« on: 18/04/2022 01:10:24 »
Just a brief example:
Let's assume that you are a jet eng. designer.
You had been asked to design a jet engine for an airplane.
However, you have no clue about the size and the total requested load of this airplane.
Can you do it successfully?
Don't you agree that a get engine for 100Kg should be different from a jet for 1,000,000,000 Tons?
Maybe for that kind of load a jet engine is not good enough.
So how could it be that we have any sort of theory for a universe without any knowledge about its total size?
That's a bad analogy. A better analogy would be: I don't have to know how many islands exist in order to test whether or not volcanism is a viable mechanism for producing an island.
How could it be that the science community don't care about the size of the universe.
I'm sure they care about it, but that doesn't matter because it may simply be impossible to know either way.
To my best understanding, we didn't discover any sort of curvature in space.
If that is correct then it proves that there is no limit for our Universe.
No limit means - infinite.
All measurement have limits of precision. So there is still room for the Universe to be curved, but at a level too small to currently be measured.
At least - do you agree that there is a possibility that the Universe is infinite?
If so, do you estimate that the BBT - as is - fits also to the infinite Universe?
Can you really set infinite Universe in only 13.8 BY?
Yes to all three.
The following users thanked this post: Bogie_smiles