Well, there plenty of possibilities about what is really happening.
I don’t have much of an opinion about the energy loss of a light wave, except that I tend to believe that frequencies remain the same and are not reduced in transit, but I’m not positive about that.
To me, I would see the “energy loss” as an amplitude loss, not a frequency loss. Here is a website that has a JAVA that shows amplitude of light waves.
micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/science...omagnetic/index.html
Regarding the galaxies, we’ve got two big problems with them. If they are not moving away from each other, we’ve got the problem of why they don’t move toward each other because of all the gravitational attraction. Newton suggested four possibilities for such an apparent visual condition, as observed in the 17th Century with all the stars and galaxies appearing to be “fixed” in place: an infinite universe in which the gravity pull was equal on all sides of a star or galaxy, a slowly collapsing universe, a slowly expanding universe, or a rotating or revolving universe.
I’m willing to accept the redshifts as a sign of an expanding universe, with the original big bang being some sort of “creation” process.
Regarding the expanding ether idea, I tend to think of the ether as being directly related to the gravity fields of each galaxy and astronomical body. There is a Taiwan physicists who has developed a new “local ether” theory that explains the “local ether” idea very well. In this theory, all the locally strong areas of the gravity fields act as a local light propagating medium near astronomical bodies, and essentially, the local gravity fields regulate the speed of light locally, at and near astronomical bodies like the earth:
qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/outline.pdf
If the galaxies are moving apart, I don’t believe that space is “expanding”. Perhaps we could say the “volume of space is expanding”, but if the galaxies are separating I would call that “moving”, rather than “being carried along by expanding space”.
What would happen with the “local ether” theory in an expanding universe would be that the gravity fields would be “expanding” and “stretching”, i.e. becoming weaker, in the spaces between the galaxies.
I couldn’t care less about what the majority of cosmologists think. They’ve been covering up a lot of information for years, because of the simple fact that ever since the big bang idea was discovered, it “appears” that our viewing position is in the center of the expanding universe, and they can’t stand that position for us, for anti-theological reasons. So that’s why the “surface of the expanding balloon model” was invented in the first place. So the average guy won’t ask, “Hey, where is the ‘center’ of the universe?” Because, it looks as if we are in the center. I’m not saying that we are in the center. And I suspect that we are well away from the center, if there is one, but visually, it looks as if we are in the center, from our viewing position, and this is too much of a “Biblical” place for us to be, according to most of the professional astronomers. I think some of them are afraid that we actually <i>are</i> in the center.
