posted on May, 19 2011 @ 01:45 PM
reply to post by smithjustinb
We wouldn't notice that we were getting bigger because everything around us is also getting bigger and at the same rate.
Yet if we do
measure a difference in the movements of outside objects than this disproves your assumption. Well, not really "disproves" but it at least shows that
a measured difference is being observed, right? We could be expanding and/or contracting but if it is at a Universally constant rate who could ever
The Universal expansion theory all rests on the observation of the Hubble constant, which is a theoretical constant not a proven one. So no
overwhelming amount of evidence here. keep in mind that the Hubble, or red shift Doppler effect, has its problems and limitations.
For example we have ways of measuring the distance of objects in space to a certain point (parallax, Cepheid variables and light magnitudes of stellar
clusters) which is not very far away cosmologically. From then on we use the Hubble "constant" to measure distance by the amount of speed this object
is supposedly moving away from us at. So we are using one observation to attempt to prove two different properties, distance and acceleration
(actually distance by amount of theorized acceleration). This attempt here is fundamentally flawed for the simple reason that the Hubble might not be
constant. Using the red shift of light in this way we will never observe anything other than an expanding Universe. What if Quasars are not as distant
as per their measured red shift? What if there is more that one reason why light shifts to the red? There appears to be no way to disprove this which
makes for a huge problem in my opinion.
Accelerations cause light to shift towards the red end of the spectrum, i.e. Doppler effect, but so does gravitational force (or the lack there of).
This is called the Equivanlence Principle.
Here we have a relativistic problem that I
think cosmologists fail to address.
Einstein theorized a Static Universe
until Edwin Hubble discovered the red shift of light,
latter to be called the Hubble constant. It was from this discovery that Einstein called the static Universe theory his biggest blunder.
If you were to ask me... The big bang never happened, the Universe is not expanding as we think it is (I favor a more static like Universe-to put is
simply), the Universe is far bigger and older than cosmologists believe it to be. We have A LOT
yet to learn and I find it completely
preposterous for anyone to have the audacity to give the Universe an age given how little we do know.
edit on 5/19/2011 by Devino because: (no