If you needed more evidence to demonstrate that photon redshift in space is not actually related to expansion, read this article. Apparently when you try to apply the expansion/acceleration model to objects that are further away at higher redshifts, surprise, surprise, it doesn't work right.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
The supposed "fix" for this serious problem is to change the metaphysical properties of "dark energy" yet again so that not only does dark energy defy the laws of physics by remaining constant over multiple exponential increases in volume, as it if that wasn't bad enough, now it actually has to get *stronger* (more dense) over time and exponential volume increases.
The lack of predictive usefulness of the LCDM model is simply staggering. On top of the fact that the LCDM model has zero predictive usefulness in the lab, every new observation from space blows huge holes in their model and the only way to "solve" the problem is to defy the laws of physics yet again, and add liberal amounts of additional metaphysical nonsense. That's how we ended up with dark energy in the first place. Now dark energy has do even more absurd magic tricks to save the expansion interpretation of the photon redshift phenomenon. Even worse, photons are still forbidden to work in space the way that they actaually work in the lab and transfer some of their momentum to the plasma medium which they traverse.
This new observation clearly demonstrates that there is simply nothing predicatively useful about the LCDM model of cosmology. Astronomers are constantly surprised by every new study and every new observation. Not only wasn't the universe slowing down over time as originally "predicted" by the expansion interpretation of photon redshift, and not only does it now have to accelerate over time, the acceleration process has to accelerate over time too! Holy Cow. There's been no significant new observation that the LCMD model actually predicts *correctly* the first time. It has to be modified with each and every new observation. Metaphysical nonsense is simply not a valid scientific alternative to good old fashion empirical physics.
Photons in the lab have been documented to transfer some of their momentum to the plasma medium. That is the real *empirical cause* of photon redshift over distance. It's been documented to work that way in the lab.
'Space expansion" is a metaphysical myth. No photon has ever been shown to be redshifted by space expansion. That is just one of four metaphysical myths which are required to hold the LCDM model together. If every new observation requires major modifications of your theory, your theory is probably wrong.
It's irrational to believe that photons in the plasma of spacetime behave completely differently than they behave in the lab. There's a very simple and well documented empirical explanation for the photon/distance relationship, namely the transfer of photon momentum to the plasma medium. That empirical redshift process has been verified and documented in the lab, yet LCDM proponents avoid that simple empirical explanation for redshift and they evoke three different forms of metaphysical nonsense to explain the very same phenomenon.
The worst part IMO is that the whole LCMD model hinges entirely upon the *assumption* that the cosmic microwave background is *not* related to stellar emissions and ordinary scattering like all the other wavelengths of light in space, but rather it's related to some mythical snow globe 'surface of last scattering" event. What a crock.
Eddington used empirical physics and the ordinary scattering of starlight to correctly predict the average temperature of the dust of spacetime on his very first attempt. The LCDM model was off by more than a full order of magnitude on it's first try. That should have been their first clue that microwaves in space have nothing whatsoever to do with expansion. Here we are, decades later, and the LCDM model fails yet another observational "test", yet rather than embracing empirical physical alternatives, they simply add liberal amounts of new metaphysical nonsense to an already irrational explanation.
Oy Vey.
Make no mistake, the LCDM model of cosmology is simply absurd. It's unworkable, it's unreliable and it's untenable. It's irrational metaphysical creation mythology that consistently fails to "predict" new observations correctly. It fails lab test after observational test after test. It's time to let the LCDM model die a natural scientific death already, and stop trying to save it with more metaphysical mumbo-jumbo. Enough already.