© Lloyd

 

Charles Chandler said:

But if redshift does not equal distance, then we don't know the age of the light that we're seeing, and we don't have any data on the evolution of galaxies, and that piece becomes pure speculation.

I don't follow the reasoning there. Wouldn't it be okay if galactic redshifts indicate distance, but quasar redshifts only indicate velocity of matter in jets (I guess electrons)? It seems certain that quasar redshifts generally or never indicate distance, because the high redshift quasar in front of a low redshift galaxy proves that the quasar is not as far away as its redshift would seem to show.*¹⁸²⁴⁶ Besides that quasar, there are numerous quasars that appear to have bridges of matter connecting them to galaxies and the same pattern holds with them, i.e. high redshift quasar associated with low redshift galaxy. So the size of the universe may be estimable based on the highest redshift galaxies. However, I see that there are numerous galaxies said to be over 12 billion ly away, and I suspect that those are not galaxies, but quasars, or galactic jets that give a false distance indication.

Re: Redshift Dependencies