Asking, on 2022 Jan 29, Google the question: is the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) red shifted? I get the following answer:
Light from the CMB is redshifted as the universe expands, cooling it over time. The CMB is a perfect example of redshift. Originally, CMB photons had much shorter wavelengths with high associated energy, corresponding to a temperature of about 3,000 K (nearly 5,000° F).
Relativity; hidden motion.
Because referred to “our position” all motions that we measure are also moving along our own position, that is along the “hidden” (not taken in account) motion of our position.
I am in a car moving at 50 km/hr with respect to the ground, and I am measuring the speed of a car passing me to be 20km/hr with respect to me; that car is rolling at 70 km/hr, with respect to the ground. Considering the 20 km/hr speed measured I call my own 50 km/hr speed a “hidden” speed.
And I know that the various rotating and not rotating “hidden” motions of earth along the “hidden” expansion of the Universe are other “hidden” motions of my car.
Trouble with Sience's Universe expansion
Consider now our position on Earth or close-by Earth; while measuring the Universe Expension's redshifts and CMB, that very position of ours is moving along “hidden” or not taken in account motion coinciding among others to the very expansion of the Universe.
So, in view of above car experiment, I should add to the fast expanding motion of far away galaxies, my own fast expanding Universe motion expansion.
Now the far away galaxies are going twice as fast as the actual measured value (twice as fast as the expansion of the Universe).
I find myself in a place expanding at half the rate the Universe is expanding.
With science's interpretation the Universe is expanding at a rate and at same time expanding at double that rate.
Science's interpretation of the redshifts is in trouble (see Note 1).
The redshifts measured can be explained differently as follows: these redshifts are due to the gravity surrounding all those far away galaxies, a gravity amounting to accelerated motions around those galaxies, in effect contradicting the Universe expansion
I concede the fact that I must also make the assumption that our own Milky Way is so small with respect to the Universe that its own gravity does not annihilate or compensate in reverse the redshifts observed; that is nevertheless obvious as the Milky way does not turn this red shift back to blueshift; and by the way this assumption cannot be used to solve science's problem in which size of space and time evolution rather than gravity are at play.
Now that the Universe's expansion has been replaced by a standstill acceleration (gravity), no big bang and no beginning of the Universe ever occurred (see Note 2).
Please note, gravimotion "worded explanation" does not negate nor contradict the measures; gravimotion's "worded explanation" is based on science's "measures" just as science's "worded explanation" is; gravimotion's "worded explanation" simply makes more sense than science's own "worded explanation" does.
Nowadays Big Bang, just as in gravimotion, never occurred in science
Big Bang is now preceded by “inflation” in science. All above becomes useless... Big Bang lost its glamour.
Note 1: Nowadays in science, the galaxies are no longer moving away from each other, space in between the galaxies instead is expanding, now an obvious problem; how could the galaxies remain in place while space (the distances between them) increases? This new problem is elegantly solved considering gravity.
Note 2: Gravimotion's interpretation: there were no beginning goes against this human belief that everything has a beginning and can be explained.