Relativity and Cosmology


A Review of Anomalous Redshift Data

Authors: Hilton Ratcliffe

One of the greatest challenges facing astrophysics is derivation of remoteness in cosmological objects. At large scales, it is almost entirely dependent upon the well-established Hubble relationship in spectral redshift. The comparison of galactic redshifts with distances arrived at by other means has yielded a useable curve to an acceptable confidence level, and the assumption of scale invariance allows the adoption of redshift as a standard calibration of cosmological distance. However, there have been several fields of study in observational astronomy that consistently give apparently anomalous results from ever-larger statistical samples, and would thus seem to require further careful investigation. This paper presents a review summary of recent independent work, primarily (for galaxies and proto-galaxies) by teams led by, respectively, D. G. Russell, M. Lopez-Corredoira, and H. C. Arp, and for galaxy clusters and large-scale structures, those of N. A. Bahcall, J.C. Jackson, and N. Kaiser. Included also are several other important contributions that will be fully cited in the text. The observational evidence is presented here per se without attempting theoretical conclusions or extrapolating the data to cosmology.

Comments: A shortened version of this paper has been accepted for publication in the proceedings of the 2nd Crisis in Cosmology Conference, Astronomical Society of the Pacific conference proceedings, 2009.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 10 Jul 2009

Unique-IP document downloads: 1490 times is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus