I'm no scientist, but I've heard the idea of a rotating universe to explain redshift? It makes sense to me when everything else already rotates. Is that a plausible idea or is it preposterous? I agree with you that some of Occam's razor is needed.
There are things we can accept at a higher zoom level, like "non-homogenaety" in the universe. But zooming out we expect homogenaety. I wonder if rotations have a way of disappearing as we zoom out? I have not considered this, so this is a knee jerk response!
I have wondered, myself, if the universe was a massive soup with sources and syncs. The scientific community would say my thoughts are those of a non-scientist based in pure conjecture. For now, I accept this dismissiveness, but I wonder if something might start to unravel a bit in the "accepted" cosmological model.
I'm no scientist, but I've heard the idea of a rotating universe to explain redshift? It makes sense to me when everything else already rotates. Is that a plausible idea or is it preposterous? I agree with you that some of Occam's razor is needed.
There are things we can accept at a higher zoom level, like "non-homogenaety" in the universe. But zooming out we expect homogenaety. I wonder if rotations have a way of disappearing as we zoom out? I have not considered this, so this is a knee jerk response!
I have wondered, myself, if the universe was a massive soup with sources and syncs. The scientific community would say my thoughts are those of a non-scientist based in pure conjecture. For now, I accept this dismissiveness, but I wonder if something might start to unravel a bit in the "accepted" cosmological model.
I don't know, but what I do know is that the New York Times did an article about theories unraveling from all the new observations.