Subquantum kinetics

[C C]

http://www.space.news/2015-11-10-physici...hesis.html

EXCERPT: [...] Dr. Laviolette’s theory isn’t just conceptual, it has actually been tested. For instance, subquantum kinetics predicts that matter is constantly created throughout the universe and that galaxies should grow with time as matter forms around their center.

At the time of this prediction, conventional science predicted that galaxies form in different shapes and sizes and do not change over time, with the exception of galaxy mergers. Dr. Laviollette’s prediction was later verified in 1995 when the Hubble Space Telescope revealed that distant galaxy clusters are more compact than nearby, older galaxy clusters.

Subquantum kinetics offers an alternative cosmology to conventional Big Bang cosmology, which argues that space, time and matter exploded into existence about 13.7 billion years ago and has been expanding ever since. By contrast, subquantum kinetics predicts a stationary universe. The red shift of galaxies is predicted to be a product of the tired-light effect, which suggests photons lose energy over time from colliding with other particles, and thus, become red-shifted.....

[elte]

Is the tired light effect a tested phenomenon, or is it hypothetical?  A common explanation for objects to aquire a redward tint is Doppler shift.  Seeing red, so to speak, can also result from absorption of other colors, letting red pass; by refraction (bending) of other colors, leaving the red to reach the observer; or by scattering when the nonred light is scattered away from the path to the observer.

[C C]

Is the tired light effect a tested phenomenon, or is it hypothetical?  A common explanation for objects to aquire a redward tint is Doppler shift.  Seeing red, so to speak, can also result from absorption of other colors, letting red pass; by refraction (bending) of other colors, leaving the red to reach the observer; or by scattering when the nonred light is scattered away from the path to the observer.

Perhaps tired light eludes being completely classed as obsolete due to fringe theories like this still occasionally referencing it. But the tests and data of better precision technology seem to falsify most past claims about it.

I guess in the spirit of Popper and any operating presupposition that certain or ideal scientific knowledge is always a receding expectation of the future, the Big Bang should continue to be challenged by something. But behind the window dressing many things are probably privately taken to be "proved", and the introduction of new rivals and wasted attack ammunition merely a symbolic ritual.