On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 12:11:49 -0700, 1treePetrifiedForestLane wrote:
> doesn't follow, exactly, but it is the same as the "tired light" idea, > that their are "atoms in space." > > but many astrophysicists tacitly *assume* that "space is Pascal's ideal > plenum;" go & figure! > > of course, it is also true that the distance swamps the blueshifting of > the half of objects that must be going "away from Earthlings."
"Tired" light is sort of the idea, but not correct. What happens is that light travels from distant points in a straight line. Because our universe is a 4D hypersphere, light does not travel in our 3D space but takes a short cut "chord" across 4D space. For that reason light from stars arrives at our telescopes at a angle to our 3D space that more or less depends on distance to the source. It is that multi-dimensional angle that creates the so-called Red Shift, NOT "Doppler shift" due to velocity which is a HUGE mistake.
I'd direct you to my website with some mathematics outlining my "Light is Right" theory but there is something seriously wrong with the math that hasn't been fixed yet. And it is soon to change to a different subject. I am so clever YEAH! G=EMC^2