How would we ever tell the difference between a universe that has expanding space and a universe that has shrinking matter? How do we reconcile our beliefs about the conservation of energy with the notion of expanding space? Wouldn't it be easier to account for energy if it involved shrinking matter? Can the notion of shrinking matter (as well as the shrinking space around it) be reconciled by string theory or some other similar unification theory? Perhaps matter is shrinking at an accelerated rate, explaining why supernovas at some redshifts are dimmer than they are supposed to be? At some point, some places in the universe would have matter shrinking faster than others, making those other places experience a universe that appears, to them, accelerating away to oblivion? Maybe we could discover other places where matter was shrinking more slowly? Maybe the most distant galaxies which appear faded (although large in terms of angular size for their actual size) are shrinking a slower rate and therefore experience a less accelerated universe? Maybe the shrinking of one galaxy affects the development of other galaxies? Like a Julia set? Maybe the shrinking is due to billions of years of scaling down of atoms and molecules as a result of energy leakages from the smallest scales of matter (entropy losses)? Maybe as time progresses, this energy that is lost is simply lost to the empty space causes energies within atomic, molecular, and gravitational systems to move around and smaller and smaller distances?