On Jun 1, 10:48*pm, "Painius" wrote:

Let's say you're holding a 12-inch rule in your hands.
Over some period of time (a very *long* period of
time), let's say that the rule in your hands expands
to 13 inches long. *This is how most people picture
the expansion of the Universe, even scientists. *The
problem, of course, is that as the rule expands, so
do the marks and lines on the rule, so do the spaces
between the lines, and so does everything that is
around the rule, including you.

Yup.

So no matter how long the period of time is that you
hold that rule in your hands, there is no way for you
to sense the expansion. *No way.

And it doesn't matter if you're observing the car
outside your house, a supernova in a Magellanic
Cloud, or the supercluster three superclusters over
from our supercluster, there is still no possible way
for us to sense either an expansion or a contraction
of space-time. *No way...

..except by observing *artifacts* and _correctly interpreting_ those
artifacts. In the case of deep-past lookback that came with the advent
of the Hubble Deep Field images, the universal 'standard candles' of
luminosity, type 1a supernovae, appear dimmer than they 'should be' at
a given redshift. This was immediately interpreted as clear evidence
of "ever-accelerating expansion" which became dogma immediately. So
what might be wrong with this interpretation? It's based on the
assumption that space is a universally-isotropic 'void-nothing' all
the way back to the instant of emergence from the BB. It has no
concept of a precipitous drop of the pressure/density of space itself
and the *cosmological density gradient* (or PDT gradient) of expanding
space which would explain the anomalous SN1a dimming.

...there is still no possible way
for us to sense either an expansion or a contraction
of space-time. No way.

But it IS possible to mentally transpose to the 'outside' referance
frame and view the 'big picture' of what produced the artifacts.. and
thereby gain a more rational interpretation of the artifacts.