You are a lot closer to your college days that I am to mine and a lot of theories have changed in the last 20+ years. My head hurts. Instinctively, I think you're barking up the wrong tree but intellectually I am too worried about a weird use of ctype in an ASP.NET app I'm enhancing and my son's college loans to grok it out.

>>True, but not because the speed of light has changed, just the distance.
>
>Right.
>
>If v = d / t, and v is constant, and d expands, than so does t.
>
>t = 1 / frequency
>
>It should be possible to re-formulate Hubble's law as the expansion of time, without modifying space.
>
>Then it should make identical predictions that match what is observed.
>
>In other words, if we can expand time (by slowing down light after it travels cosmological differences) then it should explain cosmological phenomena such as redshift and the CMB equally as well as the expansion of space.
>
>Of course, no one believes light can slow down or has a finite range, despite observing redshift.
>
>The result is, what seems like the most obvious answer, and avoids expanding space and big bang, has never been seriously considered before.