Expansion/contraction same thing?

[RAD4921]

I have come to the conclusion that expansion and contraction are probably the same thing. Doppler redshifts do not prove that the universe as a whole is expanding. On the contrary, redshifts can show contraction, such as those seen on the event horizon of a black hole. Redshifts only show that objects are moving away from US. Furthermore, if one subscibes to a holographic model of the universe, you come to the conclusion that if the universe is contracting in part (a black hole) it is contracting as a whole. If a black hole leaks out its contents back into the universe as some suggest, one could also percieve black hole contraction as a form of expansion.

It is assumed that the universe is expanding from a central location in the observable universe, that being the big bang. To me, to assume the universe has a point of origin in both space and time is claiming that there truly is an absolute frame of reference.

The above ideas seem so obvious I find it hard to believe that cosmologist and physicist have overlooked them.

What do you think? Are my ideas flawed in your opinion?

 

[russ_watters]

It is assumed that the universe is expanding from a central location in the observable universe, that being the big bang.

That is not what the big bang says. The big bang happened everywhere at once.

Redshifts only show that objects are moving away from US.

Correct. Therefore: big bang.