I was wondering if someone would kindly point me to reading material that might help to shed some light on the idea outlined below. I'm looking to understand the related concepts in greater depth. Searching for "dark time" is what brought me to PF in the first place, via this forum, and then I also came across this, but neither seem to address the outlined idea. Apologies in advance for the lengthy post--not to mention any errors in my understanding, corrections thereof would be appreciated. ____________________ We think redshift occurs because of how long it takes light to reach us from far away. The assumption here is that the speed of light is constant, even through regions of the universe--between galaxies--that are experiencing accelerated expansion. But what if they aren't experiencing acceleration and light just travels slower through these regions? Or alternatively, perhaps the speed of light is indeed constant, but time moves faster in these regions. The same argument might be made w.r.t. dark matter. The bodies rotating around the edges of galaxies are moving too fast. It seems like they need to have more mass to keep them tethered to their galaxies. Or maybe they aren't moving as fast as we think; maybe their velocities are lower. A lower velocity could come about one of two ways, by less distance traveled or more time. If time is moving faster for them, then they might be experiencing lower velocity even while we observe them at higher velocities. We know time is local to the observer, so why not? Could the (perceived) probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics be explained by this also? Perhaps the probabilism is only a matter of perception due to mis-measurement of time. If an atom, from its perspective, experiences no time, or stopped time, this could explain why electrons appear to us to be in all and none of their possible locations simultaneously--distance divided by zero. Sean Carrol writes, "An unaccelerated trajectory yields the greatest possible time a clock could measure between two events." A clock on a rocketship that zooms away from Earth, circles around, and comes back, will be behind a clock that remains on the surface of the earth during the rocketship's trip. What velocity was the rocketship traveling at? Depends on your perspective. Both the rocketship and the earthling agree on the distance the rocket traveled, but they don't agree on how long it took, so again, velocity is in the eye of the beholder. As an aside, would a rocketship zooming around like this for, let's say, a billion years, but staying close to Earth all the while, perceive even more redshift from far away galaxies? How much redshift would an atom perceive? On the surface, all of these seem to point in the same direction of time being faster at larger scales and slower at smaller scales. Scale might not be the operative variable however. Rather, these all point in the direction of time being slower in the presence of accelerating matter and faster in its absence.