The Big Bang model has a fair number of patches, but the first and most egregious is that when they realized that redshift increases proportional to distance in all directions, making us apear to be at the center of the universe, it was changed from an expansion in space, to an expansion of space, based on relativistic spacetime.

Which totally ignores the central premise of spacetime, that in a moving frame, both clock and ruler dilate equally, so that space is always measured as C.

Necessarily then, if space were to expand relativistically, the speed of light would have to increase, in order to remain Constant.

Otherwise there isn't one metric of space, light speed, but two. One based on the speed and the other on the spectrum. Given they have to be related, as they are both based on the same light, which is the denominator and which is the numerator?

If the speed were the numerator, then it would be some form of "tired light" theory, but it's an "expanding space" theory.

And it is, if you read every description of it, expanding relative to light speed. They all talk of how it is so much bigger than the singularity. Bigger relative to what? To light crossing it.

Yes, there is supposed to be some metric that expands faster than the light travels and that's causing the light to redshift, but lightwaves are not just some wavy line on a balloon, that become lest wavy, as the balloon expands. They are a function of the motion of the energy of the light.

One way light does redshift over distance alone, is as multi-spectrum "packets," as the higher frequencies dissipate faster. Yet that would mean the quantification of light is a function of its absorption and measurement, not fundamental to the light itself. So that we are sampling the entire wave front and not detecting individual, single spectrum photons that have traveled billions of lightyears.

Now if this effect compounds over distance, it would explain the upward, eventually parabolic curve in the rate, far more efficiently than assuming most of the universe is invisible Dark Energy.

As for Dark Matter, if waves are the most essential pattern, waves tend to both synchronize, which is centripetal, as one is more efficient than many, as well as harmonize, since the energy alone also tends to distribute across space.

Given that gravity is a centripetal effect, than it would seem possible this extends, as synchronization, across the entire radiological spectrum, with mass as just the stage between radiation and the vortex in the middle. Such that mass is an effect of gravity, rather than gravity a property of mass.

We are just biased toward mass, since it's something we can identify with.

Remember lasers are synchronized light waves and the quasars shooting out the poles of galaxies are essentially giant lasers.

Just some ideas, but I suspect theoretical physics is in need of a serious reset. Eventually some generation of theorists will rebel against untestable propositions.