Where is the Geographic center of infinity?

[Rybo]

"Beyond the concepts of right-doing and wrong-doing
There is a Field, I'll meet you there." ~Rumi

A field of dreams ----illusionary metaphysical---- and/or the field of reality ---physica/quas-physicall illusions---?

.."FEAR OF INFINITY. If it is so easy to expose the failings of the expansion models, how then does one explain their persistent popularity? Think, for a moment, of mankind’s fallible selection of ideas. Everything else being equal, which hypothesis will grab more headlines, generate more excitement, motivate more recruits, elicit more government and corporate funding: on the one hand a scenario of universal expansion with a fire and brimstone genesis, or on the other hand a scenario in which nothing happened (just the usual local processes)? ... Exactly; the flashy award-winning Block-Buster theory will upstage the staid and steady presentation. Throw in the support, during the 20th century, of the Western World’s dominant religion with its affinity for cataclysmic events and, behold, the expansion model becomes enshrined in reverence. It becomes a popular religiocultural icon. And to suggest that the sanctioned view-of-the-world is wrong is risky. Any alternate view becomes ungodly.
If we wanted to proffer a deeper reason for the popularity of expansion models then the fear of the infinite would be a likely choice. All the models, arguably, avoid the dreaded concept of infinite size. Although the Bondi-Gold steady-state model claims to be infinite, the argument that was used above reveals otherwise. If one is willing to delve deeper, the fear of infinity can be found in diverse fields and throughout history ---in philosophy, in religion (let us not forget why Giordano Bruno was tortured to death), in mathematics, in science, and in modern cosmology.".....

Rybo

[melanie]

"Two kinds of bodies are to be distinguished: there are primary elements of things, and objects compounded of primary elements [atoms]. As for the primary elements, no force has power to extinguish them... The ultimate particles are solid and contain no void... They must of necessity be everlasting. Their bodies must consist of unchanging substance..." The atoms, though indivisible, have parts which cannot have an independent existence. The atoms are infinite in number and the void is infinite in extent, as is the universe. "The ultimate particles are assuredly given no respite from movement, because there is no bottom at all where they can congregate and settle... The universe has nothing beyond to bound it... Everywhere lies open to things, infinite in every direction on every side... Since the universe is infinite, there can be no center... ''


(Titus Lucretius Carus: On the Nature of Things)

[Drifter]

Less all reference 'points' (bodies/entities), a.k.a. Non-duality.
Witnessing is central, apriori (experiential as pure Awareness) to all things being (movement in awareness as consciousness). imho

[Drifter]

A field of dreams ----illusionary metaphysical---- and/or the field of reality ---physica/quas-physicall illusions---?

.."FEAR OF INFINITY. If it is so easy to expose the failings of the expansion models, how then does one explain their persistent popularity? Think, for a moment, of mankind’s fallible selection of ideas. Everything else being equal, which hypothesis will grab more headlines, generate more excitement, motivate more recruits, elicit more government and corporate funding: on the one hand a scenario of universal expansion with a fire and brimstone genesis, or on the other hand a scenario in which nothing happened (just the usual local processes)? ... Exactly; the flashy award-winning Block-Buster theory will upstage the staid and steady presentation. Throw in the support, during the 20th century, of the Western World’s dominant religion with its affinity for cataclysmic events and, behold, the expansion model becomes enshrined in reverence. It becomes a popular religiocultural icon. And to suggest that the sanctioned view-of-the-world is wrong is risky. Any alternate view becomes ungodly.
If we wanted to proffer a deeper reason for the popularity of expansion models then the fear of the infinite would be a likely choice. All the models, arguably, avoid the dreaded concept of infinite size. Although the Bondi-Gold steady-state model claims to be infinite, the argument that was used above reveals otherwise. If one is willing to delve deeper, the fear of infinity can be found in diverse fields and throughout history ---in philosophy, in religion (let us not forget why Giordano Bruno was tortured to death), in mathematics, in science, and in modern cosmology.".....

Rybo

http://www.theuniversesolved.com/boo...FQWA5QodhgHLZA

[Rybo]

"Two kinds of bodies are to be distinguished: there are primary elements of things, and objects compounded of primary elements [atoms]. As for the primary elements, no force has power to extinguish them... The ultimate particles are solid and contain no void... They must of necessity be everlasting. Their bodies must consist of unchanging substance..." The atoms, though indivisible, have parts which cannot have an independent existence. The atoms are infinite in number and the void is infinite in extent, as is the universe. "The ultimate particles are assuredly given no respite from movement, because there is no bottom at all where they can congregate and settle... The universe has nothing beyond to bound it... Everywhere lies open to things, infinite in every direction on every side... Since the universe is infinite, there can be no center... ''(Titus Lucretius Carus: On the Nature of Things)

Mel, there is only one particle of universe that has no known decay time, ---ergo your "everlasting" above---- to best of my knowledge, and that is the proton, composed of 3 quarks.

As to the infinity question of universe and any geographical center, most here agree, that, there is not geographical center to an infinite "U"-niverse.

What is not clear, and is made clear by the last link I posted to Models of Universe: Celluar Universe,
http://www.cellularuniverse.org/UniverseModels.htm

is as follows.

1) macro-infinite physical universe
..{ this is Celluar Universe and may include micro-infinite physical universe. I dunnot yet cause I'm still new to this Celluar Universe model }.

2) macro finite and micro-infinite physical universe
..{ Bucky Fuller states that our universe may appear to be expanding because it is macro-finite and micro-infinitly subdividing itself ergo eternally subdividing itself. I find this scecnario to radical for my tastes. }...

3) macro-micro-finite physical and macro-micro-infinite nothingness beyond "U"-niverse
..{ this is my personal favorite and I'm not sure just yet, of all the catagories listed on the above linked page "Models of Universe" it may fall into. }...

Ok, these above three scenarios should cover the essential basics of most, if not all possible models.

1) Non-occupied space( nothingness )

2) Occupied space( physical and quasi-physical )

These two remain essential to all models, ergo the are at the top of the cosmological and hierarchy and all new students of cosmology ergo cosmos/universe should begin here. imho

Rybo