G'day from the land of ozzzz
I came across this link, it may have been from this forum.
Misconceptions about the Hubble recession law
Jul-09
adsabs.harvard.edu/doi/10.1007/s10509-009-0057-z
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Almost all astronomers now believe that the Hubble recession law was directly inferred from astronomical observations. It turns out that this common belief is completely false. Those models advocating the idea of an expanding universe are ill-founded on observational grounds. This means that the Hubble recession law is really a working hypothesis. One alternative to the Hubble recession law is the tired-light hypothesis originally proposed by Zwicky (Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 15:773, <CitationRef CitationID="CR28">1929</CitationRef>). This hypothesis leads to a universe that is an eternal cosmos continually evolving without beginning or end. Such a universe exists in a dynamical state of virial equilibrium. Observational studies of the redshift-magnitude relation for Type Ia supernovae in distant galaxies might provide the best observational test for a tired-light cosmology. The present study shows that the model Hubble diagram for a tired-light cosmology gives good agreement with the supernovae data for redshifts in the range 0<z<2. This observational test of a static cosmology shows that the real universe is not necessarily undergoing expansion nor acceleration. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Smile and live another day
