Re: Re: Re: Evidence: Open vs. Closed Universe

Anders Sandberg (
26 Nov 1997 15:14:47 +0100

"Brichero, Robert, HMR/GB" <> writes:

> Anders Sandberg writes:
> >Actually, both is equivalent (at least in the simpler cosmological
> >models; I'm not sure this holds for more complex models). An open
> >universe is spatially infinite and will expand infinitely, a closed
> >universe is finite and will contract to a point after a certain time.
> I'm not too sure about a closed universe being finite - or to be more
> specific existing in a finite space. From my understanding, a way
> around the problem of there being boundaries to the closed universe is
> to say that "in a closed universe, space is infinite, but the matter
> within it only expands to a finite point".

Nononono! A closed universe doesn't have a boundary, but its total
volume is finite. It is not a ball of stars in a huge emptiness.

The spatial geometry of a closed Friedman universe is equivalent to a
3-sphere, while the geometry of an open universe is a
3-pseudosphere. General relativistic cosmology does not assume
anything "outside" the spacetime manifold - it is simply not

Anders Sandberg                                      Towards Ascension!                  
GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y