A Kansas State University engineer recently published results from an observational study in support of a century-old theory that directly challenges the Big Bang theory

>The findings, published in the journal Particles, suggest that the hypothesis of “aging light” may be correct, casting doubt on the belief that the Universe is expanding.
>
>The study’s authors used data from multiple telescopes to analyze more than 30,000 galaxies and measure their redshift — the phenomenon where light shifts toward the red part of the electromagnetic spectrum as an object moves away from Earth. Redshift has long been used by astronomers to estimate the speed at which galaxies are moving away from us.
>
>Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky proposed an alternative explanation for redshift, known as the “aging light hypothesis.”
>
>***Zwicky suggested that galaxies weren’t actually speeding away from Earth; instead, the photons emitted by these galaxies were losing energy as they traveled through space.***

Fuck! Over a year ago a Redditor who was working on his PhD in astrophysics I believe said this exact same thing. He said (if memory serves) that red shift resulted in some kind of gravitational distortion that scientists weren’t accounting for and thus were misinterpreting to mean that the expansion of the universe was accelerating when in fact it was doing exactly the opposite. It had always been intuitive to me that the Big Bang was likely a cycle where the universe would expand to a point then contract until it was once again a single point and then the whole thing would start over.

I put him in touch with a friend who teaches physics at the university level and has authored books on relativity. My friend told him that while his hypothesis flies in the face of all we know, he should continue his research because if he’s right there’s a noble prize waiting for him.

I found the [link](https://foundation-of-zi-ee-theory.quora.com/) to that Redditor’s hypothesis.