be filled with constant matter density. Only recently it became known that already Einstein essentially anticipated and rejected the concept of this theory. A new ''C'' field introduced by [[wikipedia:Fred Hoyle\|Fred Hoyle]] may be regarded as precursor of the scalar field of today's inflationary Lambda-CDM model. In spite of its name [[wikipedia:Steady-state Theory\|Steady-state Theory]] the redshift values of individual galaxies do not result steady as constants (except of their peculiar motions), but corresponding to the titles of those articles (explicitly refering to an ''expanding universe'') would continuously increase.		* Steady-state Theory: Under the name [[wikipedia:Steady State Theory\|Steady State Theory]], which tried to describe a steady expansion, in the year 1948 a model was presented (due to differing observational facts later failed in various versions) which in view of its authors because of permanent new creation of matter from nothing - in clear contrast to SUM - should have been regarded to be filled with constant matter density. Only recently it became known that already Einstein essentially anticipated and rejected the concept of this theory. A new ''C'' field introduced by [[wikipedia:Fred Hoyle\|Sir Fred Hoyle]] may be regarded as precursor of the scalar field of today's inflationary Lambda-CDM model. In spite of its name [[wikipedia:Steady-state Theory\|Steady-state Theory]] the redshift values of individual galaxies do not result steady as constants (except of their peculiar motions), but corresponding to the titles of those articles (explicitly refering to an ''expanding universe'') would continuously increase.

	* Coasting Cosmology: A model of a more general form of the linee element than that of SUM shown above - but including a [[wikipedia:scale ~~factor~~\|scale factor]] ''HT'' - has been discussed at its time as a universe of ''coasting'' expansion <ref>E.W. Kolb, [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1989ApJ...344..543K "''A coasting cosmology''"], ApJ 344, 543-550, 1989</ref>, before in the year 2011 a closely related concept has been discussed once more in the context of today's big bang Lambda-CDM cosmology <ref>F. Melia F. & A.S.H. Shevchuk, [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.5189 "''The R<sub>h</sub> = ct Universe''"], MNRAS 419, 2579, 2012</ref>. Both models are on principle different from SUM (the fundamental consequence of constant values of redshift from sources in constant universal distances was originally not even mentioned there).		* Coasting Cosmology: A model of a more general form of the linee element than that of SUM shown above - but including a [[wikipedia:scale factor_(cosmology)\|scale factor]] ''HT'' - has been discussed at its time as a universe of ''coasting'' expansion <ref>E.W. Kolb, [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1989ApJ...344..543K "''A coasting cosmology''"], ApJ 344, 543-550, 1989</ref>, before in the year 2011 a closely related concept has been discussed once more in the context of today's big bang Lambda-CDM cosmology <ref>F. Melia F. & A.S.H. Shevchuk, [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.5189 "''The R<sub>h</sub> = ct Universe''"], MNRAS 419, 2579, 2012</ref>. Both models are on principle different from SUM (the fundamental consequence of constant values of redshift from sources in constant universal distances was originally not even mentioned there).

	* Chaotic Inflation: The physicist [[wikipedia:Andrei ~~Dmitrijewitsch~~ Linde\|Andrei Linde]] has developed the concept of [[wikipedia:~~Urknall#chaotische Inflation~~\|chaotic inflation]]<ref>A. Linde, "''Chaotic Inflation''", Phys.Lett. 129B, 177–181, 1983</ref><ref>A. Linde, [http://iopscience.iop.org/1402-4896/2005/T117/005/pdf/1402-4896_2005_T117_005.pdf "''Prospects of Inflation''"], Phys. Scripta T117, 40–48, 2005</ref> and thereby overcame the theoretical fixation on one single big bang from nothing. On the other hand there is dealt with ''parallel'' universes, where each of them had origined with own inflation and even possibly own laws of nature. This clearly contradits SUM's fundamental presupposition of many cosmic areas within one universe of everywhere the same laws of nature (multiverse). In that context - though of completely different mathematics - also appeared a title 'Stationary Universe Model'<ref>A. Mezhlumian, [http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9410039 "''Stationary Universe Model: Inputs and Outputs''"], Stanford Pre-print, 1–11, 1994</ref> for the first time. With regard to a universe eternally situated in change there obviously always had been ~~corresspondig~~ ideas, which seem related to [[wikipedia:Samsara\|cycle of growth and decay]] in eastern religions.		* Chaotic Inflation: The physicist [[wikipedia:Andrei Linde\|Andrei Linde]] has developed the concept of [[wikipedia:eternal_inflation\|chaotic inflation]]<ref>A. Linde, "''Chaotic Inflation''", Phys.Lett. 129B, 177–181, 1983</ref><ref>A. Linde, [http://iopscience.iop.org/1402-4896/2005/T117/005/pdf/1402-4896_2005_T117_005.pdf "''Prospects of Inflation''"], Phys. Scripta T117, 40–48, 2005</ref> and thereby overcame the theoretical fixation on one single big bang from nothing. On the other hand there is dealt with ''parallel'' universes, where each of them had origined with own inflation and even possibly own laws of nature. This clearly contradits SUM's fundamental presupposition of many cosmic areas within one universe of everywhere the same laws of nature (multiverse). In that context - though of completely different mathematics - also appeared a title 'Stationary Universe Model'<ref>A. Mezhlumian, [http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9410039 "''Stationary Universe Model: Inputs and Outputs''"], Stanford Pre-print, 1–11, 1994</ref> for the first time. With regard to a universe eternally situated in change there obviously always had been correspondig ideas, which seem related to [[wikipedia:Samsara\|cycle of growth and decay]] in eastern religions.

	Also in view of [[wikipedia:~~Epikur~~\|~~Epikur~~]] there ~~exist~~ an infinite number of worlds in infinite large space, what has ben reported by Lucretius in ''[[wikipedia:De rerum natura\|On the Nature of Things]]''. According to [[wikipedia:Rhazes\|Rhazes]] - in sense of timeless laws of nature - there shall be an eternal matter from atoms, an absolute and eternal universal time (different from relative 'proper' time) as well as an absolute and eternal space being unchanging. Similar concepts of space and time are found later from Newton. [[wikipedia:Nikolaus von Kues\|Nikolaus von Kues]] has thought about a [[wikipedia:~~Parallelwelt~~\|multiplicity of worlds]] in a single infinite universe. The according to modern natural science revitalized idea of an eternal infinite universe, however, is existing at the latest since [[wikipedia:Thomas Digges\|Thomas Digges]]. His contemporary [[wikipedia:Giordano Bruno\|Giordano Bruno]] defended the idea of "many worlds ", what is shown in particular from his document of 1584 ''About the infinite, the universe and the worlds'' (choice of words of this title corresponds also to SUM's distintion of "Universe" from " cosmoses"). He had the idea that this [[wikipedia:Giordano Bruno~~#Unendlichkeit des Weltalls~~\|eternal infinite universe]] was interwoven by the same divine pulse. His thinking had become influenced by the predecessors mentioned above. In the context of SUM it has now been shown that corresponding concepts are not only compatible to Einstein's equations, but seem to follow from them. On the one hand, although this new model is hardly realized till now by mainstream-cosmology, but on the other hand the current ''Cosmological Concordane Model'' (CCM) including its highly speculative ''[[wikipedia:phase of inflation\|phase of inflation]]'' (founded by no experimental experience but indispensable there) seems to strike increasing scepticism with quite a few people.		Also in view of [[wikipedia:Epicurus\|Epicurus]] there exists an infinite number of worlds in infinite large space, what has ben reported by Lucretius in ''[[wikipedia:De rerum natura\|On the Nature of Things]]''. According to [[wikipedia:Rhazes\|Rhazes]] - in sense of timeless laws of nature - there shall be an eternal matter from atoms, an absolute and eternal universal time (different from relative 'proper' time) as well as an absolute and eternal space being unchanging. Similar concepts of space and time are found later from Newton. [[wikipedia:Nikolaus von Kues\|Nikolaus von Kues]] has thought about a [[wikipedia:plurality_of_worlds\|multiplicity of worlds]] in a single infinite universe. The according to modern natural science revitalized idea of an eternal infinite universe, however, is existing at the latest since [[wikipedia:Thomas Digges\|Thomas Digges]]. His contemporary [[wikipedia:Giordano Bruno\|Giordano Bruno]] defended the idea of "many worlds ", what is shown in particular from his document of 1584 ''About the infinite, the universe and the worlds'' (choice of words of this title corresponds also to SUM's distintion of "Universe" from " cosmoses"). He had the idea that this [[wikipedia:Giordano Bruno\|eternal infinite universe]] was interwoven by the same divine pulse. His thinking had become influenced by the predecessors mentioned above. In the context of SUM it has now been shown that corresponding concepts are not only compatible to Einstein's equations, but seem to follow from them. On the one hand, although this new model is hardly realized till now by mainstream-cosmology, but on the other hand the current ''Cosmological Concordane Model'' (CCM) including its highly speculative ''[[wikipedia:phase of inflation\|phase of inflation]]'' (founded by no experimental experience but indispensable there) seems to strike increasing scepticism with quite a few people.

	The idea leading to SUM, which is shown to be the only arguable solution of Einstein's original equations without cosmological constant, is that no universal horizons must limit physical reality. Beyond local applicability any 'proper' SRT concepts will prove overstrained in the conventional GRT framework. Therefore SUM demands a scientific discussion instead of an endless sham fight against the outdated historical attempt of the SST. In contrast to apparent attempts based on premature fictions of a big bang and accelerated expansion of space it is a matter of course that ~~ubuntu~~ cosmology is not to teach nature, but to learn from and to describe the universe in awe and with due modesty.		The idea leading to SUM, which is shown to be the only arguable solution of Einstein's original equations without cosmological constant, is that no universal horizons must limit physical reality. Beyond local applicability any 'proper' SRT concepts will prove overstrained in the conventional GRT framework. This insight goes back to a seminal analysis ""Die Einweg-Lichtgeschwindigkeit auf der rotierenden Erde und die Definition des Meters"" of Einstein's ideas<ref>P. Ostermann, [http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0208056 "Die Einweg-Lichtgeschwindigkeit auf der rotierenden Erde und die Definition des Meters"]</ref>. Therefore SUM demands a scientific discussion instead of an endless sham fight against the outdated historical attempt of the SST. In contrast to apparent attempts based on premature fictions of a big bang and accelerated expansion of space it is a matter of course that cosmology is not to teach nature, but to learn from and to describe the universe in awe and with due modesty.
	~~</span>~~

	== Literatur ==		== Literatur ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:27, 21 February 2026
Line 151:		Line 151:

	Now recently there has been reported another "local value" <math>H_{\mathrm{0}}</math> = 73.2 km/s/Mpc with an uncertainty of only 2.4%		Now recently there has been reported another "local value" <math>H_{\mathrm{0}}</math> = 73.2 km/s/Mpc with an uncertainty of only 2.4%
	<ref>A.G. Riess et al., [http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/56/pdf "''A 2.4% Determination of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant''"], ApJ 826:56 (31pp), 2016, [[doi:10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/56]], [http://arxiv.org/abs/1604.01424 "arXiv:1604.01424"] </ref>		<ref>A.G. Riess et al., [http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/56/pdf "''A 2.4% Determination of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant''"], ApJ 826:56 (31pp), 2016, [[doi:10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/56]], [http://arxiv.org/abs/1604.01424 "arXiv:1604.01424"] </ref> <ref>A.G. Riess et al., [http://arxiv.org/abs/1801.01120 "New Parallaxes of Galactic Cepheids from Spatially Scanning the Hubble Space Telescope: Implications for the Hubble Constant"], [http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aaadb7 doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaadb7], [http://arxiv.org/abs/1801.01120 "arxiv:1801.01120"]</ref>
	as well as 71.9 km/s/Mpc ±3.8% (approximately corresponding to 72.8 km/s/Mpc ±3.3% in Bonvin et al.		as well as 71.9 km/s/Mpc ±3.8% (approximately corresponding to 72.8 km/s/Mpc ±3.3% in Bonvin et al.
	<ref>V. Bonvin et al., [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.4914B "''H0LiCOW V. New COSMOGRAIL time delays of HE0435-1223: H0 to 3.8% precision from strong lensing in a flat ΛCDM model''"], [http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01790 "arXiv:1607.01790]" </ref>.		<ref>V. Bonvin et al., [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.4914B "''H0LiCOW V. New COSMOGRAIL time delays of HE0435-1223: H0 to 3.8% precision from strong lensing in a flat ΛCDM model''"], [http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01790 "arXiv:1607.01790]" </ref>.
Line 178:		Line 178:
	== Comparison with the Supernova-Ia data ==		== Comparison with the Supernova-Ia data ==

	To explain the Supernova-Ia data		To explain the Supernova-Ia data <ref>A.G. Riess et al. (High-z Supernova Search Team),
	<ref>A.G. Riess et al. (High-z Supernova Search Team),
	[http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/659/1/98/fulltext/ "''New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Supernovae at z ≥ 1: Narrowing		[http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/659/1/98/fulltext/ "''New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Supernovae at z ≥ 1: Narrowing
	Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy''"], ApJ 659, 98-121,		Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy''"], ApJ 659, 98-121,
	2007</ref>		2007</ref>
	<ref>M. Kowalski et al. (The Supernova Cosmology Project), [http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/686/2/749/fulltext/ "''Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old, and Combined		<ref>M. Kowalski et al. (The Supernova Cosmology Project), [http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/686/2/749/fulltext/ "''Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old, and Combined
	Supernova Data Sets''"], ApJ 686, 749-778, 2008 </ref> on sufficiently large universal scales the model SUM does not need any 'dark energy' and thus is also different from the [[wikipedia:Lambda-~~CDM-Modell~~\|Lambda-CDM model]] as standard model of today's cosmology. Deviations in the region ''z'' < 0.1 are here reduced to a local Hubble contrast as in order of magnitude actually obseved. The universal SUM-[[wikipedia:~~Absolute Helligkeit~~\|~~distsnce~~ modulus]] results from the stationary line element as usual yielding		Supernova Data Sets''"], ApJ 686, 749-778, 2008 </ref> on sufficiently large universal scales the model SUM does not need any 'dark energy' and thus is also different from the [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM_model\|Lambda-CDM model]] as standard model of today's cosmology. Deviations in the region ''z'' < 0.1 are here reduced to a local Hubble contrast as in order of magnitude actually obseved. The universal SUM [[wikipedia:distance_modulus\|distance modulus]] results from the stationary line element as usual yielding
	:<math>		:<math>
	(m-M)_\mathrm{SUM} = 5 \log{[(1+z) \ln{(1+z)}} + 25+ 5		(m-M)_\mathrm{SUM} = 5 \log{[(1+z) \ln{(1+z)}} + 25+ 5
	\log{(\tfrac{R_\mathrm{H}} {\mathrm{Mpc}})}		\log{(\tfrac{R_\mathrm{H}} {\mathrm{Mpc}})}
	</math>,		</math>,
	where the apparent [[wikipedia:~~Scheinbare Helligkeit~~\|magnitude]] is represented by ''m'' and the [[wikipedia:~~Absolute Helligkeit~~\|absolute ~~brightnes~~]] of [[wikipedia:~~Supernova vom Typ Ia~~\|Supernovae type Ia]] ~~(SNe-Ia) as~~ [[wikipedia:~~Standardkerze~~\|''standard candles'']] by ''M''. The MG12 document ''Indication from the Supernovae Ia Data of a Stationary Background Universe''		where the apparent [[wikipedia:absolute_magnitude\|magnitude]] is represented by ''m'' and the [[wikipedia:brightness\|absolute brightness]] of [[wikipedia:type_Ia_Supernova\|Supernovae type Ia]] [[wikipedia:cosmic_distance_ladder\|''standard candles'']] by ''M''. The MG12 document ''Indication from the Supernovae Ia Data of a Stationary Background Universe''
	<ref>P. Ostermann, [http://www.icra.it/MG/mg12/talks/cot2_ostermann.pdf "''Indication …''"] MG12-Talk (please use the full-screen mode)</ref>		<ref>P. Ostermann, [http://www.icra.it/MG/mg12/talks/cot2_ostermann.pdf "''Indication …''"] MG12-Talk (please use the full-screen mode)</ref>
	demonstrates the immediate agreement of SUM's distance modulus with the SNeIa data for universal scales ''z'' > 0.1 (if at all beyond such scales - in order of magnitude corresponding to that of the [[wikipedia:Sloan Great Wall\|Sloan Great Wall]] - the universe can be rightly regarded to be homogeneous und isotropy).		demonstrates the immediate agreement of SUM's distance modulus with the SNeIa data for universal scales ''z'' > 0.1 (if at all beyond such scales - in order of magnitude corresponding to that of the [[wikipedia:Sloan Great Wall\|Sloan Great Wall]] - the universe can be rightly regarded to be homogeneous und isotropy).
	There in a number of systematically successive illustrations it is shown why to overcome the expected predictions of the [[wikipedia:~~Friedmann-Modell#~~Einstein-~~de-Sitter-Modell~~\|Einstein-de-Sitter model]] and that of the outdated [[wikipedia:Steady-state theory\|Steady-state theory]] a strange concept of a 'dark energy' representing a fictitious [[wikipedia:cosmological constant\|cosmological constant]] seemed necessary to explain the new observational data. Based on Einstein's original gravitational equations without such a constant of his "biggest blunder", however, the SUM line element had been immediately confirmed by the new Supernova measurements.		There in a number of systematically successive illustrations it is shown why to overcome the expected predictions of the [[wikipedia:Einstein-de_Sitter_universe\|Einstein-de-Sitter model]] and that of the outdated [[wikipedia:Steady-state theory\|Steady-state theory]] a strange concept of a 'dark energy' representing a fictitious [[wikipedia:cosmological constant\|cosmological constant]] seemed necessary to explain the new observational data. Based on Einstein's original gravitational equations without such a constant of his "biggest blunder", however, the SUM line element had been immediately confirmed by the new Supernova measurements <ref>P. Ostermann, [http://independent-research.org/assets/nobel-prize-physics-2011.pdf "The well-earned Nobel Prize for the wrong reason"]</ref>.
	Even taking into account an infinite number of stars, due to [[wikipedia:redshift\|redshift]] and [[wikipedia:time dilation\|time dilation]] there results a realistic finite value for the low brightness (darkness) of the night sky. [[wikipedia:Heinrich Wilhelm Olbers~~#Olberssches Paradoxon~~\|Olbers' paradox]] is solved here without any hypothesis concerning a 'big bang' or any spatial expansion.		Even taking into account an infinite number of stars, due to [[wikipedia:redshift\|redshift]] and [[wikipedia:time dilation\|time dilation]] there results a realistic finite value for the low brightness (darkness) of the night sky. [[wikipedia:Heinrich Wilhelm Olbers\|Olbers' paradox]] is solved here without any hypothesis concerning a 'big bang' or any spatial expansion.

	== Alternative to a material contribution of 'dark energy' ==		== Alternative to a material contribution of 'dark energy' ==

	In addition to the [[wikipedia:~~Inhomogenität~~\|inhomogeneous]] contribution of indirectly meausurable dark matter there should be also a roughly homogeneously distributed transparent one, which in accordance with SUM is not even detectable by the effect of [[wikipedia:~~Gravitationslinseneffekt~~\|gravitational lensing]]. This homogeneous part - in the [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM model\|Lambda-CDM framework]] ascribed to ''dark energy'' could fill the gap between that amount of the matter actually observed today and the [[wikipedia:~~Kritische Dichte~~\|critical density]] required for a ''flat'' universe without spatial ''curvature''. At the same time there is no [[wikipedia:~~Expansion des Universums~~\|expansion of space]] and therefore no need for any additional energy to accelerate the fictive universal expansion.		In addition to the [[wikipedia:homogeneity_and_heterogeneity\|inhomogeneous]] contribution of indirectly meausurable dark matter there should be also a roughly homogeneously distributed transparent one, which in accordance with SUM is not even detectable by the effect of [[wikipedia:gravitational_lense\|gravitational lensing]]. This homogeneous part - in the [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM model\|Lambda-CDM framework]] ascribed to ''dark energy'' could fill the gap between that amount of the matter actually observed today and the [[wikipedia:critical_density\|critical density]] required for a ''flat'' universe without spatial ''curvature''. At the same time there is no [[wikipedia:expansion_of_the_universe\|expansion of space]] and therefore no need for any additional energy to accelerate the fictive universal expansion.

	It is simply a wrong statement to read: ''"The measured <math>H_0</math> is also highly inconsistent with the simplest inhomogeneous matter models invoked to explain the apparent acceleration of the universe without dark energy"''		It is simply a wrong statement to read: ''"The measured <math>H_0</math> is also highly inconsistent with the simplest inhomogeneous matter models invoked to explain the apparent acceleration of the universe without dark energy"''
Line 204:		Line 203:
	is easily disproved. The refutation of that claim does not even		is easily disproved. The refutation of that claim does not even
	require any own special astrophysical expertise, since their publicly		require any own special astrophysical expertise, since their publicly
	available and Nobel awarded data seem rightly unimpeachable. Each ubuntu child may be able to debunk it as superstition (unfortunately almost soundig like a fake) by straighforwardly plotting ~~the~~ authors' own SNeIa 'gold' data in the		available and Nobel awarded data seem rightly unimpeachable. Each ubuntu child may be able to debunk it as superstition (unfortunately almost soundig like a fake) by straighforwardly plotting those authors' own SNeIa 'gold' data in the
	universal redshift range z > 0.1.		universal redshift range z > 0.1.
	</span>		</span>

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:13, 21 February 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<big><big><big>'''Stationary Universe Model (SUM)'''</big></big></big>		<big><big><big>'''Stationary Universe Model (SUM)'''</big></big></big>

	The '''Stationary Universe Model''' ('''SUM''') has been developed as ''work in progress'' by the physicist Peter Ostermann since 2001 from the presuppositon of an eternal, infinite universe on base of the original [[wikipedia:~~Einsteinsche Feldgleichungen~~\|''field equations'']] of [[wikipedia:Albert Einstein\|Albert Einstein]]		The '''Stationary Universe Model''' ('''SUM''') has been developed as ''work in progress'' by the physicist Peter Ostermann since 2001 from the presuppositon of an eternal, infinite universe on base of the original [[wikipedia:Einstein_field_equations\|''field equations'']] of [[wikipedia:Albert Einstein\|Albert Einstein]] <ref>A. Einstein, [http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/272 "''Die Feldgleichungen der Gravitation''"], Sitz.ber. Preuß. Akad. Wiss., 25. November 1915, 844-847 – (reprint Doc. 25, CPAE Vol. 6)</ref> <ref>A. Einstein, [http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/312 "''Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie''"], Ann. d. Phys. 49, 769-822 – (reprint Doc. 30 CPAE Vol. 6)</ref> without [[wikipedia:cosmological_constant\|''cosmological constant'']] and physically formulated as a reasonable alternative <ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0211054 Ein stationäres Universum und die Grundlagen der Relativitätstheorie]''", arXiv:physics/0211054, 2002/04</ref> <ref>P. Ostermann, [http://independent-research.org/assets/altern16.pdf "Problems of single-bang cosmology from the perspective of the mathematically simplest alternative based on Einstein's equations"]</ref> <ref>P. Ostermann, [https://web.archive.org/web/20230326205344/http://independent-research.org/assets/multiverse_18.pdf "New physics of an eternal infinite multiverse instead of today's singular big-bang cosmology"], preprint 2018</ref> to the numerically utmost successful [[wikipedia:big_bang\|''big bang model'']].
	<ref>A. Einstein, [http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/272 "''Die Feldgleichungen der Gravitation''"], Sitz.ber. Preuß. Akad. Wiss., 25. November 1915, 844-847 – (reprint Doc. 25, CPAE Vol. 6)</ref>		It has been presented at the 12. [[wikipedia:ICRANet\|Marcel Grossmann Meeting]]
	<ref>A. Einstein, [http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/312 "''Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie''"], Ann. d. Phys. 49, 769-822 – (reprint Doc. 30 CPAE Vol. 6)</ref>
	without [[wikipedia:~~kosmologische Konstante~~\|''cosmological constant'']] and physically formulated as a reasonable alternative
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0211054 Ein stationäres Universum und die Grundlagen der Relativitätstheorie]''", arXiv:physics/0211054, 2002/04</ref> <ref>P. Ostermann, [http://independent-research.org/assets/altern16.pdf "Problems of single-bang cosmology from the perspective of the mathematically simplest alternative based on Einstein's equations"]</ref> <ref>P. Ostermann, [https://web.archive.org/web/20230326205344/http://independent-research.org/assets/multiverse_18.pdf "New physics of an eternal infinite multiverse instead of today's singular big-bang cosmology"], preprint 2018</ref> to the numerically utmost successful [[wikipedia:~~Urknall#Expansion des Universums~~\|''big bang model'']].
	It has been presented at the 12. [[wikipedia:~~Marcel Grossmann Meeting~~\|Marcel Grossmann Meeting]]
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0230 Relativistic Deduction of a Stationary Tohu-va-Bohu Background Cosmology]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1408-1410, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot3_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>		<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0230 Relativistic Deduction of a Stationary Tohu-va-Bohu Background Cosmology]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1408-1410, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot3_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0219 Indication from the Supernovae Ia Data of a Stationary Background Universe]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1373-1375, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot2_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>		<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814374552_0219 Indication from the Supernovae Ia Data of a Stationary Background Universe]''"; in: Damour Th., Jantzen R. T., & Ruffini R. (Eds.), Proc. MG12, W.Sci., 1373-1375, 2012; [http://independent-research.org/assets/mg12_cot2_proceed_ostermann.pdf, article PDF 2012]</ref>
Line 12:		Line 8:
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://independent-research.org/assets/07a.pdf Das relativistische Modell eines stationären Hintergrunduniversums und die Supernova-Ia-Daten]''"; DPG-Vortrag/GR-205.2, 2007</ref>		<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://independent-research.org/assets/07a.pdf Das relativistische Modell eines stationären Hintergrunduniversums und die Supernova-Ia-Daten]''"; DPG-Vortrag/GR-205.2, 2007</ref>
	2007 Heidelberg before, first pre-prints are at arXiv.org).		2007 Heidelberg before, first pre-prints are at arXiv.org).
	In comparison with the due to excellent apparent confirmations for a long time prevailing [[wikipedia:~~Kosmologie~~\|standard model]] (''Concordance Model'') in form of the [[wikipedia:~~Inflation~~ (~~Kosmologie~~)\|inflationary]] [[wikipedia:Lambda-~~CDM-Modell~~\|Lambda CDM cosmology]] is SUM on base of a new line element representing a concept, which in contrast to the outdated [[wikipedia:~~Steady State Theory~~\|Steady State Theory]] seems compatible to current observational facts. Despite amazing unexpected successes the model doesn't reach the highly developed stand with regard to various details of the CCM, but is still in an initial phase; it is an encouragement in the sense of clearing up: "sapere aude!" (dare to think) and seems almost a miracle, that on basis of Einstein's equations the idea of an infinite stationary universe turns out to imply clear indication that individual cosmoses are of finite dimensions in space and time. It is in particular this conclusion that arises from the interplay of local special relativity (macroscopically representing quantum mechanics) and universal general relativity (representing gravitation). The unexpected feature is that – describing our evolutionary cosmos as part of a stationary multiverse – the same mathematical model is bringing ideas of various cultural areas to mind about existence of an eternal universe and the creation of cosmoses. While these ideas seem implausibly unbalanced in the prevailing western single-bang standard approach, the new concept SUM, if understood in sense of a Tao Cosmology, seems naturally incorporated into the picture of a multiverse as an oscillation of forces, which might philosophically also be named Yin and Yang. Preliminarily this tries to be a mainstream-breaking attempt to free human spirit from all dogmatic chains unfortunately limiting ubuntu science so far.		In comparison with the due to excellent apparent confirmations for a long time prevailing [[wikipedia:standard_model\|standard model]] (''Concordance Model'') in form of the [[wikipedia:inflation_(cosmology)\|inflationary]] [[wikipedia:Lambda-CDM_model\|Lambda CDM cosmology]] is SUM on base of a new line element representing a concept, which in contrast to the outdated [[wikipedia:Steady_State_Theory\|Steady State Theory]] seems compatible to current observational facts. Despite amazing unexpected successes the model doesn't reach the highly developed stand with regard to various details of the CCM, but is still in an initial phase; it is an encouragement in the sense of clearing up: "sapere aude!" (dare to think) and seems almost a miracle, that on basis of Einstein's equations the idea of an infinite stationary universe turns out to imply clear indication that individual cosmoses are of finite dimensions in space and time. It is in particular this conclusion that arises from the interplay of local special relativity (macroscopically representing quantum mechanics) and universal general relativity (representing gravitation). The unexpected feature is that – describing our evolutionary cosmos as part of a stationary multiverse – the same mathematical model is bringing ideas of various cultural areas to mind about existence of an eternal universe and the creation of cosmoses. While these ideas seem implausibly unbalanced in the prevailing western single-bang standard approach, the new concept SUM, if understood in sense of a Tao Cosmology, seems naturally incorporated into the picture of a multiverse as an oscillation of forces, which might philosophically also be named Yin and Yang. Preliminarily this tries to be a mainstream-breaking attempt to free human spirit from all dogmatic chains unfortunately limiting ubuntu science so far.

	After the science-fiction breaking Hossenfelder wake-up call <ref>S. Hossenfelder: "Lost in Math", Basic Books, New York 2018</ref> , the central question remains: What does the dilemma of today's mainstream physics mean in reality? Conclusions from SUM – completely new in contrast to the fictitiously asssumed big bang – allow for a solution in principle of the most puzzling questions of today's Lambda-CDM Concordance Cosmology, which after a paradigm shift to SUM might be resolved at one blow:		After the science-fiction breaking Hossenfelder wake-up call <ref>S. Hossenfelder: "Lost in Math", Basic Books, New York 2018</ref> , the central question remains: What does the dilemma of today's mainstream physics mean in reality? Conclusions from SUM – completely new in contrast to the fictitiously asssumed big bang – allow for a solution in principle of the most puzzling questions of today's Lambda-CDM Concordance Cosmology, which after a paradigm shift to SUM might be resolved at one blow:
Line 29:		Line 25:
	Team leader and Nobel Laureate Adam Riess' comment on the 'Hubble trouble': ''"The tension seems to have grown into a full-blown incompatibility between our views of the early and late time universe" (July 12, 2018 at <nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/hubble-and-gaia-team-up-to-fuel-cosmic-conundrum>). “At this point, clearly it’s not simply some gross error in any one measurement. It’s as though you predicted how tall a child would become from a growth chart and then found the adult he or she became greatly exceeded the prediction. We are very perplexed [...] The tension could thus provide evidence of physics beyond the standard model (or unaccounted systematic errors) [...] These recent results clearly motivate a detailed study of possible extensions of the Lambda-CDM model and an inspection of the current cosmological data sets, checking for inconsistencies."''		Team leader and Nobel Laureate Adam Riess' comment on the 'Hubble trouble': ''"The tension seems to have grown into a full-blown incompatibility between our views of the early and late time universe" (July 12, 2018 at <nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/hubble-and-gaia-team-up-to-fuel-cosmic-conundrum>). “At this point, clearly it’s not simply some gross error in any one measurement. It’s as though you predicted how tall a child would become from a growth chart and then found the adult he or she became greatly exceeded the prediction. We are very perplexed [...] The tension could thus provide evidence of physics beyond the standard model (or unaccounted systematic errors) [...] These recent results clearly motivate a detailed study of possible extensions of the Lambda-CDM model and an inspection of the current cosmological data sets, checking for inconsistencies."''

	According to recently found limitations of proper length and proper time the Hubble radius is setting an uppermost limit for the validity of any approximate SRT concepts and processes transferred to cosmology. Thus the new cosmological model SUM – distinguishing our evolutionary cosmos from the stationary background universe, what also solves [[wikipedia:Kant\|Immanuel Kant]]'s first antinomy of space and time – does neither include an [[wikipedia:~~Expansion des Universums~~\|expansion of space]] nor an end of the universe in bleak emptiness as nowadays usually otherwise predicted. It starts from the physical fact that nothing arises from nothing. The entirety of all is regarded as a consistent reality and in sense of ''stationary universe'' - not at all static - distinguished from our [[wikipedia:~~Urknall~~\|''evolutionary cosmos'']]. Therefore both its age and its extension are infinite, but this does not apply to our cosmos as part of it.		According to recently found limitations of proper length and proper time the Hubble radius is setting an uppermost limit for the validity of any approximate SRT concepts and processes transferred to cosmology. Thus the new cosmological model SUM – distinguishing our evolutionary cosmos from the stationary background universe, what also solves [[wikipedia:Kant\|Immanuel Kant]]'s first antinomy of space and time – does neither include an [[wikipedia:big_bang\|expansion of space]] nor an end of the universe in bleak emptiness as nowadays usually otherwise predicted. It starts from the physical fact that nothing arises from nothing. The entirety of all is regarded as a consistent reality and in sense of ''stationary universe'' - not at all static - distinguished from our [[wikipedia:big_bang\|''evolutionary cosmos'']]. Therefore both its age and its extension are infinite, but this does not apply to our cosmos as part of it.

	What in view of the FLRW singularity is otherwise called 'age of the universe', now in view of SUM turns out to be rather the maximum age of macroscopic structures. Seemingly opposite observations of e.g. oldest galaxies cannot convince of a singular origin. This in analogy to the commonplace experience that the existence of people with each member not older than about one hundred years does not prove this individual maximum lifetime to be the age of the whole population. Therefore – in contrast to the natural search for the vital history of our cosmos – it does not make sense to search for a continuous history of the entire universe.		What in view of the FLRW singularity is otherwise called 'age of the universe', now in view of SUM turns out to be rather the maximum age of macroscopic structures. Seemingly opposite observations of e.g. oldest galaxies cannot convince of a singular origin. This in analogy to the commonplace experience that the existence of people with each member not older than about one hundred years does not prove this individual maximum lifetime to be the age of the whole population. Therefore – in contrast to the natural search for the vital history of our cosmos – it does not make sense to search for a continuous history of the entire universe.

	In spite of both presupposing in common the ''[[wikipedia:~~Kosmologisches Prinzip~~\|perfect cosmological principle]]'' the model SUM with its statistically constant values of [[wikipedia:~~Rotverschiebung~~\|redshift]] is fundamentally different from the [[wikipedia:Steady State Theory\|Steady State Theory]] of an expanding universe		In spite of both presupposing in common the ''[[wikipedia:cosmological_principle\|perfect cosmological principle]]'' the model SUM with its statistically constant values of [[wikipedia:redshift\|redshift]] is fundamentally different from the [[wikipedia:Steady State Theory\|Steady State Theory]] of an expanding universe
	<ref>H. Bondi & T. Gold, [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1948MNRAS.108..252B "''The Steady-State Theory of the Expanding Universe''"] Monthly Notices, Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 108, 252-270, 1948</ref>		<ref>H. Bondi & T. Gold, [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1948MNRAS.108..252B "''The Steady-State Theory of the Expanding Universe''"] Monthly Notices, Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 108, 252-270, 1948</ref>
	<ref>F. Hoyle, [http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1948MNRAS.108..372H "''A New Model of the Expanding Universe''"] Monthly Notices, Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 108, 372-382, 1948</ref>.		<ref>F. Hoyle, [http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1948MNRAS.108..372H "''A New Model of the Expanding Universe''"] Monthly Notices, Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 108, 372-382, 1948</ref>.
	The mathematically exactly derived values of redshift correspond to the statistically constant [[wikipedia:~~Euklidische Geometrie~~\|Euclidean]] distances in universal coordinates which are also called ''[[wikipedia:~~Entfernungsmaß~~#~~Mitbewegte Entfernung~~\|comoving coordinates]]'' because of historical grounds. After a preliminarly purely mathematical derivation of a stationary [[wikipedia:~~Hintergrundstrahlung~~\|background radiation]] with [[wikipedia:~~Plancksches Strahlungsgesetz~~\|Planck spectrum]] without reduction to a fictional [[wikipedia:~~Urknall~~\|big bang]]) a previous version of SUM		The mathematically exactly derived values of redshift correspond to the statistically constant [[wikipedia:Euclid\|Euclidean]] distances in universal coordinates which are also called ''[[wikipedia:Comoving_and_proper_distances#comoving_coordinates\|comoving coordinates]]'' because of historical grounds. After a preliminarly purely mathematical derivation of a stationary [[wikipedia:cosmic_background_radiation\|background radiation]] with [[wikipedia:Planck_spectrum\|Planck spectrum]] without reduction to a fictional [[wikipedia:big_bang\|big bang]]) a previous version of SUM
	<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312655v6 The Concordance Model - a Heuristic Approach from a Stationary Universe]''", arXiv:astro-ph/0312655v6, 2013</ref>		<ref>P. Ostermann, "''[http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312655v6 The Concordance Model - a Heuristic Approach from a Stationary Universe]''", arXiv:astro-ph/0312655v6, 2013</ref>
	has been developed to ''Model of a Stationary Background Universe Behind Our Cosmos'' (2013) <ref>P. Ostermann, "Model of a Stationary Background Universe Behind Our Cosmos", 2014 [equation (9) here ok]</ref>. The underlying articles are at [http://independent-research.org <span style="color: green">"independent-research.org"]</span> ready for download.		has been developed to ''Model of a Stationary Background Universe Behind Our Cosmos'' (2013) <ref>P. Ostermann, "Model of a Stationary Background Universe Behind Our Cosmos", 2014 [equation (9) here ok]</ref>. The underlying articles are at [http://independent-research.org <span style="color: green">"independent-research.org"]</span> ready for download.

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 21 February 2026
Line 92:		Line 92:

	Because of the exponential mean time scalar e<sup>''Ht'' </sup>, all corresponding relative temporal changes depend on differences ''t'' – ''t''<sub>R</sub></sup> according to e<sup>''Ht'' </sup>/ e<sup>''Ht''<sub>R</sub></sup> = e<sup>''H''(''t'' – ''t''<sub>R</sub>)</sup> solely, where ''t''<sub>R</sub></sup> is a respective reference point of universal time. Therefore no special fixation of the universal time scale ''t'' * is preferred. This fundamental feature is what allows arbitrarily to set ''t''<sub>R</sub>*</sup> = 0 for arbitrary complexes of observation.		Because of the exponential mean time scalar e<sup>''Ht'' </sup>, all corresponding relative temporal changes depend on differences ''t'' – ''t''<sub>R</sub></sup> according to e<sup>''Ht'' </sup>/ e<sup>''Ht''<sub>R</sub></sup> = e<sup>''H''(''t'' – ''t''<sub>R</sub>)</sup> solely, where ''t''<sub>R</sub></sup> is a respective reference point of universal time. Therefore no special fixation of the universal time scale ''t'' * is preferred. This fundamental feature is what allows arbitrarily to set ''t''<sub>R</sub>*</sup> = 0 for arbitrary complexes of observation.
	The same fact applies to all other coherent events, in particular also to [[wikipedia:~~Spontane Emission~~\|emission]] and subsequent [[wikipedia:~~Absorption~~ (~~Physik~~)\|absorption]] of photons in distant galaxies.		The same fact applies to all other coherent events, in particular also to [[wikipedia:spontan_emission\|spontan emission]] and subsequent [[wikipedia:absorption_(physics)\|absorption]] of photons in distant galaxies.

	In contrast to the respective local quasi-proper time ''t'' ' = ''T'' ' – ''T''<sub>H</sub> (where ''T''<sub>H</sub> = 1/''H'' is the [[wikipedia:~~Hubble time~~\|Hubble time]]) the universal time ''t'' * has neither a beginnig nor an end. According to the SRT line element remaining locally valid		In contrast to the respective local quasi-proper time ''t'' ' = ''T'' ' – ''T''<sub>H</sub> (where ''T''<sub>H</sub> = 1/''H'' is the [[wikipedia:Hubble_time\|Hubble time]]) the universal time ''t'' * has neither a beginnig nor an end. According to the SRT line element remaining locally valid
	in any place and ever again (d''σ''<sup>2</sup><sub>SRT</sub> = ''c''<sup>2</sup>d''t''<math>\,</math><sup>2</sup><sub>SRT</sub> – d''l''<math>\,</math><sup>2</sup><sub>SRT</sub>) the intervals of ''[[wikipedia:~~proper length~~\|proper length]]'' and ''[[wikipedia:~~Zeitdilatation#Eigenzeit~~\|proper time]]'' are defined always together. From SUM's line element the mathematical approximations are easily concluded yielding		in any place and ever again (d''σ''<sup>2</sup><sub>SRT</sub> = ''c''<sup>2</sup>d''t''<math>\,</math><sup>2</sup><sub>SRT</sub> – d''l''<math>\,</math><sup>2</sup><sub>SRT</sub>) the intervals of ''[[wikipedia:proper_length\|proper length]]'' and ''[[wikipedia:proper_time\|proper time]]'' are defined always together. From SUM's line element the mathematical approximations are easily concluded yielding
	:<math>		:<math>
	\mathrm{d}t_{\mathrm{SRT}}</math> ≈ <math>\mathrm		\mathrm{d}t_{\mathrm{SRT}}</math> ≈ <math>\mathrm
Line 121:		Line 121:

	If according to ''t'' * = ln<math>\,</math>(''HT'' ')<math>\,</math>/<math>\,</math>''H'' only the universal time ''t'' * was transformed, it would follow the stationary line element in a		If according to ''t'' * = ln<math>\,</math>(''HT'' ')<math>\,</math>/<math>\,</math>''H'' only the universal time ''t'' * was transformed, it would follow the stationary line element in a
	[[wikipedia:~~Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker-Metrik~~\|Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker~~-Form~~ (FLRW~~-Form~~)]] with the simplest [[wikipedia:scale ~~factor~~\|scale factor]] ''a''<math>\,</math><sub>SUM</sub> = ''HT'' ' yielding		[[wikipedia:Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker_metric\|Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker form (FLRW form)]] with the simplest [[wikipedia:scale factor_(cosmology)\|scale factor]] ''a''<math>\,</math><sub>SUM</sub> = ''HT'' ' yielding
	:<math>		:<math>
	\mathrm{d}\sigma_\mathrm{SUM-FLRW}^{\ast 2} =		\mathrm{d}\sigma_\mathrm{SUM-FLRW}^{\ast 2} =
Line 131:		Line 131:
	== Energy density and the negative gravitational pressure ==		== Energy density and the negative gravitational pressure ==

	The SUM component ''G''<sub>00</sub> of the [[wikipedia:Tensor#~~Ko- und Kontravarianz~~\|''covariant'']] ~~[[wikipedia:Friedmann-Gleichung#Herleitung\|~~Einstein~~-Tensor]]~~ - obviously corresponding to the ''universal energy density'' - is temporally constant. On the other hand the [[wikipedia:~~Krummlinige Koordinaten#Tensoren zweiter Stufe~~\|mixed ~~co- contravariant~~]] component ''G''<sub>0</sub><sup>0</sup>, which would apply at application of [[wikipedia:~~Einsteinsche Feldgleichungen~~\|gravitational equations]] on local [[wikipedia:~~Ideale Flüssigkeit~~\|perfect fluids]], seems to depend on ''universal time'' ''t''<math>\,</math>. But that such a dependence over arbitrarily large periods would be unrealistic again - opposed to locally restricted [[wikipedia:~~Zeitdilatation#Eigenzeit~~\|proper times]] ''t'' - follows from the fact, that any special reference point of universal time ''t''<math>\,</math> does not exist.		The SUM component ''G''<sub>00</sub> of the [[wikipedia:Tensor#\|''covariant'']] Einstein tensor - obviously corresponding to the ''universal energy density'' - is temporally constant. On the other hand the [[wikipedia:mixed_tensor\|mixed tensor]] component ''G''<sub>0</sub><sup>0</sup>, which would apply at application of [[wikipedia:Einstein_field_equations\|gravitational equations]] on local [[wikipedia:perfect_fluids\|perfect fluids]], seems to depend on ''universal time'' ''t''<math>\,</math>. But that such a dependence over arbitrarily large periods would be unrealistic again - opposed to locally restricted [[wikipedia:proper_times\|proper times]] ''t'' - follows from the fact, that any special reference point of universal time ''t''<math>\,</math> does not exist.
	The SUM line element implies a negative gravitational pressure of –1/3 the ''[[wikipedia:~~kritische Dichte~~\|critical density]]'' at each arbitrarily chosable zero point of universal time ''t''<sub>0</sub>* = 0. In contrast to ordinary particles in a box (which due to their positive pessure would immediately [[wikipedia:~~Diffusion~~\|diffuse]] without its walls), galaxies within a limited region of the ~~stationaty~~ universe would mass together due to their mutual attraction if there was no negative gravitational pressure (caused by the gravitational potential of matter and energy outside).		The SUM line element implies a negative gravitational pressure of –1/3 the ''[[wikipedia:critical_density_(cosmology)\|critical density]]'' at each arbitrarily chosable zero point of universal time ''t''<sub>0</sub>* = 0. In contrast to ordinary particles in a box (which due to their positive pessure would immediately [[wikipedia:diffusion\|diffuse]] without its walls), galaxies within a limited region of the stationary universe would mass together due to their mutual attraction if there was no negative gravitational pressure (caused by the gravitational potential of matter and energy outside).

	== SUM result of two different values for the local and the universal Hubble constant ==		== SUM result of two different values for the local and the universal Hubble constant ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:56, 21 February 2026
Line 47:		Line 47:
	<math>\Omega_\mathrm{\Lambda}</math>) [lower blue broken line]; the Einstein-de-Sitter model <math>a_\mathrm{EdS}(t') = </math> <math>(1 + \mathrm{3/2}Ht')^\mathrm{2/3}</math> [lower grey solid line, favored before the SNe-Ia breakthrough]. In contrast to all other comparable values the CCM best-fit parameter <math>\Omega_\mathrm{\Lambda}</math>) = 0.737 (blue solid line) seems determined by the condition, that its line should meet the SUM scalefactor (red) at its boundaries, i.e. at HT' = -1 exactly and at Ht' ≈ 0 approximately today. – SUM's unexpected local character as pseudo-proper FLRW form is concluded according to the corresponding sections above.]]		<math>\Omega_\mathrm{\Lambda}</math>) [lower blue broken line]; the Einstein-de-Sitter model <math>a_\mathrm{EdS}(t') = </math> <math>(1 + \mathrm{3/2}Ht')^\mathrm{2/3}</math> [lower grey solid line, favored before the SNe-Ia breakthrough]. In contrast to all other comparable values the CCM best-fit parameter <math>\Omega_\mathrm{\Lambda}</math>) = 0.737 (blue solid line) seems determined by the condition, that its line should meet the SUM scalefactor (red) at its boundaries, i.e. at HT' = -1 exactly and at Ht' ≈ 0 approximately today. – SUM's unexpected local character as pseudo-proper FLRW form is concluded according to the corresponding sections above.]]

	In contrast to ''static'' the word ''stationary'' means, that all things considered remain at large the same, though single components may permanently change. The concept of SUM can be based on a deductive development different from any inductive conclusion. Two [[wikipedia:~~Postulat~~\|postulates]] are sufficient to derive SUM's stationary [[wikipedia:~~Metrischer Tensor#Linienelement~~\|line element]]:		In contrast to ''static'' the word ''stationary'' means, that all things considered remain at large the same, though single components may permanently change. The concept of SUM can be based on a deductive development different from any inductive conclusion. Two [[wikipedia:axiom\|postulates]] are sufficient to derive SUM's stationary [[wikipedia:line_element\|line element]]:

	* Postulate I – With respect to sufficiently large scales the universe is stationary, homogeneous and isotropic.		* Postulate I – With respect to sufficiently large scales the universe is stationary, homogeneous and isotropic.
Line 57:		Line 57:
	\mathrm{e}^{Ht^{\ast}}\mathrm{d}\sigma_\mathrm{SRT}^{\ast}		\mathrm{e}^{Ht^{\ast}}\mathrm{d}\sigma_\mathrm{SRT}^{\ast}
	</math>.		</math>.
	Here ''H'' stands for a true ''Hubble constant'' (which in contrast to CCM's time-dependent ''conventional'' [[wikipedia:~~Hubble-Konstante#Definition~~\| Hubble parameter]]		Here ''H'' stands for a true ''Hubble constant'' (which in contrast to CCM's time-dependent ''conventional'' [[wikipedia:Hubble_constant\| Hubble parameter]]
	''H''<sub>0</sub> of the [[wikipedia:~~Urknall~~\|big bang cosmology]] is called ''significant''; the abbreviation d''σ''<sub>SRT</sub> stands for the line element of [[wikipedia:~~Spezielle Relativitätstheorie~~\|special relativity]], where the additional symbol '<math>\,</math><math>\,</math>' is indicating at each occurance the feature, that corresponding values are related to ''universal coordinates'' (besides '[[wikipedia:~~Entfernungsmaß#Mitbewegte Entfernung~~\|comoving coordinates]]' ''l''<math>\,</math>* also the 'conformal time'		''H''<sub>0</sub> of the [[wikipedia:big_bang\|big bang cosmology]] is called ''significant''; the abbreviation d''σ''<sub>SRT</sub> stands for the line element of [[wikipedia:special_relativity\|special relativity]], where the additional symbol '<math>\,</math><math>\,</math>' is indicating at each occurance the feature, that corresponding values are related to ''universal coordinates'' (besides '[[wikipedia:comoving_coordinates\|comoving coordinates]]' ''l''<math>\,</math>* also the 'conformal time'
	''t''<math>\,</math>*).		''t''<math>\,</math>*).

	According to SUM the universal coordinates temporarily match the [[wikipedia:~~Beobachter (Physik)#Relativitätstheorie~~\|proper lengths]] and the [[wikipedia:~~Zeitdilatation#Eigenzeit~~\|proper times]] of special relativity again an again. From the line element's explicit quadrat written out is the constancy of the universal [[wikipedia:~~Lichtgeschwindigkeit~~\|speed of light]] obvious because of c* ≡ d''l''<math>\,</math>/d''t'' = c (for d''σ''*<sub>SUM</sub> = 0).		According to SUM the universal coordinates temporarily match the [[wikipedia:proper_length\|proper lengths]] and the [[wikipedia:proper_time\|proper times]] of special relativity again an again. From the line element's explicit quadrat written out is the constancy of the universal [[wikipedia:speed_of_light\|speed of light]] obvious because of c* ≡ d''l''<math>\,</math>/d''t'' = c (for d''σ''*<sub>SUM</sub> = 0).

	== Redshift and the significant Hubble constant ==		== Redshift and the significant Hubble constant ==
Line 76:		Line 76:

	It is simply wrong to claim that the cosmic redshift proves any expansion. The ''universal redshift'' of distant		It is simply wrong to claim that the cosmic redshift proves any expansion. The ''universal redshift'' of distant
	[[wikipedia:~~Galaxie~~\|galaxies]] is understood in the SUM framework not as a [[wikipedia:~~Doppler-Effekt~~\|Doppler~~-Effekt~~]] but in sense of an extended Einsteinian [[wikipedia:~~Rotverschiebung#Gravitative Rot- und Blauverschiebung~~\|gravitational redshift]]. This corresponds exactly to the well-known fact that the redshift once measured by [[wikipedia:~~Pound-Rebka-Experiment~~\|Pound ~~und~~ Rebka]] is not at all caused by a flight between emitter at the top of the Jefferson tower and a receiver on the ground (even [[wikipedia:Edwin Hubble\|Edwin Hubble]]		[[wikipedia:galaxy\|galaxies]] is understood in the SUM framework not as a [[wikipedia:Doppler_effect\|Doppler effect]] but in sense of an extended Einsteinian [[wikipedia:gravitational_redshift\|gravitational redshift]]. This corresponds exactly to the well-known fact that the redshift once measured by [[wikipedia:Pound–Rebka_experiment\|Pound and Rebka]] is not at all caused by a flight between emitter at the top of the Jefferson tower and a receiver on the ground (even [[wikipedia:Edwin Hubble\|Edwin Hubble]] <ref>E.P. Hubble, [http://www.pnas.org/content/15/3/168.full "''A relation between distance and radial velocity among extra-galactic nebulae''"], Proc. N. Acad. Sci. 15, 168-173, 1929</ref>
	<ref>E.P. Hubble, [http://www.pnas.org/content/15/3/168.full "''A relation between distance and radial velocity among extra-galactic nebulae''"], Proc. N. Acad. Sci. 15, 168-173, 1929</ref>
	had already considered such an alternative explanation instead of a fictive mysterious Doppler effect which would be out of place in this context).		had already considered such an alternative explanation instead of a fictive mysterious Doppler effect which would be out of place in this context).

	The only difference in comparison with an ordinary [[wikipedia:~~Rotverschiebung#Gravitative Rot- und Blauverschiebung~~\|gravitational ~~Redshift~~]] is that in this case the potential takes a time-dependent form, which due to its sign always affects as a ''red shift''. According to the general definition of the [[wikipedia:~~Rotverschiebung~~\|redshift parameter]] ''z'' = ''λ''<math>\,</math><sub>observed</sub> / ''λ''<math>\,</math><sub>emitted</sub> – 1 do result with		The only difference in comparison with an ordinary [[wikipedia:gravitational_redshift\|gravitational redshift]] is that in this case the potential takes a time-dependent form, which due to its sign always affects as a ''red shift''. According to the general definition of the [[wikipedia:Redshift\|redshift parameter]] ''z'' = ''λ''<math>\,</math><sub>observed</sub> / ''λ''<math>\,</math><sub>emitted</sub> – 1 do result with
	:<math>		:<math>
	z_{\mathrm{SUM}} = \mathrm e^{Hl^{\ast} / c} - 1		z_{\mathrm{SUM}} = \mathrm e^{Hl^{\ast} / c} - 1
Line 88:		Line 87:
	l^{\ast} = \tfrac {c}{H} \ln {(1+z)}		l^{\ast} = \tfrac {c}{H} \ln {(1+z)}
	</math>		</math>
	are real measurands in addition to the local SRT [[wikipedia:~~Beobachter (Physik)#Relativitätstheorie~~\|proper lengths]] due to the constant values of redshift of corresponding objects. Contrary to [[wikipedia:~~Urknall~~\|big bang theory]] the universal distance ''l''* is uniquely maesurable - though indirectly - in the SUM framework.		are real measurands in addition to the local SRT [[wikipedia:proper_length\|proper lengths]] due to the constant values of redshift of corresponding objects <ref>P. Ostermann, [http://independent-research.org/assets/hubble_os14.pdf" A Strange Detail Concerning the Conceptualization of the Hubble Constant"]</ref>. Contrary to [[wikipedia:big_bang\|big bang theory]] the universal distance ''l''* is uniquely maesurable - though indirectly - in the SUM framework.

	== Universal time ''t''<math>\,</math>* and the limits of proper length and proper time ==		== Universal time ''t''<math>\,</math>* and the limits of proper length and proper time ==