For list astro-geeks and sci-fi nuts looking for famous and not so famous extra stuff in the universe:
http://www.astro.umd.edu/~ssm/mond/flowchart.html
Check out the boxes several tiers down the tree of `new particle' on the left under, `massless and stable but...' ... `kills dinosaurs', `cripples dinosaurs', `scares dinosaurs a bit.' Also of interest are boxes labeled `only found at Stanford' (People who went to Cal, like this sort of thing)
Evidently to dodge missing mass and redshift without resort to postulating 90% of stuff that can't be seen or measured in various canonical theories, you can always alter fundamental constants like e. This is accomplished by setting, ``variable charge wavelength changes.. proportional to the inverse fourth power of the local-to-remote differential in unit electrical charge...'' For variable charge fans see:
http://www.ebicom.net/~rsf1/missmass6.htm
The value goes up in regions of high matter density like the galactic disk, spiral nebula, globular clusters and quasars. The value drops in `empty' regions.
The idea gets `suggestive' backing (anything is possible) by recent observations of quasars that spectulate that proton mass to electron mass ratio was different in different evolutionary epochs (see astro-ph/0210299):
http://arxiv.org/list/astro-ph/0210?200
In terms of geometrical analogies, a factor like variable e used to construct a mass contour line gives a low flattened curve with spikes, like mountains (regions of high density). This factor used in a 2-d perspective projection along a line of sight, turns elongated ellipses into semi-normal circles, i.e. tends to cancel the `perspective' effect. (As if the 2-d perspective plane was curved upward near objects to show more of their `top' view.)
Cosmological models depend on e because it appears in the calculations used to get from the shift in hydrogen spectral lines to redshift-distance relation (z). By allowing e to vary with mass density along the path from source to receiver, the redshift becomes an artifact and measures the density differential between us and remote objects.
Consequences. Abandons perfect cosmological principle, violates gauge invariance (conservation laws), leaves CMB unexplained... Oh, nevermind. It was fun.
For unrelated but fun java applet on field of moving charge:
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~phys1/java/phys1/MovingCharge/MovingCharge.html
There are other inhomogeneous and anisotropic models that accomplish various magical feats by altering fundamental constants. There is the variation of G with time (currently used to `correct' BB model predictions with observation), and the aging photon theory that ultimately dialates into CMB (to get rid of expansion). I always liked the aging photon theory, but it's very dated.
For some beautiful astronomy images and photosphop techniques to get them:
http://www.robgendlerastropics.com/
CG