Recent content by Greenlight

the expansion rate is but a hypothesis for the redshift observation. a different expansion rate is a hypothesis for cmbr observation. dark energy is a hypothetical explanation for the hypothetical expansion. hypothesis are not evidence.

a gradual deviation based on distance sounds like an artifact of the measurement. Probably because of a bad assumption like that they think time flow is linear.

AI: Yes, the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation can be measured locally. It's a faint microwave radiation that permeates the universe and can be detected everywhere, also the AI: The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is measured from a very great distance, approximately 40 billion...

Me: do we observe the CMBR as uniform or as a red shifted gradient based on distance? AI: We observe the CMBR as highly uniform, rather than as a redshifted gradient based on distance. This is because the CMBR comes from a single, well-defined surface—the surface of last scattering, when the...

I am trying to figure out how they got locked into this model. if i follow the Scientific theory what was next? observation: CMBR map Question: what's that from? hypothesis: CMBR is a remnant of the big banger Prediction: ?? experiment: ??? Analysis: ??? conclusion: ??? example...

If time originates from matter, then we should be looking for dark energy in the atom, not in space. It would be a perpetual loss of energy instead of a gain, which makes much more sense logically.

but we have a way to look back in time, and so we do notice. The further the distance we look the further back in time we see. Because the speed of light is not infinite. It manifests as redshift.

I believe that it is so. Now consider the rate. I believe it to be an exponential. Now consider the age of the universe. It could be the square root of our current best guess since our best guess assumes time is linear.

The radius will always be the speed of light because the speed of light is what defines/creates the horizon. It would be that way no matter what the rate of expansion is because any acceleration will increase to c eventually no matter what acceleration is used.

I don't believe that redshift reveals expansion. has anyone proven it? is there any corroborating evidence?

i asked AI and said the CMBR but there is a cosmological crisis that says cmbr doesn't agree with redshift. if expansion is inferred by redshift, what other evidence do they have to corroborate? as redshift can be caused by time dilation or means other than motion.

Mass/Energy density decrease increases time flow rate. increased time flow rate causes expansion. expansion causes decrease in mass/energy density it's a feedback loop.

rest mass or relativistic mass? Does relativistic mass affect the event horizon size at all?

if light speed is a constant, what speed is the light when it is 12.9 billion light years away. Do you get to add the expansion to c or do you have to subtract the expansion to keep c a constant?

Has anyone ever calculated the value of gravitational time dilation from inside a spiral arm vs in between arms?