Comparing Hubble calculated distances and brightnesses with Pan Theory calculations of distances and brightnesses     Calculate this page  after entering data above The standard Hubble distance formula shown below, like the 'P' Hubble formula on the previous page, states that the distance to a redshifted cosmic entity is proportional to the measured increase in its redshifted wavelengths as observed from the divided spectra of its light. The red shifted increase in the wavelength is given by the "z" value. Although this principle is the same, calculations are somewhat different. 'z' is the redshift value, 'c' is the speed of light, and 'H 0' is the Hubble constant input value or 71, if no value is input. [((z+1)2-1) / ((z+1)2+1)] c / H0 A spectral line which is normally measured to be nm long is redshifted to nm. The redshift z =   Wavelengths were input on the previous page. The Hubble constant entered above = . The Hubble distance(km/s/Mpc) = Mpc Mly The ratio of the Hubble formula calculated distance to the Pan Theory calculated distance = Determining the actual diameter of the galaxy being observed and its real relative brightness is based upon the differences in distances and brightnesses between the two formulas. This is simply a function of the inverse square law of light and the observation angle since its increased size and apparent brightness is based upon the PTC proposed size increases in the past, which is already being observed. So the actual diameter and relative brightness of the galaxy being observed is greater by this factor:   The larger size of matter in the past is also a very important factor concerning apparent galaxy sizes and brightnesses. With redshifts starting at a little greater than one, galaxies will appear to be brighter than the Hubble distance formula would indicate, simply because matter in the past was relatively larger. The most informative aspect of these alternative equations can be seen in the following calculations. Our conclusions were based upon a three year long research study of type 1a supernova observations which resulted in the newly derived equations and calculations used here on this website, showing strong evidence for the non-existence of dark energy. From these "standard-candle" calculations we are now able to do the same calculations for galaxies as we did concerning type 1a supernovae. In astronomy one solar mass represents the mass of the sun; this enables the judgment concerning the mass of other stars in comparison to our sun. So we have done the same thing for the Milky Way galaxy, for it to represent one galactic mass concerning galaxies as a standard. We will call this kind of galaxy the "MW standard" galaxy. It can also be used as a standard for a galactic sizes and brightness. For spiral galaxies, to be able to judge the angular size (diameter) and luminosity for a galaxy exactly the same as the Milky Way, would also be a good standard size calculation feature. For instance, for a galaxy just like the Milky Way in every way at the so-called edge of the observable universe (once they are able to come to the conclusion that there are many) , at a redshift of z = 16, its calculated distance based upon the 'P' Hubble formula would be about twice the distance calculated by the Hubble formula. This would make its apparent galactic size about 1/4th the diameter of what would be expected for the Milky Way at that redshift, because of larger matter in the past. Although of smaller appearance, galaxies would appear many times denser and brighter than they should for a standard galaxy calculation. The problem is simply that the correct distance and brightness equations are not being used by mainstream astronomers. Mainstream formulas are likely the only equations they know. On the graph that follows, you will see what to expect from a "Milky-Way-standard-galaxy" concerning its brightness vs. its distance. These are comparitive brightness calsulations based upon the differnces between the two distance formulas. The blue line on the graph below represents what you will observe using the Hubble distance formula and brightnesses, and the red line is not calculated because zero comparitive brightnesses are "boring." What you will see with the 'P' Hubble formula is that distances are directly proportional to all redshifts no matter how distant. For example on the first page, put in the largest redshifts you are interested in concerning observations, and you will realize what to expect of the most distant observable galaxies, concerning their "unexpected" over-brightnesses and generally smaller sizes (angular diameters) based upon the Hubble distance formula only. Luminosity Comparison, graph seen below:                                                 When using the Hubble distance formula, a galaxy brighter than the Milky Way would be more negative than the luminosity value indicated above, and a galaxy less luminous would be more positive than the value indicated. The 'P' Hubble formulas are based upon matter in the past having been relatively larger. From this perspective, larger cosmic entities in the past would appear brighter which can be seen by the Brightness Enhancement factor calculated on the first page. A decreased brightness factor, as a result of increased Pan Theory distances, results in a dimmer luminosity, a plus factor, and a brighter luminosity a negative luminosity factor. lumens. The standard formula for this calculation is based upon the inverse square law of light. The combined total of the two factors, the first is of increased brightnesses due to larger atoms in the past, and the second factor decreases brightnesses due to increased distances. The overall decrease in brightness at a redshift of about z = .5 was the basis for the dark energy proposal concerning type 1a supernova. Since distances of the 'P' Hubble are always greater, if the brightness shown is greater, it would be because the size of matter was greater than the increase in distance, therefore the relative brightnesses would have been even greater going further back time. This combined factor is one of the more important calculated factors here since astronomers can determine what should be expected concerning luminosity based upon standard model calculated distances and brightnesses: Values are positive unless designated negative. The angular size of galaxies and other cosmic entities will appear to be smaller than they really are/were if the distance is in fact greater, according to the 'P' Hubble distance equation. The angular size difference based upon increased distances would be inversely proportional to the change in distance. To a lesser extent angular sizes of cosmic entities can be influenced by larger atoms in the past. This additional factor would be directly proportional to the cube root of the observed wavelengths, but this factor not only accordingly influences the observed size of matter, but also the measured size of space it occupies. For this reason this factor is not needed in this calculation. The inverse of this factor is often used by astronomers to represent angular size (its diameter). If distances in reality are greater than what you calculate then the angular size will always be smaller than it would have been, therefore less than 1. Based upon the input variables the angular size is: The calculation in the box shown below is a more certain proof concerning the validity of the 'P' Hubble distance formula and the PTC. The equation is based upon just one negative growth rate factor like the Hubble constant, a positive factor looking backwards in time. It is a negative factor going forward in time because accordingly matter is very slowly getting smaller, rather than space expanding. Since we can only look backward in time only a positive factor ia used for observation. From a strictly relative perspective this could be considered the same as space expanding. But instead accordingly, matter actually is getting smaller -- about 1,000th part every 11 million years. As one inputs the redshift values, they should be able to see how close the calculated results are to the red and blue lines on the graph shown below. Only the blue line is calculated since it is based upon the Hubble formula. The red line according to the PTC is boring because it is only a relatively straight line of brightnesses. Th-s graph was drawn about 10 years ago concerning our study of type 1a supernovae. The predictions of these calculations at high redshifts should be observable by the James Webb, or course interpretations will likely be wrong if interpretations are based upon mainstream cosmology, which we believe nearly all will be. if valid then the big question becomes: what is more likely, that the Hubble distance formula is off by about 10% in its distance calculations at a redshift of about z=.5, or that the entire universe is accelerating in its expansion and that 2/3rds of it is made up of a type of unknown energy called dark energy? -- or that dark energy is non-existent and the Hubble distance formula underestimates distances by at least 10% at a redshift of z = .5 and greater. We believe the correct answer concerning the most likely probability is obvious. If the Hubble formula is off by at least 10% at a redshift of z=.5, then the whole dark energy proposal would be wrong and the wrong alternative was chosen. These calculations, like the Luminosity comparison calculations above, are directly in accord with the Pan Theory of Cosmology, while being totally contrary to mainstream cosmology. It should be noted that the original comparisons concerning the granting of the Nobel Prize related to type 1a supernovae calculated distances based upon the Hubble distance formula, compared to the inverse square law of light. Here we are comparing the Hubble distance formula with to the Pan Theory distance formula (the 'P' Hubble formula). In both cases the Hubble distance formula is off by at least 10% compared to the alternative calculation. For mainstream theorists they proclaimed the existence of dark energy because they had no other alternative to consider. For us this difference simply requires a "slightly different" distance formula, The 'P' Hubble distance formula, and the universe does not have to change at all (no dark energy, dark matter, expanding universe, or Inflation). Observed brightnesses and angular sizes of galaxies and other cosmic entities are the calculated predictions of the Pan Theory, which are believed to be confirmed by an extensive study of type 1a supernova which can been seen in the related research paper, link below. http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/32603/19463 Explaining well-known theoretical and observational problems with the Big Bang model, while for the same reasons and observations support the Pan Theory, is explained in another published research paper, link below. http://www.aijcrnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_9_September_2014/2.pdf This graph is based upon the Luminosity Comparison calculation shown above. Its basis came from our supernovae study completed in 2013. Type 1a supernovae are standard candles, link shown below. The chart above also applies to galaxies where Milky-Way-galaxy brightnesses ("MW standard") also can be considered a standard concerning galactic brightnesses. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/18af/86eb09dbf86df826906392e2eb4c9f876d8d.pdf The horizontal scale on the bottom represents "redshifts" "z" which equal the proportional wavelength increase of these "MW standard" galaxies, and the entire observed wavelength is equal to (z + 1). The vertical scale on the left-hand side represents ΔDM, the change in luminosity of the standard galaxies you are observing based upon changes in their redshift input values. The blue line is what you should expect to see concerning "MW standard-galaxy-brightnesses" when using the Hubble distance formula, and the red line is what you should expect to see of brightness of a "MW standard-galaxy" when using the 'P" Hubble formula, neutral relative brightnesses neither positive nor negative. We have no calculation for this since when using the 'P' Hubble equation to calculate distances, any non-nuetral luminosity would mean a galaxy that is either more, or less luminous than the Milky Way. This would only be interesting for astronomers who are looking at such entities. And if so they should contact us at the email listed below and we would expect that ASAP we could include such a calculation based upon their need. Also, all those who have comments about this site or calculations should also contact us about typos, context, questions, etc. at the email address below. Again, I think we should illiterate that if one is instead using the 'P' Hubble formulas to calculate cosmic distances and brightnesses, then the brightness line should be almost completely straight when viewing MW-like galaxies, like the red line and dots in the diagram above. pantheory.org@gmail.com

Comparison of Pan Theory calcualtions to Hubble Distance and Brightness calculations

Astrophysics                                 Cosmology                                Theoretical Physics              Noble