Re: Olber again (was: Re: Big Bang is Bunk)

From: Joe Dees (
Date: Tue Jul 31 2001 - 01:33:17 MDT

('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) >Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 16:36:40 -0400
> Mike Lorrey <> Re: Olber again (was: Re: Big Bang is Bunk)Reply-To:
>> <>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Anders Sandberg wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 11:48:17AM -0400, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>> >
>> > If the universe is already infinite, how could it be expanding? If it is
>> > expanding, how could it be called a 'steady state'?
>> You can have an expanding steady state. Just imagine an infinite plane
>> which is growing so that two points separated by one unit of length at time
>> t will be separated by two units of length at time t+1, for example:
>> x(t)=x(0)*2^t y(t)=y(0)*2^t
>> This is a simple toy universe with infinite past, future and spatial
>> extent.
>Ah, but Anders, doesn't this run into the mass limitations in the 'how
>big is hell' essay I copied here recently???
It not only runs into the "why is the sky dark at night if the universe is infinite?" Olbear's Paradox, but also into the "since gravity is a function of the total mass in the universe, if the universe is infinite, why isn't every body a singularity?" of Mach's Principle.

Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL! compares book price at 41 online stores.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:59 MDT