Ruling out an expanding universe with conventional proofs

quote:

---

I suppose it's possible that a genius can come out of nowhere and show all contemporary physics to be wrong - and there are obvious precedents, or at at least one -

---

I can't think of any precedents, at least within physics.

Einstein didn't have an academic position, but he was still operating from within the professional world of physics in 1905, his annus mirabilis. He completed his PhD early in that year, and he'd already published several papers by then; he had enough of a reputation that he started writing reviews for Annalen der Physik the same year as well. Also, his revolutionary papers were more a matter of reinterpretation of existing physics, rather than a wholesale replacement of existing theories. Special Relativity, in particular, has clear antecedents in the work of Lorentz and Poincare. In contrast, the paper in question here would completely gut the prevailing theories in both cosmology and particle physics. Edited by sfs, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Some act as if I haven't tried to publish the paper (and nearly succeeded), work in cooperation with universities or make my research available to the scientific community. Although I agree that this isn't the best place for a scientific debate on the theory, that was never my intention in the first place. That doesn't mean I won't respond to reasonable posts or questions however.

---

The response you've gotten has been reasonable. As you note, the odds against you being correct are "astronomical". If we spent our time reading all of the unlikely ideas out there, we'd never get anything done. So if you want to get people, including people here, to pay any attention to your ideas, you've got to get them vetted by the usual process.