Could you be helpful in providing the source of this info....
I recommend
Some Consequences of the Generalised Uncertainty Principle: Statistical Mechanical, Cosmological, and Varying Speed of Light (S. Kalyana Rama, 2001) and
‘c’ is the speed of light, isn’t it? (George F.R. Ellis, Jean-Philippe Uzan, 2008) for some good reading.
The former is more concerned with quantum fluctuations, focusing on the fact that you cannot predict a single photon's path or perceived speed through a medium, however it does state that the
average velocity (specifically the mean velocity) is reduced in a denser, due to the fact that the photons are travelling in a wider range of directions (and therefore have different velocities).
The latter questions the fundamental problems with a varying speed of light, and also covers the difference between the electromagnetic constant (i.e. the "actual" speed of light) and the relativistic constant (i.e. the "speed limit" of the universe).
I think you are confusing speed with acceleration. Acceleration is the increase in speed. The tennis ball decelerates going up until it stops and then falls back to earth accelerating in speed as it comes back.
Acceleration is not the increase in speed. Acceleration is the change in velocity with respect to time. Deceleration is acceleration in the opposite direction.
Under standard Newtonian physics, a ball in the air on Earth accelerates towards the Earth at 9.8ms^-2. It doesn't matter whether the ball is travelling upwards, downwards, or in no direction whatsoever, it's still accelerating downwards.
Not necessarily. You are making the assumption that the Big Bang occurred at one specific point. Also, 'acceleration of expansion' can only be explained by contraction and not inflation.
Where am I making the assumption that the Big Bang occurred specific point? I said everything is moving apart from everything else. This is an observable fact. Every galaxy supercluster is moving away from ours. The further away they are, the faster they are moving. This also means that from the point of view of any supercluster, every other supercluster is moving away from it. I'll do a really crude diagram for you now:
Code:
1 2 3 4 5
| > >> >>> >>>>
1 2 3 4 5
<< < | > >>
1 2 3 4 5
<<<< <<< << < |
From the point of view of 1, all other numbers are moving right (away from it).
Because 3 is moving to the right at a speed of two arrows from 1's frame of reference, all speeds relative to 3 can be obtained by subtracting two arrows right. Relative to 3, all numbers to the left are moving left (away from it), and all numbers to the right are moving right (away from it).
You can do the same for 5. Or 2. Or 4. You could expand this model into two, or three, or
n dimensions, and exactly the same rules apply. There is no need to have a fixed point anywhere.
Also, 'acceleration of expansion' is not only not explained by contraction, it's explicitly contradicted! How can expansion be happening faster when it's not happening at all? EDIT: For clarification, by that I mean that it wouldn't be referred to as "acceleration of expansion" at all, it'd be referred to as "thank god we're not all doomed as early as we thought we would". Or "contraction reduction", whatever.
