Originally Posted by
Nereid
This is an interesting challenge, but there are subtle straw men qualities. Alternatives are discounted because the BB is based upon a specific set of rules. If the rules are wrong, in most cases, so are the interpretations of the phenomenon.
3) observations of the abundance of elements and nuclides.
My universe is infinite and does not have a beginning, so the high levels of heavy elements found in distant quasars and galaxies is a no brainer: The mean distribution does not change. The local areas that are low in heavy metals does not present a challenge, either: There must be recycling, and an obvious place for this is in galactic cores, many of which just happen to be blowing giant hydrogen bubbles. (Remember, the 2d law of thermal stuff has to be thrown out in a closed system, and whether the violation is a big bang or point exceptions in areas of high density, the results are the same.
1) the Cosmic Microwave background: It is a gaussian distribution of energy in a low frequency bandwidth. I think it is primarily a function of the electromagnetic field associated with the solar wind at terminal shock with energetic particles. There is also galactic, and cluster-wide contamination - about the only specific information is the increase in intensity toward the galactic center, and a weak stirring cause by the planets in the zodiac plane: The two primary features in the WMAP surveys. The rest is just muddy water.
4) and 2) The classification of the large scale structure is heavily biased by the rules used in interpreting the data. BB cosmologist eschew intrinsic redshifts, and also assign relativistic factors in the k-corrections. If these distance dependancies are wrong, so is the interpretation of structure. The most obvious evidence that these interpretations are wrong is the migration of 'blue' galaxies from cluster cores in the past into 'Field galaxies' at the present time, but in general, all of the power functions, patterns and geocentric peaks in galactic distributions are not due to a universe radiating from a BB center, but artifacts caused by our lack of understanding of the basic nature of light. This is mostly Einsteins fault.
5) The dark sky: Light travels through space as an electromagnetic soliton, and just as it is subject to the rules of radiation transfer passing through a crystal or any medium with a known density, it also interacts gravitationally with each and every object. Since this is also (In my interpretation) an electromagnetic effect it is NEVER perfectly elastic: redshifting is a radiation transfer event. We don't measure this locally, because it is prohibitatively small, but it is impossible for light to travel through space without an energy budget. The sky is dark because all light is eventually redshifted into oblivion. The universe is not winding into a complete state of equilibrium because massive, dense galactic cores are also converting electromagnetic energy into light elements, and about the only thing that Einstein did get right, is that it takes a lot of light to make a single proton - which incidently, is also a soliton. Waves, baby, waves.
Just want to comment on this. Why do you have a problem with time as an inverse dimension? And, while Newtonian gravity is treated as a force, in GR, it is the geometry of spacetime.
