OK.
>I disagree that this is any less intuitively pleasing than a closed universe,
OK.
>and that this is why cosmologists search for missing mass.
I would qualify that with "..._some or most_ cosmologists..."
>There are a
>multitude of other observed phenomena which align well with the theory of a
>closed universe, as well as theoretical reasons for believing that such a
>case is probable.
OK, let's go over these -- knowing full well most of us -- including me --
are not
experts.:) Doesn't this contradict your initial statement?
>An open universe is just as intuitively pleasing - if only
>to suggest that our notion of time is in some way accurate - that it does in
>fact have some degree of linearity.
On that last point, yes.
Daniel Ust