Postby blacknblue » Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:18 pm
So he is reviving the Steady State theory. Those two theories have been fighting it out for primacy forever. Both of them have inherent contradictions, and each of them solves the other's contradictions while making news ones of their own. Neither of them explains the whole picture satisfactorily.
The Big Bang of course leaves the question, where did the big bang come from?
The Steady State has the problem, why does the universe appear to present entropy? The cyclical theory tries to prop up the Steady State theory but some people equate this to the 'multiple crystal spheres' approach used in the middle ages to explain the discrepancies found when the Church realized that their theory of Earth being the center of the universe did not match the data.
If the universe is cycling, then where does the energy come from for the second explosion? Observations tell us that the matter in the universe is expanding. As it gets farther apart, gravity will act more weakly on it, not more strongly. What force will pull it back toward the center then? Energy has to come from some where. The light and kinetic energy of the stars is being turned into heat even as we speak. eventually they will all go dark and the energy will all be heat. How will that heat energy act to drag the matter back to the center to power a second bang?
But if it doesn't, what happens at the end? Why did the bang happen at all, if there was no purpose to it? Contradictions in both theories.
"When the legends die, the dreams end. When the dreams end, there is no more greatness."
--Tecumseh
"It is better to be a live jackal than a dead lion."
--King Solomon the Wise
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Unless the few are armed.