[nilak]

It is possible that the space dust influence has been underestimated and it may be no universe expansion at all.

[GoC]

Space dust could preferentially absorb the shorter wavelengths as a ratio. Another clue is we only use SR red shift and not GR red shift. BH's prove the timing is incorrect. The universe is doing anything your subjective model predicts in your own mind. 

[nilak]

Space dust could preferentially absorb the shorter wavelengths as a ratio. Another clue is we only use SR red shift and not GR red shift. BH's prove the timing is incorrect. The universe is doing anything your subjective model predicts in your own mind. 

But space expansion is a GR concept. In SR spacetime is flat.

[GoC]

Space dust could preferentially absorb the shorter wavelengths as a ratio. Another clue is we only use SR red shift and not GR red shift. BH's prove the timing is incorrect. The universe is doing anything your subjective model predicts in your own mind. 

But space expansion is a GR concept. In SR spacetime is flat.

There is no such thing as flat space. Even between galaxies there is dilation of attraction on a larger scale. Andromeda is moving towards us and yet it is red shifted. The only way we know it is moving towards us is the arm moving towards us is more blue shifted than the arm moving away is red shifted. The lensing in a galaxy is the curve of space which is really dilation of space with a threshold boundary past where the mass exists. A galaxy and a planet have the same issues with dilation only the galaxy is accumulated dilation. Its still the inverse square of the distance outside of the galaxy. Why do you think each of the voyagers appeared to slow down when they reached the edge of our solar system? The clock tick rate increased making it appear the voyagers slowed down. Main streams model does not have that as a possibility. Einstein was probably correct the universe is a steady state of motion rather than expansion.

Only SR is used for expansion because of main stream's model does not include GR.

[nilak]

 Why do you think each of the voyagers appeared to slow down when they reached the edge of our solar system? The clock tick rate increased making it appear the voyagers slowed down. Main streams model does not have that as a possibility. Einstein was probably correct the universe is a steady state of motion rather than expansion.

Only SR is used for expansion because of main stream's model does not include GR.

Voyagers could've been slowed down by space dust as well, possibly, or their tick rate has increased  because of a higher gravitational potential which would also mean that they actually travel slower. But I don't know their story.

[timey (OP)]

A contracting universe can be described by Einstein's equation without invoking Dark Energy or Dark Matter.

Chris - I watched a Horizon program on Dark Energy last year where physicists were saying in light of Dark Energy remaining a complete mystery, that perhaps a new approach is required...
Among those physicists was George Efstathiou from Cambridge University.
Do you know him?

There is very little, if not no evidence at-all that observed red shift of the frequency of distant light sources is proof of expansion.

But there is staggering evidence that light is gravitationally shifted in frequency via the gravitational field. (Pound Rebka)

An alternative to a velocity related interpretation of red shift observations is to consider the shifts in frequency as having been caused by the gravitational field.

Although GR is the best description that we have of our universe, GR has a bit of trouble describing the gravity of gravity:

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/gravity_of_gravity

Non-linearity makes relativistic physics more difficult than Newtonian gravity or electrodynamics. There is no general way of building up more complex situations from elementary building blocks. For each complex situation, the calculations must start anew. If you know how a test particle would move in the vicinity of two different single black holes, that does not tell you what gravity the particle would feel if both black holes were present.

By stating the frequency change in light in the g-field to be caused by slower time in the g-field itself, (a symmetry of frequency changes for mass in the g-field, where pe=mgh and where m=0 no pe is added), this affords a means of describing gravity by means of the adding up sum totals  and attributing the resulting increase in gravitational acceleration to the factor of shorter seconds.

This also offers a bridge between the particle model and the wave model and causes quantum to be a continuum.

This is an alternative description of the mechanics causing the observation of the redshift distance correlation in order to describe a contracting model that remains fully described within the remit of Einstein's equation describing GR.

This alternative does not require Dark Energy or Dark Matter.

[PhysBang]

Only SR is used for expansion because of main stream's model does not include GR.

This is more nonsense that GoC has spouted before. The standard cosmological model is GR. The redshift calculations are GR, since they are based on the use of a scale factor and scale factors cannot possibly exist in SR.

[GoC]

Only SR is used for expansion because of main stream's model does not include GR.

This is more nonsense that GoC has spouted before. The standard cosmological model is GR. The redshift calculations are GR, since they are based on the use of a scale factor and scale factors cannot possibly exist in SR.

Do you even know the difference between GR and SR? SR is velocity issues while GR is dilation issues. You can have stand still red shift from light as dilation with little SR speed. Main stream shut down an astronomer who claimed different sized galaxies in the same group had different red shifts. Basically labeled him a quack. Size of dilation is a GR affect in red shift. Main stream's model does not consider the accumulation of dilation in a galaxy because they believe in flat space within a galaxy. The lensing effect is the accumulated dilation of a galaxy. And there is a threshold boundary. By our perspective much further out than where 75% of the light is created in the center of more extreme dilation we naturally view all galaxies as red shifted by GR without expansion.

If you are considering Dark Matter as GR you are incorrect again. Main stream force fits dark matter into their model of understanding. You probably foolishly believe the universe is only 13.6 billion years old because that is what you were taught. BH's of 30,000 AU prove that to be incorrect also.

You allow main stream to think for you and parrot their teachings without a real understanding of the problems their view creates.

You really haven't read enough to form your own opinion especially where the math does not fit the model.

They really only use SR expansion of receding galaxies and not GR dilation. There is equivalency in red shift and GR can be relatively stationary with its red shift. SR is strictly a receding issue.

Saying something without explanation to back up what you say seems to be your contribution. You need proper knowledge and that comes from studying not mimicking illogical subjective statements.

[kymere]

Recently, I composed a hypothesis that may very well explain the reason of the expansion of the Universe through "dark" energy. The idea is that the big bang was caused by the gravitational collapse of a black hole in another dimension of space-time. The gravity pushed through this fabric (four dimensional) and all of this gravity then became the inevitable dark energy that is causing the equal expansion of space around us at all time. If this were to hold true, not only may the universe contain finite space and matter, it would explain the evaporation caused by Hawking radiation, and the future expansion of our universe into solely space. I recommend checking out my recent proposal.