Hoyle's steady state universe is expanding, so the Hubble redshifts come from velocity; but matter is constantly being created so that the universe doesn't get more spread out over time. The amount of matter that needs to be created is minuscule, amounting to just a few hundred atoms per year in a space the size of our galaxy.

Doesn't the Galaxy create a Gravity Lens and the Quasars are much farther away than they appear. That would explain the higher Red Shift. I'm not an Astronomer so please don't be too hard on me because I'm just an Amateur.

The other thing is that, aren't Gravity Waves instantaneous?

Hey Josh, you may find this interesting. One of the pieces of "evidence" used to prove the existence of Dark Matter is that stars orbit galaxies too fast. That is, they don't follow Kepler's equations for bodies in orbit. It turns out that the assumption that they must obey Kepler is wrong! I found this paper that accurately calculates the rotational velocities of stars around galaxies using only Newton's law of gravitation and the formula for centripetal motion. I confirmed that the math works out myself.

This doesn't give a new understanding of the universe, but it's another nail in the coffin for conventional astrophysics.

Hoyle's steady state universe is expanding, so the Hubble redshifts come from velocity; but matter is constantly being created so that the universe doesn't get more spread out over time. The amount of matter that needs to be created is minuscule, amounting to just a few hundred atoms per year in a space the size of our galaxy.

Doesn't the Galaxy create a Gravity Lens and the Quasars are much farther away than they appear. That would explain the higher Red Shift. I'm not an Astronomer so please don't be too hard on me because I'm just an Amateur.

The other thing is that, aren't Gravity Waves instantaneous?

Hey Josh, you may find this interesting. One of the pieces of "evidence" used to prove the existence of Dark Matter is that stars orbit galaxies too fast. That is, they don't follow Kepler's equations for bodies in orbit. It turns out that the assumption that they must obey Kepler is wrong! I found this paper that accurately calculates the rotational velocities of stars around galaxies using only Newton's law of gravitation and the formula for centripetal motion. I confirmed that the math works out myself.

This doesn't give a new understanding of the universe, but it's another nail in the coffin for conventional astrophysics.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1406.2401

By the way, I did talk to the author a few years ago. He said the paper was based on some ideas his father had brought with him from Russia.

Josh, thank you.