Einsteins original intuition about the universe was that is is quasi-static. His Special Relativity is Euclidean, flat and posits Lorentz transforms which are observed locally, near invariant frames of reference. Later Einstein generalized his concept of relativity (Classical General Relativity) within a closed spherical geometry in 4 Dimensions. Further investigation indicated that classical particles can only be formed within a 4 Dimensional system.

Although other non-euclidean geometries also fit Einsteins GR formula's, the first geometry to provide solutions to Einsteins GR formula's was Schwarzschilds "Two-sphere" mirror geometry. The positive solutions to the GR formula's predict a marginally closed space/time in the universe. Initially the negative solutions, which also fit the negative solutions to GR and QM were assumed to be vestigial. The work of Dirac, Bohr and others has cast doubt on whether these solutions are really vestigial, suggesting that the universe might exist in a bi-particulate condition on two 4D tracks, each particulated in opposite polarity.

Originally, Guth proposed that inflation be restricted to the Planck Realm. This is completely acceptable in a SRT/GR/QM universe for only slight changes need to be made in the geometry...a Planck realm being substituted for a point mass at the center of the geometry. Recent extensions of inflation to include the entire cosmos are very dubious conceptually and essentially relegate the SRT/GR/QM model to the status of of a "cross section" of a very hypothetical and non-observable multi verse.

The fact that many scientists, even well known and respected ones frankly reject the Einsteinian model, regarding it as a tiny cross section of a hypothetical infinite cosmos with many realities reflects the unwillingness of these people to take the implications of Einsteins theories seriously. The truth of course is that the universe we live in is Einsteinian. The conjecture that there is something "beyond Einstein" begs the reality that no tested aspect of relativity has ever cast doubt on Einsteins ideas. Every time we land in an aircraft "0/0" our safe arrival is assured by the accuracy of Einsteins concepts, developed 100 years ago. Time dilation has been experimentally verified. So have time/space/mass relationships elucidated in the theories of Einstein.

A famous astronomer recently proposed that a distant galaxy is 31 billion light years from the Earth due to the "expansion of the universe", even though the light from that galaxy left that galaxy 13 billion light years ago. The careful reader immediately realizes that this conceptualization of the universe is completely inconsistent with General Relativity. In a GR universe, no part of the universe is ever, at any time, farther from any other part of the universe than the age of the universe itself...everything was singular 14 billion years ago at the big bang. This is just one example of weird geometrical assumptions about the universe which have no proven basis in fact, being proposed as "fact". The general term for such geometries is "Cosmic Variance". GR is a deterministic concept with invariant frames of reference and transforms related to the coordinates of the observer- and GR is the verifiable idea. All of the observations of Hubble and others regarding the "expanding universe" can be fully explained- and experimentally verified- within Einsteins quasi-static model...as that same famous astronomer is well aware.

This of course does not mean that "Cosmic Variance" has no basis in fact. The problem is not variance, or that the universe we observe is a "cross section" of reality. The problem is that the universe in GR does not exist beyond the big bang.
Cosmic Variance is scale related within an eternal universe of finite mass. We observe the universe on 4D event horizon "surfaces". At higher orders of magnitude and lower orders of magnitude of scale, "cosmic variance" does indeed exist, and with proper instrumentation, what is found there can be observed, and the conditions there related to the world we know. However there is nothing outside a GR universe...by definition. There is nothing wrong with speculation, but speculative theories, regardless who proposes them are speculation.

The verified reality we live in is eternal, finite in mass, marginally closed in geometry- and Einsteinian. We exist on that basis.

www.geocities.com/aletawcox (archived)

Sincerely, Samuel A. (Sam) Cox

Errata...

Einsteins original intuition about the universe was that IT is quasi-static.

The hot big bang is a boundary condition of the universe...nothing in the GR universe dates before that event. However it is not to be construed that therefore nothing existed before the big bang. The periodic nature of time/space in GR allows for a cyclic universe (as observed in 4 Dimensions)...even though the structure of the cosmos is quasi-static.

Best Wishes, Sam Cox

Argument against a cyclic universe: It doesn't look like it's collapsing now or in the future. Admittedly, that doesn't say anything about a possible past history of oscillation. http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q2789.html

Hi,

I like your Bible verse...learned it in summer Bible school at my church when I was a small boy- and never forgot it, especially during the more difficult times of my life!

The universe has be found to be accelerating outward. We also know that as we observe outward, the universe we find is younger and smaller...not more vast. At 14 BLY outward, the universe is singular everywhere at 360 degrees...the "big bang".

These facts have implications with regard to the geometry of the universe, and the nature of time and space. The key is observation. We observe time...the universe is observed to be dynamic, therefore we KNOW that the universe has a dynamic component. However the universal structure may well be very different than the way we observe, in fact recent observations indicate that the universal structure IS very different from the way we observe it at our frame of reference.

I'm sure you are familiar with GR time dilation and the Lorentz transforms. What happens very rapidly can be observed to happen very slowly. If we built a spacecraft capable of accelerating at 1G (comfortable living conditions), we would arrive at Andromeda in 12 of our years and be on the other side of the universe within a natural lifetime.

I believe that present evidence indicates that from our observing frame, the universe is probably cyclic...however Einstein also indicated in his theories that the universal structure itself is quasi-static- for good engineering reasons. In the Einsteinian program, whether the universe is cyclic or not becomes sort of a side issue....true maybe, but not a foundational issue in the cosmology.

This type of universe is a construct...either by intelligent design or by phylogenic development, but in any case, everything in the universe is linked to every other
part....God is implied to be very much a part of the picture!

you speak to respect of the geometry of wormholes,where the pairs of particles:
electron and positrons are created in the two mouth of the wormholes.
the shapes of the variances geometrics are linked to the topological changes,that contains non-orientable spacetime curves that are linked to the violation of PT( generating non-invariance rotational;it is the non-equivalence of spacetime to
given two antipodal points.this demostrate the cosmic variance with geometry;from ultrahyperbolics to the elliptics and viceversa,through temporal evolution.

You might be interested in another thread I started regarding field work done at Fermi Institute in Chicago...

What happened to the Antimatter?

Best Wishes