Your post convinced me,
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graybeard Guille .... I don't have disagreements with the current cosomoligical science. |
I always have to explain. When I type a post, I'm never thinking. I mean, I am thinking, but never thinking in what I'm typing, or maybe yes, but not completely. I am always thinking in another post which is after another post which is after another post which is to come just after the one I'm writting. This is why I right things like cosomoligical. I just beg you for forgiving my errors.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dave8679 Not necessarily - if you think of the universe has having a space-time visualisation as the surface area of a sphere then you would have a model that has no true centre (every point on the surface could equally be noted as the centre), that can expand and contract and, since it has no boundaries, has no edges. Naturally in reality we're talking about much higher levels of dimensionality but the theory should still hold.
Dave |
Very true.
And there is even more to that:
The centre of the universe wouldn't be possible at all, because the universe is constantly growing, it would never be a perfect sphere. Thus, in the hypothetical case that there is such thing as the centre of the universe, then i twill only be the centre for the avarage of the distances of all the edges of the unvierse to it.