Starting with Newtonian Dynamics, the Physics became gradually dominated by the idea that properties of matter extend indefinitely in space. The Modern Physics still has remnants of that conception, in spite of sometimes explicit denial of the fact. When it comes to checking the truth of that assertion, it is easier to check directionally, for Man’s capability of displacement in space is very limited.

Inasmuch as the space properties relate to the matter filling the space, the Physics of space is similar to Cosmology, and from Cosmology we can borrow one or two ideas regarding isotropy, the notion coming frontward whenever we discuss the matter in relation to space. It turns out that, from cosmological point of view, the usual perception of isotropy, as invariance of properties of matter to action of rotations in space, is not sufficient.

In Cosmology we face the idea that something is missing in the general picture about isotropy, and different reformulations of the conditions defining this general property for the needs of Cosmology show clearly what this something is: the scale of contemplation of the Universe. Indeed, cosmologically the isotropy of the Universe is related to the scale we look at it: obviously even for the naked eye the internal galactic space is not isotropic with respect to distribution of matter.

The primary drawback of the human condition is that most of the time we cannot talk about isotropy but at a scale where the Universe is, at least to a certain degree, a figment of our imagination, for instance at extragalactic or atomic level, to take only the two extreme examples. Thus, the judgments about the isotropy of space are marked by all kinds of uncertainties. Our idea of isotropy comes usually from our perception of the extragalactic level. Rarely can one see debates as to the isotropy of Universe based upon microscopic, atomic level, considerations. But are such arguments to be taken into consideration?

Our opinion is that, indeed, they are! This opinion is based on the observation that the light – the carrier of information about the Universe at large – transcends between Microcosm and Macrocosm. Thus, we claim that it carries information about Galaxies. We extract this information locally, based on the microscopic phenomena triggered by the light that, we claim, comes from the points towards which we aim with our telescopes. It is then only natural to accept that the elementary receiver of light, the atom, might as well change its properties along time. If so, this process might appear as a change in the properties of the light we receive, and therefore we might see as expansion of the Universe a phenomenon of evolution of the atoms.

Therefore there is some merit in theories that challenge the expansion of the Universe. Excluding those that tend to replace the isotropic expansion by some kind of anisotropic one, we are aware of only one of the theories taking into consideration the very dual nature of information contained in the light. This is the theory of Sambursky (Physical Reviews 1937, Vol. 52, pp. 335 – 338). Sambursky sees the expansion of the Universe dynamically, arguing theoretically that "the dynamics of expansion are transferred into the dimensions of atomistic phenomena where expansion appears as its reverse – shrinkage" (l.c. p. 335). Leaving aside the intricate theory, involving the long-term variation of the Planck constant, we consider this theory as entirely feasible, based on the dual nature of light: it carries information about the Macrocosm, but this information can only be extracted through microscopic processes.