Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
As for a rotating universe.
The total ebing infinite I do not the universe rotates.
|
So does that mean for you "rotating universe" is/is not for you ?
I am ok either way. I found your paper interesting by deriving from Einstein's Metric Tensor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
But the parts within have a common movement and rotatiion.
We have a MW galaxy rotation that forms a part of the local group of galaxies that rotate around M87 and this local cluster forms part of a cluster of cluster of galaxies that also rorate, and so it goes on forming a super cluster of clusters of galaxies.
|
Is M87 really in our local cluster. I was aware not of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
Where do you stop?
|
Good Question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
As for the BB creating the MW and other galaxies its just a theory, that I cannot vision it working.
|
That is ok with me too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
Observations (Hubble deep field) shows us over 100 billion galaxies and within that super monsters of clusters of galaxies. Now getting them to form throughout the universe at the same time is more than a miracle and to top it off, do it in 13.7Gyrs.
|
Not when you take into account Inflation. Not that I like Alan Guth's theory anymore that you do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
Yes you can use ad hoc theories and make it work.
But at the end of the day the King does not wear invisible robes.
|
Where I see things starting to behave somewhat "ad hoc" (borrowing your term) is when in BBT
we start to consider what is going at fractions of a sec after initial event
because of speculation in various GUT theories that have had only fractional sucess
(independent of String Theories...)
Even though most of the age paradox has been explained with updated data, there is still some sloppiness in the Hubble Constant -- not so ironed down.
maddog
