[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by davidgow77 This explains the horizon problem as it shows conclusively that areas of space need not be in communication with each other, but share the common feature that every definable point in the space-time metric must have at one stage or another been at the perimeter of the universe.

but spacetime points still can "sees" every other point up to infinity if the spacetime structure is a cubic lattice and for every point there are at most only six closest or shortest path between points. And the shortest path is the Planck length as you mentioned.

[AntonioLao]

but if the spacetime structure is a tetrahedron, instead of cube, there can still be 6 shortest path shared by 4 contiguous points.

[davidgow77]

If space is a plenum, with every planck point being definable, then the geometry of space time is omni-dimensional... I.e. has dimensions in every direction. It is not cubic or tetrahedronal. The fact that we interpret space as 3-D is down to the fact that matter is 3-D; matter is comprised of 3 single dimensional strings, or quarks arranged into a Calabi-Yau manifold, such as a proton of neutron) and that space curves around it (Einstien's statement that matter causes space to curve must mean that if space is interpreted as 3 dimensional, it is not because that is an intrinsic property of space, rather than it is an intrinsic property of matter.

DG

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by davidgow77 If space is a plenum, with every planck point being definable, then the geometry of space time is omni-dimensional

what i have in mind is the local infinitesimal motion of a dynamic geometry of spacetime. This local infinitesimal motion (LIM) of spacetime is a conserved quantity, which is equivalent to the square of zero-point energy. I have shown the matrix formulations of its algebra in other threads. When a point moves, a path is created hence a connection established between two points. Once a point chooses a particular direction to move, it will keep moving in this chosen direction for all eternity. I called this the principle of directional invariance. This principle has 8 properties and they are topologically equivalent to the 8 gluons of quantum chromodynamics (QCD). Bear in mind that these are only possible at the Planck scale of density, length, time, mass and energy. When i took the ratio of mass of proton to electron at the 6th LOE, the answer was 1832, error is less than 1% (.22%) of the experimental 1836.

[battybat]

Originally Posted by davidgow77 I think I can explain why CMB comes from all directions, and not from a big bang centre. Energy is not propagated from a source, but from the outer-layer (the horizon) of the universe. If there is zero outside the universe, then as this zero splits into negative energy (space) and positive energy (energy), it would show that the positive energy which once complimented the negative energy seems to vacate the space... leaving the CMB as a fingerprint. Propagation of energy and space must then come from the perimiter (the spherical outer membrane) of the universe and not from the centre. This explains the horizon problem as it shows conclusively that areas of space need not be in communication with each other, but share the common feature that every definable point in the space-time metric must have at one stage or another been at the perimeter of the universe. DG

You obviously subscribe to a different BB theory than the conventional one, DG.
According to this, the CMB radiation is the remnants of the light produced during the initial, plasma stage of BB, when the temperature was too high for charged particles to combine into atoms and the light was continuously scattered by these charged particles. After recombination (don't ask me why the 're' is there), when neutral atoms were formed, the light was no longer scattered and shot off to all corners of the universe. Billions of years later that light must be long gone, yet it's suppose to account for CMB radiation. If this was April the first, I might have suggested that the whole universe was surrounded by a huge mirror. No doubt BB advocates will come up with this idea next! - it's about par for the course.

Battybat.

[Omni]

Originally Posted by battybat If this was April the first, I might have suggested that the whole universe was surrounded by a huge mirror. Battybat.

It's also funny on April the ninth .

[davidgow77]

Originally Posted by battybat You obviously subscribe to a different BB theory than the conventional one, DG. Battybat.

Yep. I think the BB theory of propagation of energy from the centre is just plain wrong. I can see how your mirror idea could shed some light (ha ha!) on the CMB problem though. However, my insight is that every part of the observable universe must have been able to communicate with eachother in the past, becasue every single point within the universe must have once been on the edge of it. If energy is propoagated from the boundary of the universe, then this would explain a uniform CMB for the period of exponential inflation.

DG

[AntonioLao]

another evidence supporting the BB is the resolution of Olbers' Paradox. The puzzle of why the sky appears dark at night or also appears dark by day if the atmosphere is removed.

the resolution is that the universe must have a beginning. Otherwise the universe would have been infinitely bright if it was eternal as the steady state theory suggested.

[surya]

the light travelling 10 billion year from a galaxy towards our planet.Does't mean that the distance between earth and that galaxy is 10 billion light year because that light is not comming directly(straight path) to our earth

actually light emitted from that galaxy is stored in some galaxy or other galaxy and hence it take time to reach our earth.you are satisfied with this answer?but this is true only.if any further doubt mail me on surya_912003@yahoo.com ..

[Guille]

We must remember that the Big bang isn't a theory of how the universe began, or it's origins, but a theory of how the universe evolved.