Hi Billy, On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:57 PM, [email protected] wrote: > How about Steady State Mark II ? > > There was an astronomer named Opik, I think, who postulated > an "oscillating universe" once upon a time, way back in the Hoyle era. > Maybe it merits a second look.
Oh, it has periodically been in fashion (no pun intended). The problem is that: a) the universe turned out to be a tremendously efficient radiator -- it generates enormous entropy, so it doesn't 'bounce'; it can't keep oscillating b) if anything, the expansion of the universe appears to be *increasing*, not decreasing (due to something called 'negative energy'). So, I don't know of any sort of a steady state that is at all consistent with the experimental evidence. And I did actually take a course or two on this in college, and the evidence for "a" Big Bang has only gotten stronger (even if the details are still fuzzy). > My thoughts for now, for what they may be worth, perhaps > next to nothing. :-) > But I gotta tell you, what has always attracted me to Hoyle despite > all the evidence in favor of Gamow has been a question : > How can there not be a universe ? Ever. Um, Genesis 1:1? -- Ernie P. > > Billy > _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
