I am not a physics major but have always been perplexed by the apparent paradox of two issues: 1. If we use the Hubble telescope to view items 10B+ years in the past yet the universe is expanding, what was the actual physical location of these bodies at the time the light was produced? Wouldn't they have been much closer to begin with? e.g. the light seems to be coming from distances much larger then the universe would have been at thei time of the photon emission. 2. I'm familiar with the concept of local time compressing as a body accellerates to provide for constant perception of c. e.g. an accelerated body's local time slows to prevent its light from overtaking light from a "stationary" source. However, let's say we try this experiment local to the Earth. The Earth is in motion around the sun, the sun in motion around the galaxy, the galaxy towards the Great Attractor, what if the "accelerated body" is actually *decelerating* from this relative motion -- wouldn't its local time potentially speed up as it's the perceived "stationary" bodies which are actually traveling at a high rate of speed? e.g. If we were to fire off rockets in 14 different directions each 45 degrees from another in 3d space, and then measured local time, couldn't we then detect in which direction we're actually heading in as the rocket whose time slows the most would point towards greater velocity vs. the rocket whose clock slows (or speeds up) points to "true" stationary space?