« on: 19/02/2024 00:45:39 »
you have to sort out how all of the matter and energy in the known universe, let alone the INFINITE universe, could be contained in the tiny package mentioned when talking about the initial size of the universe, before inflation.As stated above, the infinite universe necessarily must always have been infinite and never had any finite size.
ES seems to have deleted his post, but it correctly went on about the dangers of using our size metrics and time metrics to describe the state before inflation.
For the record, the mass/energy that makes up today's observable universe expanded from a very small volume to perhaps the size of a honeydew, in waaaay less time than it would take light to travel from the center of a honeydew to the edge.
logic tells me the universe could never have fit in a teacup.Mathematics also agrees with you.
The "tea cup" hypothesis has no place in my rants about the "Infinite and Eternal Universe" concept (maybe multiple tea cups would be closer), and neither does "exponential inflation".Very good. Neither your view nor the consensus one suggests that the universe ever fit in some finite volume, although I assure you that there are plenty of pop websites and videos that say exactly that. They're all wrong.
Inflation seems to assume a huge void surrounding the matter/energy in the tea cupInflation theory, or the entire consensus view for that matter, does not in any way suggest anything expanding into a void or into anything else. That would be simple movement, not expansion.
and the Big Bang occurring spontaneouslyThe big bang theory also does not suggest that. It is merely a theory about the evolution of the universe from its earliest (but still nonzero) times.