On 1/1/2020 11:00 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 12:47:52 PM UTC-7, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 11:10:51 AM UTC-7, Philip Thrift
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 9:26:01 AM UTC-6, Alan
Grayson wrote:
On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 1:54:36 AM UTC-7, Philip
Thrift wrote:
This could be the case:
For every formal IUT (infinite universe theory) there
is a formal FUT (finite universe theory - there is no
infinite entity in the theory) - that is just as good
in matching up to all observations.
What has to 'give' is this:
*Well, the denial that the universe is closed and
spherical. AG *
We can *never, ever know* which one corresponds to
reality.
@philipthrift
One can have a finite universe theory with a finite space
metric as a function of time where the distribution of matter
does not take a 'spherical' shape. I.e.: A theory where metric
as a function of time does not have to be the same everywhere
and everywhen, and new matter could appear over time.
@philipthrift
It's "spherical", like the Earth, with hills and valleys,
mountains and canyons. I'm not referring to a perfect sphere. AG
In the not-too-distant past, I've had this discussion with Brent. He
claimed, IIRC, that the universe could have begun infinite in spatial
extent. But the usual models have it starting as very small. I would
like his input in this matter. AG
It could have begun infinite, while the part visible to us is now was
then very small.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/228805ce-c9df-8b6c-b29b-978e84c7fdfc%40verizon.net.
