Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!uwvax!uwmacc!uwmcsd1!uwmeecs!litow
From: litow@uwmeecs.UUCP (Dr. B. Litow)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Size of the Universe
Message-ID: <440@uwmeecs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 15-Oct-86 07:44:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: uwmeecs.440
Posted: Wed Oct 15 07:44:57 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Oct-86 20:23:08 EDT
References: <5845@decwrl.DEC.COM> <1322@utastro.UUCP> <1733@cvl.UUCP>
Organization: U of Wi-Milwaukee, Dept of EE and CS
Lines: 26

> From one of Ethan Vishniac's postings:
> 
> > The flatness problem makes everyone uncomfortable...
> 
> The mention of hyperspherical models made me wonder how we know that
> the universe really is as extensive as the distance computed from
> highly red-shifted objects suggests.
> In particular, how do we know that the univers is not (relatively)
> small with a topology that permits closed geodesics.
> In this case, highly red-shifted light has just looped the loop
> a couple of times, which would allow the entire universe to be in
> communication.
> This would have interesting consequences. For instance, certain
> object would represent earlier stages of our own galaxy if we knew
> where to look.
> I have never heard this notion discussed.
> Does anyone know what (if anything) eliminates such a model??
> Please reply to the net.
> 
> 
> Randal Nelson

I don't know much about this but a starting point for references might be
"The Large Scale Structure of Spacetime" by Hawking & Ellis

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***