The "temperature fluctuation of the universe being less than the room you're in" was really eye-opening. Shows you just how uniform it is. I love analogies like that which bring it "down to earth".
@julianthegodmusic11 ай бұрын
2 years late but I bought the startalk book! Sitting here with it right now ready to read
@t.g.277711 ай бұрын
You guys get the complexity just right, not too dumbed down and not too complicated
@ryanforgo350011 ай бұрын
I'd argue we could use a more complicated episodes with some of these people. But it should only be a follow up to such simple episodes as this one so that we can stay on track.
@TheRealSkeletor11 ай бұрын
@@ryanforgo3500That's why I watch PBS SpaceTime.
@dianacanales252611 ай бұрын
Thank-You Dr. Tyson & Dr. Spergel for your intriguing answers to today's questions. Special Thank-You to Paul Mercurio for sitting in for Lord Nice! You did a great job, Paul!😊 This episode seemed too short, and they always are to me, because the topics and questions posed are so fascinating! Best show on the internet!! Thanks for all you do!❤🪐✨💫
@joe-dp3ng11 ай бұрын
N.D.T. has done so much for astronomy with his great personality and his tireless efforts to keep the public informed. He is what the "average Joe" needs to stay interested in science. Only a few come along in any given generation.
@joshinnc152011 ай бұрын
This episode should've been one of the hour+ long episodes. Maybe even cut the hour+ into smaller portions for the masses. I would truly love to hear more of the same. ❤
@joseimpact11 ай бұрын
it is!!! it's an old episode I think it's only like 4 months old!!
@joshinnc152011 ай бұрын
@KiDDopee11 Thanks for the heads up! I'm going to find it now. 👍👌
@sellnout414411 ай бұрын
What’s the episode called?
@fwd7911 ай бұрын
@@sellnout4144 we cannot add links in replies since KZfaq flags it, search: *Inside NASA’s UAP Report with Commission Chair David Spergel & Neil deGrasse Tyson*
@fwd7911 ай бұрын
@@joshinnc1520 Name of episode: *Inside NASA’s UAP Report with Commission Chair David Spergel & Neil deGrasse Tyson*
@angelicapickles978411 ай бұрын
It's funny having two people, especially NDT who loves making jokes and humor, then the one who keeps trying to give the facts without pausing - a testament to his dedication
@shannonharris11 ай бұрын
Universe isn't old.... ITS CLASSIC VINTAGE!
@michaelccopelandsr712011 ай бұрын
Well, technically, it is an antique. ;-P
@fratparty6911 ай бұрын
Lmao, we're all hipsters
@RobbieRobot.11 ай бұрын
😂😂😂 love it!
@hman291211 ай бұрын
Retro
@electrovoyage261311 ай бұрын
I think it's a bit older. It's antique
@tdome300011 ай бұрын
Extremely good insights from David Spergel there. Even if all this stuff has already been "discussed" elsewhere, this video was very insightful with more details.
@user-yd1zl1tv8x11 ай бұрын
My oh my!!! Just signed up to receive these video presentations, and I could not be happier. What a breath of fresh air: solid, rewarding, satisfying conversations about the most eminent things!!! Important conversations, as Newton might say, of "giants" talking. Mr. Neil, thank you for posting this. Kind regards!
@user-hg8ux9mj1i11 ай бұрын
Another great one y’all!! Had to watch this one twice!! . As usually, this show is massive!.
@jamesgreenler822511 ай бұрын
Nobody knows how old the universe is , we only know how far we can see and Nobody knows how the universe began, we only have theories.
@Nefville11 ай бұрын
David is *EXACTLY* the type of guy you want in charge of the NASA's independent study on UAPs. He's one of the only people skeptics like me would believe if they actually turned out to be something more and I expect they won't.
@ryanforgo350011 ай бұрын
That is not neseccarily good. You need a balance between both types of people so that one can find the unexpecged and another can make sure that we don't drift too far away with our imagination. The way i thought of david is, if you had too many of him jn the top we might be much less likely to bump into an unepexcted discovery. But uf we don't have him ppl like him at all we mivht end up wasting rss, energy and hopes over un-trustworthy concepts.
@helloyes228811 ай бұрын
@@ryanforgo3500 why would people like david be less likely to bump into unexpected discoveries? He'll go where the evidence takes him - that's science.
@rey346811 ай бұрын
@@helloyes2288because science also involves taking seemingly unrelated phenomena, mathematics, and abstractions of physical objects to try to not only explain natural phenomena but also predict it. In other words there may not be any easily identifiable “evidence” for a scientist to follow when trying to predict a natural phenomenon in the universe. Not only that but you may have to also create the idea of the phenomenon first in your mind and then try to apply what’s known in math, physics and geometry to make your initial theory before it can be tested. You need ppl like Einstein who can sit down and literally think up physics before an experimental scientist can try to test their validity.
@helloyes228811 ай бұрын
@@rey3468 That's not how it works. Besides, the first step to proving a hypothesis is creating an experiment, you're skipping that step.
@Indiefraiche11 ай бұрын
@@helloyes2288I was going to say the same thing. You don’t create ideas or formulate a conclusion first supports your hypothesis. These things should be unbiased as should all science. I love skeptics and the conspiracies but never do I think science should be driven by either.
@NiX_aKi11 ай бұрын
I've been waiting for this! 💗💗
@emuPoco-F311 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for all this work! I never miss a video, my best regards from México 💕
@BenjySparky11 ай бұрын
Niel, David and Paul y'all rock! Peace
@primovato936211 ай бұрын
Tips hat to editors
@thewb832911 ай бұрын
The beauty of Science is that it is self correcting or reinforced as new information is discovered and evaluated (unlike the human construct of religion where things are made up to continue support a previous claim).
@Va1demar11 ай бұрын
not in this case for sure, new data are interpreted to fit already established postulates and models without introducing any changes
@nicholasgardiner960111 ай бұрын
@@Va1demar Definitely Maybe. Which case?
@Va1demar11 ай бұрын
@@nicholasgardiner9601 in this topic and how scientists use the fingers of their limbs to calculate the age of the universe
@certifiedsadboi338711 ай бұрын
Is science not a human construct as well ? Obviously science is a great tool but it doesn’t exist on its own apart from humans.
@cannotthinkofoneatth11 ай бұрын
incorrect.. I think you need to be scientific and self correct yourself that this statement is incorrect and in the least not applicable to all religions.. for eg, Hinduism has concepts of shastrarth and padarthas (google them for yourself).. also Hinduism supports all kind of schools of thoughts - monotheism to polytheism and even atheism aka nastika philosophy
@kirandeepchakraborty792111 ай бұрын
Excellent Conversation ⭐⭐⭐⭐
@cannapolis900911 ай бұрын
I must agree, since I’ve been thinking this myself, about the early stars being extremely massive. Because not only did they start off early with a lot of hydrogen around, but all of that hydrogen was with an easy reach of their gravitational pull. Today we have light years between the stars, and the hydrogen is blown away across light years until it finds enough mass again to form a new star. The beginning of the universe did not have that distance problem.
@dadsonworldwide323811 ай бұрын
So what sbout peeka boo blue young small galaxy or green peas close to milkyway and mixed in all throughout ? It just sits around in a nebula 13 billion years then decides to collapse a billion years or less ago?
@lawrencedoliveiro910411 ай бұрын
One reason why the stars _needed_ to be big was there was no carbon around to catalyze hydrogen fusion at the sorts of temperatures you find inside our own Sun. If the same mass of gas came together back then, it would not ignite. It needed to get much bigger and hotter before the fusion fires would start.
@LennyDucano11 ай бұрын
Another great one y’all!! Had to watch this one twice!! 🎉🎉
@terryl787411 ай бұрын
The amazing fact that the universe continues to expand is mind boggling.
@Jay-ft3xh11 ай бұрын
*hypothesis that is currently being edited to fit the data.
@artwatch-y9j11 ай бұрын
Neil, we need to make this program longer
@Rahulnpx11 ай бұрын
My favourite way to watch startalk episodes is in the flight , so when Neil says , keep looking up , I gaze up from the flight window in the sky, to honour his appeal 😊.
@stevenkarmazenuk254011 ай бұрын
Bring back Chuck.
@mrpearson123011 ай бұрын
Love Paul Mercurio. Hilarious! Love Neil! Love Startalk! Just purchased the new 📖
@JohnDoe-sy6tt11 ай бұрын
Thank God for sound waves!
@zabity11 ай бұрын
I'd love to hear some longer talk with visualizations about the (current state of) universe's geo(uni?)graphy - where's the center of the bang, where the earth/milkyway is, etc. how are getting to these conclusions (what the tech is) and what are the propositions & research questions.
@tedsword11 ай бұрын
To answer your question about where the center of the big bang is, the answer is not satisfying: depending on how you look at it, there either is no center, or everywhere is the center. If you go to any point in space, whether it be Earth, the center of the Milky Way, Andromeda, or anywhere else, you would see space moving away from you in all directions. The way we always see the big bang depicted is space radiating out from a point, because it would be hard to depict it any other way. But it gives the inaccurate impression that it has a center. Our current accepted understanding is that the universe is not expanding into anything, which is a mind-boggling thought that I cannot conceptualize or understand, and I think if you were to ask most physicists, they would say that it is not something you could intuit.
@glenncurry30417 ай бұрын
So glad to hear that the most advanced understanding of our existence is that the Universe is very big! 🙂
@Donder133711 ай бұрын
As always, i learned alot from you guys! Thx for that 👍
@stevec-b621411 ай бұрын
to answer these questions in a way that my brain can cope with is a triumph!
@s1nb4d5911 ай бұрын
Enjoy these interviews with just you and the interviewees 8),Paul was a blast,keep him on.
@RIOT69011 ай бұрын
I like to think of the Microwave Background as a photograph made of microwaves of the nano-scale environment of the super early universe, except blown up to a super galactic scale.
@ZenRyoku11 ай бұрын
is it possible that the universe could be so old that even the light of the early universe is so far away that the light has still has not had enough time to travel to us....or perhaps the energy they expell just simply loses all visible properties because it has traveled too far for anyone or anything to have been able to observe it???? 🤔
@elmoteroloco11 ай бұрын
As usually, this show is massive!
@BlackHoleForge11 ай бұрын
8:00 Sometimes I put you on when I'm working on my vehicle. I was working on my brake lines this time, just sitting there trying to get something accomplished, and then honk!, I dropped my tool and hit my head. 🤕 For goodness sakes will somebody buy their book already. My heart and my head can't take it anymore.😂
@carldaynolo111 ай бұрын
we're so used learning together with the Chucker its just not the same without him
@kratomseeker525811 ай бұрын
well the other guy was funny too.
@ProgRockDan111 ай бұрын
Fascinating
@mrfilipelaureanoaguiar11 ай бұрын
About the age of the universe, could you imagine that, everything is invisible but surfaces, at night, we can see space black that could be, a gigantic planet that we float on, that is turning real slow and someday, could light the whole sky at night white, and during day blue. Age of that size rotation is important.
@jonc615711 ай бұрын
I love rabbit hole vids...
@tedmcfly11 ай бұрын
This David sergle is my new favorite Neil Degrassi Tyson.
@snarkykat11 ай бұрын
It's always best to discharge or confirm one's assumptions as much as possible before putting out any papers or press releases. Check, double-check, and recheck everything
@tylermcnally82327 ай бұрын
That's what peer review is and why papers are released. The media jumps on hypothesis before they have been checked and uses the word theory as guess instead of hypothesis.
@anandvermaearth11 ай бұрын
If I am not mistaken, we constantly loose matter ? With time we have less atoms , mostly converted to Energy and other radiations ? Energy is conserved.
@michaelccopelandsr712011 ай бұрын
Neil and Chuck for 2024!
@NicholasNerios11 ай бұрын
Great video.
@cardinia111 ай бұрын
Another COSMIC lesson tanks mate
@marcocambray772511 ай бұрын
2hr session next plz😊
@oscarmedina130311 ай бұрын
Time itself is expanding/stretching was quite a surprise.
@MaverickBlue4211 ай бұрын
"it's been a delight, an honor, and a privelege even just to be your friend and colleague, and Paul...uh...good to have you here..." 🤣
@SchwarzSchwertkampfer11 ай бұрын
*Dr.Tyson what do you think of this brainstorming idea* . *If a 4D being cast a 3D Shadow* . *To us it seems 3D* . *Is there a way to test how much of reality is actually just 3D Shadows* . *If I am understanding this correctly, if not I apologize* . *If I am then this will give humanity a better picture of 4D space* .
@user-qo4hc6jf1l11 ай бұрын
Love ya mr Tyson ❤
@Rares.E11 ай бұрын
Thank you!
@TheCorruptionKing11 ай бұрын
Can you use a sewing button ruler as an example of an expanding universe? Each point expands equally, however the relative rates of expansion would be different between point A and B, compared to A and H points. In a linear model
@Dar_Rito11 ай бұрын
David Spergel is giving me Jeff Bridges from Iron Man 1's Obadiah Stane vibes. Minus the villain arc. :D
@alexgonzalezjr682311 ай бұрын
Banquet halls I worked in would fill in the good bottles with cheap liquor all the time.😂
@TylerMatthewHarris11 ай бұрын
I was literally just looking into this
@noahway1311 ай бұрын
I love this editing
@SophiaAphrodite11 ай бұрын
I heard the analogy that if you took the visible universe and skrunk it to the size of the ocean. We have only explored a single glass of water.
@tylermcnally82327 ай бұрын
A small drop of water maybe.
@whiteowl870311 ай бұрын
Time being relevant makes the universe eternal.
@user-eq8ib7sc5e11 ай бұрын
In my humble opinion, the universe goes on infinitely in all directions
@fluid161411 ай бұрын
Hilarious. Short and sweet.
@johnvanderpol211 ай бұрын
Could the initial galaxies and their super massive blackhole not be the remnants of one huge star. Where the remnants later occasionaly merged.
@rosefine739411 ай бұрын
I love StarTalk and it's amazing how big the universe is with the lights that reach us. Did these early massive stars eventually become a supermassive black hole at the end of their lifetime?
@UncleRuckus760011 ай бұрын
Stars turn into 3 things when they die so maybe won't won't know for sure
@tedsword11 ай бұрын
Science doesn't have an understanding right now of how supermassive black holes form.
@1humanBeingHuman11 ай бұрын
tired life, model ….. i can relate
@markodespotov145511 ай бұрын
yo wheres chuck? great video though that dead cold guy is funny
@Chemy.11 ай бұрын
Interesting and looking to work on any of the observatories in Chile
@user-he1yb7pl1w11 ай бұрын
I'm always taken back by why people are surprised by galaxies and black holes at the beginning of the universe. Obviously there was a lot of stuff in a small space at the beginning so you would get super large stars very easy and large black holes that had large stars and such to consume in a small space. The laws of physics formed at the first instant of the big bang. I beleive that we have a very good understanding of the expansion of space to know this is what happened. The question that one cannot answer is why the big bang started to begin with? and was it truly the start of time and space.
@michealray489511 ай бұрын
Tired light makes more sense given that the medium of space itself is made up of a complex soup of quarks in fluctuating densities. To assume that a photon could travel through space without ever interacting with any of those quarks thus never exchanging energy with any of them causing it in itself to lose any momentum seems like a big leap. Tired light makes more sense. It is also easier to explain and to understand. Someone once said something like "if you can't explain it to someone at a 4th grade level of understanding it's probably wrong"
@LightGreen501311 ай бұрын
Can someone explain what exactly is meant when we say that the CMB radiation is normal? When I look at a map of it, the map just looks very irregular. Are are we saying those fluctuations are just random (but still somewhat large)? Or is it the deviations are so very small compared to the average? Thanks in advance!
@Google_Does_Evil_Now11 ай бұрын
Did you Google the variation in color and what the variation in color represents? It's a very small variation. I think it's way less than 0.1°C ( or 0.1°K or 0.1°F). Google says: "The actual temperature of the cosmic microwave background is 2.725 Kelvin. The middle image pair show the same map displayed in a scale such that blue corresponds to 2.721 Kelvin and red is 2.729 Kelvin" Therefore the variation in temperature is from 2.721 to 2.729, which is 2.729 - 2.721 = 0.008°K/C maximum temperature difference across the entire universe.
@LightGreen501311 ай бұрын
@@Google_Does_Evil_Now ah thanks! super helpful
@colinmaharaj11 ай бұрын
11:50 The only way you can know this shape of something, as if you can see the outer boundaries of it, draw a line around the boundary, and say this or that is the shape. But because we cannot see the edge of the universe, you therefore cannot see the shape of the universe.
@bree552911 ай бұрын
I think it’s possible that not all light in the universe has reached us yet. It could be older.
@tedsword11 ай бұрын
A lot of light has not reached us yet. If all light had reached us, then we would cease to see distant galaxies. However, there are multiple ways of expressing a so-called "cosmic horizon", wherein at a certain distance from us in the universe, you will not see any light beyond that point. These horizons exist due to the expansion of the universe and the speed of light. Inside of these horizons, you have the observable universe. However, the universe, itself, is even larger than that.
@anthonylosego6 ай бұрын
I would love to discuss with you a concept I see ignored in most of these KZfaq videos. Including other channels as well. A concept that could explain dark matter. No matter where I look, no one seems to be discussing it.
@morlin10111 ай бұрын
It is the emergency chain mechanism of universal recreation if we do not find how to tap that vacuum energy
@zamboni903811 ай бұрын
Expansion clearly has substantial evidence confirmed across a spectrum of verifiable observations. I still wish he did a deeper dive into tired light theory just to understand the specifics more. Would be cool to understand how it fails in observations. Being human, sometimes I project my feelings that tired light theory feels more intuitive than space expanding. Part of me feels like it would be naive to not be looking for different perspectives on TLT while we keep working on inflation as the leading theory.
@citizenworld852911 ай бұрын
time changes as universe expands. Its like calculating what was the price of house in 60's compare to price today. 1. Time is expanding and we don't know at what rate. Therefore its hard to calculate its age without that number. 2. Universal age should be in light years and not earth years.
@videosofeverything387611 ай бұрын
Can you do a short video or YT shorts on Pirates of Caribbean when Jack Sparrow and Will Turner was walking under the ocean while holding a boat upside-down?
@t.g.277711 ай бұрын
@StarTalk Are you guys doing an event for the US solar eclipse next april? I am planning on going to Buffalo, NY to see it, right in centre of path of totality
@tedsword11 ай бұрын
For the last eclipse, Neil went off somewhere by himself to watch it. So based on that, I don't think there will be an official event.
@sekaramochi11 ай бұрын
Please please please never stop ♥️
@Tommyoda11 ай бұрын
This is all fascinating but I’m still fascinated how our moon orbits earth as we revolve around the sun. ☀️
@eleventy-seven11 ай бұрын
It's ageless and timeless although the Tired Light theory explains why Red Shift and the CMB have been misinterpreted.
@sekaramochi11 ай бұрын
Neil sweet sixteen and waiting for forty two, the meaning of life the universe and everything
@kirickreutov284611 ай бұрын
Neil a question for you about relativity...if a twin travels away from earth at close to the speed of light and come back he is now younger than the twin who was on earth correct? Now say there's triplets floating in nothing but space one starts moving away from the other 2 at close to the speed of light and then comes back is he now older than the other 2? Or are the 2 guys younger because if there's nothing else to compare the speed to the 2 guys could be seen as moving not the 1 guy. Is this a flaw?
@aanchaallllllll11 ай бұрын
1:03: 🌌 The visible matter in the expanding universe is diluting as the universe expands. 3:58: 🔬 The tired light hypothesis suggests that the red shifting effect observed in distant galaxies is due to light losing energy as it travels, rather than the expansion of the universe. 7:05: ! The video discusses a recent paper claiming a much older age for the universe based on an analysis of colors of galaxies. 10:18: 😂 David Robertson rationalizes away a cool party idea and discusses anomalies in cosmic microwave background radiation. 14:15: ! The video discusses the theory of inflation and how it explains the rapid expansion of the universe. Recap by Tammy AI
@TheGbelcher11 ай бұрын
12:03 Not only is the universe larger than we can see, we also think the universe is flat. So the donut must be large enough that we can’t measure the curvature.
@davidpelletier537911 ай бұрын
This David guy is awesome lol
@oliveirlegume37253 ай бұрын
Is tired light coming from photon losing energy from charge interaction ? We observed it with photon interacting with électron but do not take in account for red shift...
@Drcraigpl11 ай бұрын
Time slows down near massive objects..So as the light from distant galaxies passes nearer massive objects on its way to us, it gets red shifted. Just an idea..IDK
@tylermcnally82327 ай бұрын
Things are spread out father than you seem to think. You could drive a straight line through any of our asteroid belts and not have to swerve away from a rock once. Galaxies and "large objects" as you put it are even more spread out than that (to scale of course)
@SolMuun11 ай бұрын
I'd love to see how these guys handle the growing Earth hypothesis. I personally think it's real, but the mechanism is elusive. Some people think it correlates to the expansion of the universe, others think that the gravitational constant is lower now than it was in the past. What do you guys think?
@lucaslegey74428 ай бұрын
@StarTalkRadio answer me this plz (bugging my mind) If information is also limited to the speed of light, when observing an electron wouldt the "possibility cloud" colide faster then light? (having in mind that the information that it was observed had to travel all atoms lenght)
@tylermcnally82327 ай бұрын
Probability cloud. Use the right terms. Also what is the cloud colliding with exactly? Electrons repell each other and never touch. The electron clouds on the outer edge of your hand never touch any of the electron clouds of any object you've ever held. So what are you talking about.
@RogerGarrett11 ай бұрын
What happens to a photon when it bounces off a surface? I know that it can impart momentum to what it hit, so does the photon lose energy? What does that mean to the photon? Change it's wavelength, it's size, slow it down? If it just kept bouncing between surfaces would it eventually just disappear? Since photons can bounce off surfaces, can it bounce off another photon? If not, why not?
@bobman92911 ай бұрын
It doesn't bounce off. It is absorbed and then another is released.
@RogerGarrett11 ай бұрын
@@bobman929 NOPE. Well, not always. Reflection: When photons encounter a reflective surface, such as a mirror or a polished metal, a significant portion of them are typically reflected. This means that they bounce off the surface without being absorbed. The angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence, as described by the law of reflection. This is why you can see your reflection in a mirror; photons from your face strike the mirror's surface and bounce back towards your eyes. Absorption and Re-emission: While a reflective surface predominantly reflects photons, some may be absorbed temporarily by the surface's atoms or molecules. However, these absorbed photons are usually re-emitted shortly afterward. The key point is that they are re-emitted in random directions, not in a well-defined angle like in reflection. This re-emission is what gives some materials their reflective properties. It's important to note that the absorbed photons are not typically "released" as new photons, but rather they are re-emitted as the same photons, maintaining their energy and properties.
@bobman92911 ай бұрын
@@RogerGarrett sorry buddy but you have confused yourself there. Don't know where you got your info from but the energy of the photon is always absorbed by the electron it hits. If the frequency matches the electrons it will turn that energy into thermal energy, meaning the photon was "absorbed" If it doesn't, the energy is initially absorbed by the electron but then emitted (reflected) back out with the exact same energy properties. So it seems like the same photon but actually isn't. Atoms/paticles in general emit other particles such as photons when elections jump to a lower shell/level as a way to keep the conservation of energy. You have to remember that everything is just waves of energy, not solid objects. You want to google quantum physics of light flection.
@dirtynachobuffet11 ай бұрын
I really want a cosmopolitan now.
@Elkhorse11 ай бұрын
Maybe the gravitational wave from the big bang is the force thats expanding the universe by pulling it from the outside where we cant detect it.
@rebokfleetfoot11 ай бұрын
'we can't be in the center' :) i agree with that
@MGBranco11 ай бұрын
Mexico just show 2 alien bodies guys! I will wait for THE ep!
@sumitbhardwaj561211 ай бұрын
Sir I was reading the Swami Vivekananda philosophy and he wrote about when there was no universe or you can say it was in super tiny shape so he wrote when there was no universe there was no time, there was no death and there was darkness of darkness. So my question is what scientists think when there was no universe. what was inside this tiny universe. My English is not good so please manage
@keeganlea111 ай бұрын
whats the math say about the assumption that stars had grater mass in the early universe vs what we see from younger galactic clusters?
@danfortinart10 ай бұрын
I feel we should consider the observers belief on the size vs the components and how the oberserver may assume It to be .
@tylermcnally82327 ай бұрын
Good thing science doesn't care about your "feelings."
@caneloweight175weightdrain511 ай бұрын
What is before expansion R why what are we expansion into?
@h7opolo11 ай бұрын
electromagnetic waves of universal scale are vital for the fundamental physics of higher frequencies.
@patrickkeller219311 ай бұрын
We have multiple indications that the expansion theory is right. However, just because one theory is right, doesn't necessarily mean another is wrong. Not sure if it was referencing the same paper, but I recently saw a report proposing Tired Light not as a replacement, but as a potential additional effect.