On Thu 26/05/2022 at 00:49 UTC, Eric Flesch wrote:
On 23 May 2022 08:48:49 +0100 (BST), Lou
wrote:

If galaxies are said to spread apart with expansion
then galaxy distribution observed now,...and reversed 13 billion
years should give us an image of galaxies that should be much
closer together in the Hubble deep field.

Remembering that we see back 13 billion years in every direction, your
point boils down to that we should see those early galaxies as larger
on the sky. But their surface brightness is very faint at the
distance so we would be seeing their brightest cores only. I'm not
defending the BB model, but I'm pretty sure it accomodates your point.

However, way back in 1993, Nilsson et al (ApJ 413,453) showed in their
Figure 5 that the apparent size of radio lobes decreases linearly with >redshift, as though the universe is endless flat space. Nilsson
commented about this: "The crucial assumption here is that the linear >size-redshift correlation, if it exists, can be neglected". To my
knowledge, this linear correlation has not been refuted
observationally to the present day.

Unfortunately PHellberger refused to allow my following reply to you
Recently on sci.Astro.research. I don’t have my original comment but
the following below is a new version based on the censored post:

Could you clarify the quote in your post regarding Nilsson et al.
I looked up the original paper and can’t understand the contradiction
in your post copied above. It seems Nilsson does observe a linear
Redshift correlation...but then he or you say it can be neglected
because in fact there is a linear redshift correlation? That seems Contradictory to me. I assumed you mean there is a linear
redshift correlation?
The next part of my post speculated on what a linear redshift distance correlation would be in a non expanding universe. But I’m not sure if you argue
for a non expanding universe or not. I assume you do.
Anyways if z=1 equates to a doubling of wavelength
in a non expanding universe at a specific distance X. Then in a non expanding universe a doubling again of wavelength from z=1 must equate to a
doubling again of redshifted wavelength at a distance of 2X.
Which is z=3

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)