you have disproved your statements by failing to be able to use them in a standard test for a theory of gravity. You have to show that your theory works, we can't just take your word for it.
I'm not a physicist, I'm not under contract to follow specific criteria. This is not a publishing company. If I publish my theory I will include all that is necessary.
As it is, I am being generous in sharing the ideas, at risk of being ripped off.
I know the difference between releasing a scientific paper and an open discussion of ideas, do you?
I thought the internet was about freely sharing ideas, but now I don't know...
The way I see it, until you make some kind of scientific statement you are nothing more that a six year old throwing rocks.
I know what you people are afraid of. This could lead into the propogation of light, a sore-spot for BB theorists. I wasn't going to go for the jugular, but you guys are pushing me.
Spacetime is required by BB theory. It has properties assigned to it, therefore it exists. It is a substance, a MEDIA.
When Einstein put forward his theory of relativity in 1905, it was claimed that no experiment using a rotating interferometer could prove the existence of an aether since relativity would cancel out the apparent changes in the length of the arms of the rotating apparatus. However, relativity did not deny the existence of the aether as postulated by Fresnel. Indeed, Einstein theorized that gravity was caused by the distortion of "space-time". What exactly did he mean by "space-time"? It appears that his "space-time" is just another name for aether.
Modern Cosmologists claim that the expansion of the universe under the Big Bang Theory is due to the expansion of "space" and it is the expanding "space" which is causing the stretching of photons (i.e. red shift). Again it sounds like the use of the word "space" here is just another name for aether.
We know that light must either be propogated by this MEDIA or must propogate through the MEDIA.
If it propogated through the MEDIA, scattering would occur.
This is not what we observe.
Therefore light is propogated by the spacetime MEDIA.
As such, it is elastic and will lose energy over great distances. This causes the "distance indicator redshift".
Applying this redshift to observations shows that the universe is not expanding, destroying BB theory.("Blasthemer!")
My bad. There IS a one in a octillion chance that we just happen to be between the expansion and contraction stage. I could totally see the status quo community going with that.