Michael Aaron Cody

The CMB blackbody spectrum was the strongest evidence for cosmic expansion. It isn't anymore. Peer-reviewed proof: a static universe produces identical results - no expansion required. This resolves Zwicky Tired Light. @physorg_com @universetoday @newscientist @bigthink @IFLScience @SPACEdotcom @AstronomyMag doi.org/10.4236/jmp.20…

@jayvanbavel Wilder still that authors pay to publish. Springer 2 to 4k, IOP 3 to 4k, Royal 2 to 5k, Nature up to 13k. Good luck if you don't got funding. Some journals are gold OA only, no subscription route, payment mandatory. The money flows to everyone except the unsung heroes of science.

We should pay peer reviewers Paying reviewers led to faster first editorial decisions—an average of 5.5 working days versus 38 days for unpaid reviews, And review quality actually improved (as judged by handling editors on the basis of helpfulness in making an editorial decision) In this six-month experiment, reviewers who delivered a peer review within four working days that their handling editor considered good quality were paid £220 (US$290) nature.com/articles/d4158…

@Math_files Why does this nonsense keep circulating? An Einstein equivalent is someone who changes the field. Has she? No. Could she? Maybe. But crowning someone 'the next great' before the great achievements is silly.

Harvard believes the next Einstein is already among us. Meet Sabrina Gonzalez Pasterski, a quiet theoretical physicist and one of the brightest minds of her generation. At 14, she built a real airplane. At 16, she flew it alone. When MIT rejected her, she sent them a video of the plane she built instead. Their reply: "Start next semester." She later graduated with a perfect GPA, was cited by Stephen Hawking, and turned down offers from Google, Facebook, and Jeff Bezos. Instead of chasing money and fame, she chose to focus on understanding the universe.

@skdh Hey Sabine check this one out: Rethinking the Black Hole Singularity. Short op-ed published in multiple outlets. realclearscience.com/articles/2026/…

the black hole information loss paradox has been solved again

For decades, cosmology treated expansion as fact. The K(t) trilogy proves the background observables are degenerate with a static universe. Expansion is no longer a fact. It is a choice. Space stretching still works. It's just no longer the only map that fits. 🗺️🔭 @SPACEdotcom @skyatnightmag

@BitcoinPulseX Send it to a local orphanage instead. Open an account for each child and deposit $5,000 into each one. They can't access the money until they turn 18.

The three-paper K(t) trilogy resolves the classic tired-light objections, puts static cosmology back on the table, and shows cosmological expansion is sufficient, not necessary, for the background evidence. It is not a model. It is an audit. Three papers. Two journals. Seven referees. Redshift Without Expansion: physicsessays.org/browse-journal… CMB Without Expansion: scirp.org/journal/paperi… JWST Without Expansion: scirp.org/journal/paperi… Capstone op-ed: realclearscience.com/articles/2026/… @BrianKeating @IAI_TV @TheDebrief @universetoday

Grateful to every editor and referee I worked with, across fields and including other researchers. Seven referees reached the same conclusion. Universal expansion in Cosmology is an interpretation, not proof.

This historical note was added by the Journal of Modern Physics to my published CMB paper after review. The manuscript went through two referees, including a six-page LaTeX report, and final chief editor review. The note speaks for itself.

Black-hole theory comes down to two physical realities: (1) collapse continues to a singularity, or avoids it. (2) collapse ends because geometry and spacetime break down. I put the second one on record in 2025, published in 2026. link.springer.com/article/10.114…

@MeganTStevenson I think your example highlights a problem for IQ as a proxy for intelligence. You possessed all the information needed to catch the mistake, yet the mistake persisted for years. Whatever intelligence is, it seems to involve more than pattern recognition and puzzle-solving speed.

@MichaelCody If I had thought about it for a moment I would know that’s impossible. Whatever feature of thought identifies dumb mistakes was not firing in this instance. This “mistake-catching” trigger seems different from the type of active intelligence at work when you focus on something.

If a meaningful part of what we normally interpret as high IQ is just a heightened preference for analysis/patterns/thinking, that makes it harder to interpret IQ as being somehow more advanced, more evolved, "better"

The IQ system that Mensa propagates has to be one of the most structurally absurd ideas in modern society. The IQ test was meant to help children, including the children still being left behind in school systems today, not to filter people through a narrow metric. Disgusting. @spikedonline @MeganTStevenson @AmericanMensa spiked-online.com/2026/04/04/men…

The K(t) framework uses the gold standard of physics math: Liouville transport mechanics. Zero free parameters. It mathematically derives perfect CMB blackbody preservation. Proving expansion is a sufficient explanation, not a necessary one.

𝗥𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗛𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗦𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 The black hole singularity was never real. It's an artifact of the equations we've followed since 1916. New papers show the geometry cracks and fails instead of collapsing into infinity. One calculates an exact breaking point using only standard relativity. The other tracks how spacetime tears during collapse. The event horizon stops being a gateway to anything. It becomes the edge where the description ends. Read the full article: wattsupwiththat.com/2026/06/17/ret…

"New literature attacks the very fundamentals of how we describe black holes and what they are. The work that defined this shift, "Black hole singularities and the limits of the spacetime continuum," explained exactly how, why, and where black holes fail." realclearscience.com/articles/2026/…

@RCScience Great working with you all again, thanks for running it.

"This is concerning because it may counter the cosmological principle." Actual referee comment. 2025. That's how I knew I was onto something. The CMB paper was later published.

Interesting. Temple et al. challenge Friedmann stability. My 2026 work challenged the uniqueness of expansion through observational transport. Different mathematics, same question- what is proven versus assumed? royalsocietypublishing.org/rspa/article/4…

@Wenzhong_Zhang @RCScience Thanks for the comment and support. I’ll take a look at your work. Independent research is never an easy road. Best.

@RCScience @MichaelCody I agree with you. I am excited to complete my 11th paper about the foundation theory of physics during the 11th year of my hard and independent research to support your view. Please search: Amazing Photons and Free Space, the Fundamental Nature of Our Universe.

Cosmological expansion isn't a fact. It is an assumption. And when a new observation doesn't support it, the universe is asked to adjust. by @MichaelCody realclearscience.com/articles/2026/…

@FQXi Well the best advice I can give is start at the elementary level. Go back to that "fundamental question". Remember most science is not "settled" it's assumed and you should challenge that whenever you can. Hence my published works.

Joshua Deutsch on why FQxI helps make space for fundamental questions that don’t fit the usual funding priorities.