It seems most logical, to me anyway, that the Universe is truly infinite in time and space. Nothing

created it, it will never end, and that is more logical, to me, than arising from nothingness.


The whole modern concept of big bang etc. is mostly based on Hubble’s red shift.

When I read articles about the cosmos’ origins and recent astronomy discoveries,

I keep imagining immense distances and all kinds of possible ATTENUATIONS of light and gravity

from distances that we haven’t seen. At least not yet Gravity from further reaches of the same U slows

light photons and therefore RED SHIFTS the light. I know, the same general gravity should act

the same everywhere and therefore not attenuate, but I can imagine a relative kind of attenuation

because the light or gravity photon or wave does become affected by all sorts of local gravities

on its way to us. Why not just like the way light is bent around Mercury or gravity by Jupiter?

The immense distances would allow for multiple interactions and a gradual slowing or red shift.


So we don’t need the big bang. The church likes it because it allows for a creator.


And the missing energy or mass or dark matter….

Why not just our parallel universe operating in a kind of 180 opposite direction from ours.

Where else would those positrons and other fleeting particles have to go? Into our sister Universe, I

would guess.


I have been looking for a forum to express these views……..and since I know of no one else….

Everything-list people might be it.


I now humbly wait for rebuttals and offers to go elsewhere.



Reply via email to