Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site brl-vgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!decvax!harpo!seismo!brl-tgr!brl-vgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-vgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.astro.expert
Subject: Re: cosmology (yea!)
Message-ID: <2006@brl-vgr.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 14-May-84 11:31:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-vgr.2006
Posted: Mon May 14 11:31:17 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 16-May-84 07:35:04 EDT
References: <253@utastro.UUCP> <1617@brl-vgr.ARPA>, <1811@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistics Research Lab
Lines: 20

I doubt that even the black hole advocates can claim that the
universe (or our part of it, at any rate) is inside the critical
radius of a humongous black hole.  But who knows?  If they want
to believe it enough I am sure they'll work up a theory to make
it so.

Here is my favorite cosmology:
	(1) Space isotropic (same, on a large scale, in all directions).
	(2) Distant light red-shifted `a la Hubble.
	(3) Therefore, light is "infinitely" red-shifted in the limit
	    that it originates from a certain large distance (call it
	    the "radius of the universe" for definiteness).
	(4) The local average density of matter etc. is static (does
	    not change in time).
	(5) The above all apply to every point in the universe, at
	    every time.
It is kind of cute that the distance horizon follows you around as
you fly across the universe.  No danger of ever falling off the edge.
If anyone has a more appealing cosmology than this I would like to
hear it.