Bufofrog

No. It is not an exception. It seems like you are not really knowledgeable about the BBT or red shift. Before trying to replace a theory one should understand the theory.

EM radiation from all other galaxies is not just red shifted, some galaxies are blue shifted. That would seem to falsify your idea.

You don't actually have a theory. Being very gracious, I would say you have a hypothesis. That being said I would further say your hypothesis has been disproven by experimentation.

It is wrong, because the sun will not become a supernova. No, it is about changes in a populations genetic makeup over time.

I wouldn't think that would be the case. In the universe you are describing there would be equal amounts of mass around the photons. IOW the strength of gravitation attraction in front of the photons direction of travel would be the same as behind it, so there would be no red shift.

You keep saying this and everyone keeps telling that you're wrong, so this not very productive. The speed of light is always measured at c, so it is not possible that it is effected by the relative or absolute velocity of the inertial frame of the experiment.

You're right, thanks for the correction.

That is not evidence in support of your claim, that is evidence that if you are struggling to breath it is also going to be hard to sleep.

Correct, an inertial observer will always measure the speed of light in a vacuum as c. I think you got it now

More than just absolute motion you cannot perform any experiment in a closed room that will give you a hint about your motion, assuming an inertial frame.

Hope he has a good retirement!

Are you saying that you think some physicists would think that the 2 light pulses would not arrive at the point simultaneously for an observer in that lab frame?

Do you have some sort of parentheses fetish?

I would recommend you get a degree in environmental engineering . The pay is higher and the work is more interesting.

It doesn't matter. The point is both of the light pulses S1 and S2 will move at c relative to the observer on the ship, v never is considered.

Discussing how to make explosives on an open forum seems like a bad idea IMO.

The OP apparently has some phobia about suffocating in their sleep.

Then the article is wrong. Glad we cleared that up.

The picture is just a way to represent the field, there are no actual lines or groves.

If an electron and a photon were just 2 points the chances of them 'hitting' each other would be essentially zero. So clearly the picture in your head of this interaction is incorrect.

Aluminum foil will. What does a cracked iphone have to do with your question?

I'm not sure what the issue is. There is a minimum amount of energy needed for pair production. At the minimum energy needed the pair will form and immediately annihilate each other. If the energy is a bit higher than the minimum then the particle pair will have some KE and will move apart before attracting each other and annihilating each other. If the energy is very high the pair will have enough KE that they never recombine.

But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. No man except for the lavender dude.

It means time is a dimension. You apparently decided for some reason to only recognize spatial dimensions as 'real' dimensions, that's fine for you, but don't expect others to jump on board with you. That is not correct. Special relativity is a special case (flat space time) of general relativity.

It is not possible to locate an event without the dimension of time. For instance if I want to have a meeting with you it is not possible without specifying a time, in other words it takes a minimum of 3 spatial dimension and 1 time dimension.