Actually things can move in a static spacetime and still appear redshifted or blueshifted. And I am not sure why you are tagging the result as dubious, as it only makes the science complicated, there is nothing wrong with their results as far as I can tell.
When there is nothing going on, and only unanswerable questions exist, speculation is a good form of entertainment. There is nowt going on, on this forum at the moment.
Where did I see this quote
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
- Carl Sagan
All things MAY be entangled to a certain extent, this includes the Dark Matter effect, which is likely not due to real particles of any kind. Dark Energy which can not violate conservation of energy. The HUP and zero point energy. Virtual particle exchanges which are only theoretical but help with the maths and Feynmans diagrams. Perhaps those virtual particle exchanges are done via entanglement.
Dark Matter / Virtual particles aka Feynman have never been detected, the mechanism behind gravity is ultimately due to quantum mechanics and likely entanglement. Dark Energy if via the HUP or zero point energy is not real energy ie the HUP can violate conservation of energy for small periods of time, before repaying. If virtual particles momentarily appear expanding space time, then disappear before more VP reappear and further expand space time, does space time have to shrink once the VP that stretched it disappears.
Space time is viewed traditionally as curved under general relativity, it can equally be viewed as flat, using a flexible ruler. ie if the ruler is at a tangent to a BH it measures a standard length, if you rotate the ruler ie your eye towards the BH the ruler shrinks. This is like looking at a shadow, ie things are distorted.
There may be more to what we observe in space time than meets the eye, and trying to understand it from Newtonian mechanics point of view or a space time viewpoint, MAY not be accepting the universe as it really is, however satisfying and reassuring that might be
Edit a couple of good links on entanglement I picked of another forum https://www.sciencen...og&context=117
Entanglement can’t be visualized in spacetime terms because entanglement precedes spacetime. You need entanglement to have spacetime — it is somehow more fundamental than spacetime. So you cannot understand entanglement as something that happens within spacetime.
This strikes me as very close to Bohr’s original insight, first articulated in 1927, that a spacetime description and a cause-and-effect description are mutually exclusive. Almost nine decades later, physicists may be on the verge of understanding why those two views are incompatible, and may soon be able to show that entanglement itself provides the resolution of its own mystery."
Edited by Flummoxed, 04 April 2019 - 11:10 AM.