IF Light Gets "Tired", Do We Need "Dark Energy"?

 If Zwicky's "Tired Light Theory" is partly back on the table, then do we need "Dark Energy"? The cosmos could be expanding because light is pushing against it. Dark energy would literally be EM energy, including light. The rate of the universe's expansion would increase because in stars, matter with gravity would be converted into light without it. And that light would push against space time like air in a balloon. Gravity would have to be an artifact of differences in EM fields at ultra-small wavelengths as I have stated elsewhere and would loose effectiveness at great distances to do normal red-shift stretching. 

 I don't buy the "older universe" in the link. I think spacetime is curved and they are looking at light from galaxies that has made more than one circuit around the cosmos, 

Update, I don't think "tired light" is the right way to put it. Rather, if I am right about the connection between ultra-short wave EM radiation and quantum adjustments in subatomic particles producing a tiny net attraction we call gravity, 

These are just placeholders for related ideas I want to think about later and ponder if the dots connect and how..

"the Ultraviolet Catastrophe"  

BUT I do think that classical Newtonian gravity breaks down by being somewhat stronger at a low force but I still suspect that at a very low force is starts to vanish altogether, explaining the expansion of the universe when combined with light pressure at longer wave lengths (which I hypothesize don't get so weak that something analogous to the ultraviolet catastrophe makes their energy mostly vanish. At least not at distances as small as the current size of the universe. 

I postulate there is a "sweet spot" for the gravitational effect of these tiny waves that corresponds to what is being found at the distance of distant binary pairs. They find that gravity seems to be stronger than Newton would expect at these distances. So, Classical Newtonian physics breaks down at ultra-tiny ranges, works for ordinary ranges at non-relativistic speeds, but does not work once you get to wide-binary distances because it is stronger than Newton predicts, but becomes weaker than Newton predicts at ultra long distances due to something analogous to the "Ultraviolet Catastrophe". 

It makes sense if gravity is a result of these tiny tiny EM waves that are overcome by quantum forces at super-close range, interfere with each other some at normal ranges (producing the force expected from classical Newtonian physics) but at interstellar ranges are low enough in density that the interference is minimized and thus the force is stronger than Newton expected it to be, But at extreme ranges the waves get so tiny that quantum effects cause them to increasingly become zero. At some range, gravity goes away. We can know this range based on how large we think the universe was when cosmic expansion began accelerating rather than slowing down.

UPDATE: This newly proposed model for dark energy is a lot like I have been saying- that so called "dark energy" is really light pressure, photons exert a push against the cosmos. His description is more complex of course.