The Expanding-Space Cosmology as Oxymoron

[Pentcho Valev]

"No experiment has ever been performed that verifies that expanding space can indeed alter the wavelength of an already moving photon."

View: https://youtu.be/94_3N7XZjBQ?t=349


This can be generalized:

No length or distance between two entities has ever been observed to change as a result of space expansion.

Expanding space keeping lengths and distances unchanged? Oxymoron?

 

[Atlan0101]

You accelerate toward the speed of light (+300,000kps), you at once also decelerate toward it (-300,000kps), Woe be if the twain meets at it.

You never travel to the speed of light, you only accelerate (+) / decelerate (-) to it closing in upon it in a closed systematic environment, and in so doing as you close in upon it be ready to see double and to meet your own negatives of energy and matter (anti-matter). In expanding between, you contract between. An expanding contraction. A contracting expansion . . . Oxymoron?

That is what you get for expanding universe to "nowhere," into "nothing," an equal but opposite contraction of universe right with the expansion. All told then, within a universe, that state of it goes "everywhere" and "nowhere" at all! . . . Physics?

 

[Pentcho Valev]

Actual or anticipated questions like

If the universe is expanding, then why aren't we, why no length has been observed to stretch, why no two things have been observed to move apart pushed by expansion, etc.

plague cosmologists so they have alleviated the problem by tweaking the theory. Our theory predicts expansion, cosmologists have decided, only for pure voids - so the annoying questions will become pointless. For spaces where stretching or moving apart is observable and the annoying questions make sense, our theory predicts no expansion at all:

Sabine Hossenfelder: "The solution of general relativity that describes the expanding universe is a solution on average; it is good only on very large distances. But the solutions that describe galaxies are different - and just don't expand. It's not that galaxies expand unnoticeably, they just don't. The full solution, then, is both stitched together: Expanding space between non-expanding galaxies...It is only somewhere beyond the scales of galaxy clusters that expansion takes over." https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...ont-actually-expand-in-an-expanding-universe/

"Space DOES NOT Expand Everywhere...Is the space inside, say, a galaxy growing but overcome by the gravitational attraction between the stars? The answer is no. Space within any gravitationally bound system is unaffected by the surrounding expansion."

View: https://youtu.be/bUHZ2k9DYHY?t=356

 

[Atlan0101]

Oh, universes expand and, concomitantly, contract, for a net physic of zero regarding both; a net physic of going "nowhere" into "nothing." At least not via internal, integral, expansion (one side of a coin of universe) and contraction (the other side of the same coin of universe). And gravity (g to x-finite, and G to infinity's collapsed constant (/\) of 'Horizon' (h)), are responsible for both sides of the coin and coins. Two gravities, two forces of gravity, one observed and realized to the inside (g) and one observed and realized to the outside (G) (though not realized as such since most physicists do not recognize infinity to exist at all, much less regarding more or less independent bubbles (plural) of universes (again plural), and the overall collapsed constant of Horizon (singular)). Five forces existing altogether, (G) being a duality of pull and push gravity (depending upon how it is "observed" (from that side, the infinity Horizon side, or this side, toward the Horizon, of the direction of the wave)).