Summations Only

Blue and red shift have nothing to do with expanded states. It has to do with the relative velocity between the two observers. If you mounted the right equipment to two fighter jets you could measure a blue shift as they sped towards each other and a red shift as the passed each other and sped away. It has NOTHING to do with the epxanded state of the jets, which is just insane.In a vortex, there would be galaxies moving TOWARDS each other. This would produce a BLUE shift. We don't see any BLUE shift. Instead, we see that galaxies are RED shifted meaning that they are MOVING away from us, and the further away they are the FASTER they are moving away from us.Do you understand this or not?

Percy, have you read my 'Observational Evidence' on page 1? There I offer evidence that we are going 'in' rather than out.
You ask for evidence and there it is.Nobody and no telescope can see beyond the Observable Universe (OU) and anybody who says he can is just pretending. A Belgian Priest, LeMaitre, on hearing the OU was expanding, assumed the entire Universe was expanding Outwardly and that there must have been a Big Bang to get this started (celestial fireworks, anyway).There is no evidence the Universe is expanding. It was assumed by a priest and the Church loved it as it agreed with the Bible (instant Universe). The Universe didn't appear suddenly 13 billion years ago, it evolved slowly. Over trillions of years Darwin had exactly the same problem.

Taq, I know all about your red and blue shift, you don't have to explain.In a vortex, Taq, youi're going to accelerate. Acceleration leads to loss of pressure (expansion,no?). A system left to expand, in free-fall, will expand evenly in all directions, with the ones farthest away expanding fastest. That's a red shift, Taq. What are you going to do about it? How would the Galaxies be moving towards us? That's impossible, to me.

It's not evidence? I don't understand. I give you 3 examples of this 'accelerating expansion' - all lnward.I go on to explain what is happening in the three examples and I'm trying to show that any 'accelerating expansion' fits this method. How much do you know about 'accelerating expansions' I wonder.Myself, I know about 10, all; of them Inward. They are fairly common.
If the expansion is accelerating, it's Inward. Outward expansions all slow down and stop. Only Inward expansions accelerate.
You either know this or you don't. If you can't see this, I can't help you.

All I know for sure is that Einsterin himself denounced his Cosmological Constant and he never changed his mind on it.

Percy, you have fallen for one of the biggest tricks ever visited the human race. Nobody can see the Universe, just the Observable Universe(OU). Surely you can see that? Only by studying the OU and not blinding ourselves to Science and new discoveries can we ever understand the Universe.
To say the enire Universe is expamding, because the OU is expanding is poor science, especiall;y when in 1998 they found that the expansion was accelerating - and any accelerating expansion is Inward as I clearly show in ,my Observational Evidence,

Actually, you did not show any such thing.You simply provided a couple of likely to be non-analogous examples, and then generalized to the universe, something that isn't all that much like the a bird flapping its wings, a snowball, or air approaching a vacuum nozzle. Do we need special or general relativity (GR) to describe those things? No, so we should expect the physics of expansion modeled using GR to be different, probably in significant ways.When you keep asserting that you have clearly established something using Observation evidence, when you actually mean look at this similar things you've likely misinterpreted, then you look like a dime a dozen physics crank. First, you are making the same mistake you are accusing everyone else of making. Is the entire universe actually undergoing accelerated expansion, or is the observed expansion actually of a completely local effect?Secondly, show me the math. Or is that part to be left to the scientists?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

OK, what you call "accelerating expansion" happens in our everyday world. You've made no connection between those and our Universe. You need some evidence that is observations of the characteristics of the Universe, not allegedly analogous processes. Arguing by analogy is a fallacy. Analogies are useful for explaining certain characteristics of established phenomena but they are not evidence for the existence of phenomena other than themselves. You are asking us to rely on your intuition for scientific conclusions. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. Especially since there are such severe problems with your hypothesis that you obviously can't address (e.g the expected blue shift of some galaxies). Plus we know (and obviously you don't) that extending "common sense" conclusions drawn from our everyday experience to the very small and the very large, both of which are far from our everyday experience, is often wrong.It doesn't matter whether or not you can think of an accelerating expansion that does not slow down. It doesn't even matter whether or not there exists an accelerating expansion that does not slow down other than the Universe's. The Universe's expansion could well be unique in the Universe, since the Universe is nothing like what we experience on Earth.

Pressure has NOTHING TO DO WITH RED SHIFT. A vortex is not expanding evenly in all directions. Galaxies will be pulled towards the same spot causing us to observe a blue shift. We do not see a blue shift. We see a red shift. That's how a vortex works.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Can't make much sense, No Nukes. Do try to be more coherant, please.

Any 'accelerating expansion' is Inward. For one thing - Outward Expansions all slow down and stop. The only kind of expansion that accelerates is Inward.The expansion of the Observable Universe (OU) is accelerating, and that can only mean we are going in.The Math for this is very complex. Too complex for me, but I know I'm right. GR doesn't really come into it.

Loss of Prerssure equals Expansion. If you're accelerating as you expand that's going to be Red shifted.Why should Galaxies move closer? That doesn't make sense, Taq. In a vortex you will accelerate - that means expansion. Too bad you can't see this...

We need more than your say so. Expansion is never inwards. It is always outwards. That's what expansion means. If matter is moving inwards then it is contraction, not expansion.

The universe is not expanding because of a loss of air pressure. In a vortex, material accelerates towards each other as they near the center. This would produce a blue shift.