I don't think space is expanding.

[Reality Check]

Mike Helland's new deep ignorance that we must actually see things before they exist

The redshift distance relation is stated in Hubble's law, v=H₀D.

That seemed to be fine from 1929 to 1998, when the acceleration of the redshifts was firmly established.

Some history followed by repeating his ignorant fantasies.
v=c-HD has nothing to do with Hubble's law. Galaxies close to us are not moving away close to the speed of light ! v is not the v in Hubble's law. H his nothing to do with Hubble. That equation is his seemingly abandoned changing speed of light fantasy that does not cause redshift. The frequency of light does not depend on speed.

7 April 2021: Mike Helland's new deep ignorance that we must actually see things before they exist .
We have never seen dark energy. Whether is causing the acceleration of the expansion of the universe has properties that ensure we cannot see it! But we can measure what it does. We can see that the effect has been in GR since its beginning (a non-zero cosmological constant).
There are other examples such as neutrinos, quarks, black holes, and the hot dense state of the early universe!

7 April 2021: Mike Helland's ignorance about the actually "observed" inflation and dark energy.

10 March 2021: Mike Helland makes a high school science error (Therefore "c - c/(1+HD)²" is a high school science error).
10 March 2021: The total idiocy that he can change the units of Hubble's constant!
21 March 2021: A deeply ignorant "v = c/(1+ D/H}2 fantasy from Mike Helland (even ignorant about his own fantasies !).

 

[Mike Helland]

7 April 2021: Mike Helland's new deep ignorance that we must actually see things before they exist .
We have never seen dark energy. Whether is causing the acceleration of the expansion of the universe has properties that ensure we cannot see it! But we can measure what it does.

And therefore the awards are deserved.

 

[Mike Helland]

I always find it interesting how those with alternative models accuse others of dogma and religion, while they are the ones that refuse to accept that their model might be wrong and ignore all criticism.
The fallback position of those who cannot defend themselves.

Mike, your theory is wrong.
Maybe, just maybe it is possible that expanding space is also wrong, but even if it is (and no observation so far has shown it to be), your theory will never replace it, as it fails at every basic level.
If it can be taken apart on a website by people just spending some of their free time on it, it will be shattered the moment you try to actually engage scientists.

To put it in a programming analogy, you are the equivalent of a manager who coded a few lines of BASIC when he was young, who now tells the lead programmer of his company that his brilliant simple solution can be used to optimize the whole IT structure of the company, while ignoring all input from those that actually know what they are talking about.

Let's say there's a galaxy observed with z=2.

Show me how you calculate it's distance.

 

[Ziggurat]

If you think the redshifts tell the story of how the universe started and how it will end, nothing I say will ever change your mind.

It's not just an observed phenomenon to you. It's a creation story.

On their own, red shifts don’t. They are just one piece of the puzzle.

But for some reason, it’s the only piece you want to play with. And nothing anyone has said has gotten through to you. You refuse to learn.

 

[Agatha]

This thread has become long so I have opened a continuation thread here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=350705

Posted By: Agatha