I am only a average computer technician, and have no grand aspirations, but often I feel a need to point out inconsistencies I see, and often that leads me to think on them for some time.
Premise – Quasars are so bright because they are so far away, and so huge.
Problem – If that was the case, based on red shift many or most of them would be far brighter for their distance than even the largest supernova, and maintain that brightness level for a very long time. This would be highly unlikely.
Solution – Quasars are not that far away, but as the steady state crowed show, they may very well be within the range of the companion galaxies.
Problem – If that was the case, how do you account for the red shift shown in the quasars relative to the galaxies, or for that matter, account for the red shift in the galaxies themselves. Something has to be causing it.
Solution – We know gravity can effect light over the short term, we have observed the manipulation of light around stars from background galaxies. We understand how that works, but what are the effects of gravity on light over thousands of years? If a Galaxy is dense or sparse would that effect the light coming from the galaxy? Can that cause a red shift we observe? And a quasar being very dense in deed, have a greater effect on the light leaving it?
How many items have a blue shift? There are catalogs of millions of galaxies all with various red shifts, but how many have a blue shift? Reality is there are an incredibly small number, and most are very low compared to the apparent red shift of so many other objects. This should indicate that of the millions of red shift items and dozens of blue shift items, the math of the big bang does not work there either. There should be quite a few more. If gravity is causing the red shift, then to get a blue shift items would need to have a specific heading, and relatively high speed in order to show.
M31 has one of, if not the largest blue shift of any galaxy in the sky. Why?
Does any of this rule out a Big Bang? no. Does any of this prove a Big Bang? No.
I deal in logic, and often I find an answer simply by thinking my way through the problem. This is not something I can do that on. There seems to be a lack of science or at least easily available material on this whole problem. Sometimes I have a hard time sleeping after these kind of think sessions. Perhaps someone can recommend reading on this subject. And yes I do understand much but not all of the math involved. After all I do not have a Physics degree.