I think that inflation after the big bang is an impossible myth.

Speed is a relative thing. When the early universe was at an extreme density time could not exist. Not until it exceeded the schwartzchild radius. And even then time would go by at a different rate relative to the universe at the current density.

As we do not really know the mass of the universe it is hard to define what that radius was or is. I suspect that the new estimate of 28 billion years based on what the JWST is seeing and the current estimate for the speed of light could be used to define it. Prior to that there was no such thing as speed. We also think of the universe as a sphere just as we think of black holes as spheres, but again, in infinite density there cannot be any dimensions, so that is a fallacy. Black holes appear as spheres to us. Were we living in a two dimensional world i think that they would just be a point.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Northwest · M

Cosmological Model vs. Black Hole Model: The universe’s expansion is described by the Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) metric, a solution to Einstein’s field equations that describes a homogeneous and isotropic universe. A black hole, on the other hand, is described by solutions like the Schwarzschild or Kerr metrics, which account for the intense gravitational pull of a localized region of space.

I don't think science ever proposed a spherical geometry for the universe. This may have come from a mistaken interpretation of what Einstein said, when he tried to answer the question: what is beyond the known universe, and what does it expand into, and he gave an illustration of a ballon, you paint from dots on it, and as the ballon expands, the dots move apart, into "new" space". But it's not really clear what the shape of the universe is, and what perspective to use.

Tastyfrzz · 61-69, M

@Northwest correct. We imagine it from an outside three dimensional perspective but in reality it is far different.

Northwest · M

@Tastyfrzz There's also an incorrect assumption, that the early universe, especially at the moment the Big Bang happened, it was a uniform motion, when there's enough evidence now to suggest that this was not a "universal motion", that pushed everything out with an equal force, resulting in a "sphere" effect, and instead it was random in different directions.

Tastyfrzz · 61-69, M

@Northwest

I see that Einstein's radius of the universe: The numerical value of Einstein's radius is/was of the order of 10^10 light years, or 10 billion light years, and perhaps it was at the point when reality as we know it began.
It just seems to me that one cannot define a universe until all of the dimsions for one can exist.

Northwest · M

@Tastyfrzz

It just seems to me that one cannot define a universe until all of the dimsions for one can exist.

This is not going to happen anytime soon. In the meantime, progress, within we know, can and should continue.