It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
How would it violate entropy or any other law? I'm not seeing it.
Originally posted by predator0187
It would break the laws of physics if light could go on indefinitely, as entropy is another key principle...
There was nothing wrong with suggesting that hypothesis as it was suggested by scientists and seriously tested...and rejected, by evidence.
I don't think you could 'hold' a beam or photon, I tend to think of it more as an elements half-life, and maybe there is a 6-7 billion year half life, making galaxies at this distance appear 'red shifted' and moving away from us. Rather than the universe expanding, maybe the light is 'fading', if you catch my drift...
However to suggest it now that it's been rejected by evidence is probably not warranted unless there is something new to add, like new evidence or a new way to overcome the stated problems with the idea.
In general, any "tired light" mechanism must solve some basic problems, in that the observed redshift must:
admit the same measurement in any wavelength-band
not exhibit blurring
follow the detailed Hubble relation observed with supernova data (see accelerating universe)
explain associated time dilation of cosmologically distant events....
These conditions became almost impossible to meet and the overall success of general relativistic explanations for the redshift-distance relation is one of the core reasons that the Big Bang model of the universe remains the cosmology preferred by researchers.
I actually need to study this paper myself as I've only skimmed through it.
We use standard general relativity to illustrate and clarify several common misconceptions about the expansion of the Universe. To show the abundance of these misconceptions we cite numerous misleading, or easily misinterpreted, statements in the literature. In the context of the new standard Lambda-CDM cosmology we point out confusions regarding the particle horizon, the event horizon, the ``observable universe'' and the Hubble sphere (distance at which recession velocity = c). We show that we can observe galaxies that have, and always have had, recession velocities greater than the speed of light. We explain why this does not violate special relativity and we link these concepts to observational tests.