Observations contradict galaxy size and surface brightness predictions
  that are based on the expanding universe hypothesis
  In a non-expanding universe surface brightness is independent of distance or
redshift, while in an expanding universe it decreases rapidly with both.
Similarly, for objects of the same luminosity, the angular radius of an object
in a non-expanding universe declines with redshift, while in an expanding
universe this radius increases for redshifts z>1.25. The author and colleagues
have previously shown that data for the surface brightness of disk galaxies are
compatible with a static universe with redshift linearly proportional to
distance at all z (SEU hypothesis). In this paper we examine the more
conventional hypothesis that the universe is expanding, but that the actual
radii of galaxies of a given luminosity increase with time (decrease with z),
as others have proposed. We show that the radii data for both disk and
elliptical galaxies are incompatible with any of the published size-evolution
predictions based on an expanding universe. We find that all the physical
mechanisms proposed for size evolution, such as galaxy mergers, lead to
predictions that are in quantitative contradiction with either the radius data
or other data sets, such as the observed rate of galaxy mergers. In addition,
we find that when the effect of telescope resolution is taken into account, the
r-z relationships for disk and elliptical galaxies are identical. Both are
excellently fit by SEU predictions. An overall comparison of cosmological
models requires examining all available data-sets, but for this data-set there
is a clear contradiction of predictions based on an expanding universe
hypothesis.
