Did Hubble can it wrong?

[little_monkey]

The gravitational redshift depends on the difference of the gravitational potential. If two identical stars are at different distances, they will be in different gravitational potential, hence will exhibit diffrent redshifts.

At the large r limit (when the source is very very far away from the observer) the gravitational redshift are identical for identical stars. It doesn't matter that one of the one of the stars is 100 billion lightyears further away. Read the link I provided and look at the 2nd equation in the article.

I have read your link and nothing in there contradicts my blog. Secondly, there is no reference to two identical stars, so I have no clue where you get that. Simply put, galaxies at different distances will have different redshifts. It doesn't matter what their masses are. What matters is the mass of the source of gravity. In the first figure, the source is the earth, but in the appendix, it's an infinite number of galaxies.

If you look at equation 10, d = H Δv, you need to know the mass and the size of the source. And so my argument is that this will be the same for every galaxy. I've put an appendix on my blog to illustrate that. Check it out again: http://soi.blogspot.ca/

Two words: statelite galaxies. If the masses of each galaxies would be the same, then you shouldn't have any satellites. A satellite requires a central mass that is much heavier than itself to orbit around.

I'm not talking about satellites. Your point is irrelevant.

Your claim doesn't hold up to the observations.

You haven't shown that so far how my claim doesn't hold up. I believe you did not understand my blog. Let me give a short synopsis. Historically Hubble discovered his eponymous law through observation, not theory. He concluded that all galaxies were moving away - this was from what was known as the Doppler Effect. Subsequently this was developped as the Big Bang Theory.

In my blog, I show that by taking Einstein Equivalent Principle, one gets that Doppler Effect = Gravitational Shift, and from there, I derived Hubble Law. Now if you can show where my derivation is wrong, then fine, I will appreciate, but so far, you haven't. The only argument that can destroy my claim is my assumption that the universe is infinite. If the universe is finite, then my claim doesn't hold any longer.