Double BULL'S-EYE for Einstein

Originally posted by deezee
I know about this. This was the original impression, when they saw redshift in all directions.
But it can also simply be explained by expansion. The direction of the expansion should be possible to calculate from the differences in the redshift in different directions. Or is it "exactly" the same in all directions?

Or it could be that it has nothing to do with expansion and red shift is not directly associated with distance.

What do you mean by growth? How is it different?
Besides, how can you say for sure, which theory is flawed?

I was merely inferring the growth and evolution of galaxies, And of course I can't say for sure but I can with confidence say that redshift is not a quality of distance alone.
Here's my favorite example NGC 7603, believers in redshift distance will say this is a chance scenario (as wiki says). The thing is that their are several dozen chance occurrences that totally refute the original red shift premise. Calling them a coincidence is hardly scientific, more like denial if you ask me. And remember the originator of the theory in the end, disagreed with it.

How can you say that?!? It's improoved bunk in a much higher resolution and 3D!

Besides, who should be offended in this? I've heard "No offense intended" many times, but usually there was something to be offended by, when this was said..

Ha, right you are! my no offense comment was meant only so I didn't come across as being argumentative for the sake of it. I didn't want to insult your opinion.
The new data is still based on the same premise.

I don't care where the evidence leads, as long as it's closer to the truth. I do know, that many people interpret evidence, the way they want it to be tho... That's why i like to look into things myself.

Always a pleasure to hear this attitude, I agree.

Can you perhaps mention some of the most profound implications of intrinsic redshift?

I think the most important thing is that much of the conclusions based on it come into question, which is quite a bit.
One of Halton Arps ideas that I find fascinating is that quasars are ejected from galaxies that grow to become proto galaxies, in other words galaxies give birth to other galaxies, more evidence is required but I find his research to be on the money.