Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!im4u!ut-sally!utastro!ethan
From: ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Size of the Universe
Message-ID: <1338@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 15-Oct-86 12:40:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: utastro.1338
Posted: Wed Oct 15 12:40:20 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Oct-86 21:49:26 EDT
References: <5845@decwrl.DEC.COM> <1322@utastro.UUCP> <1733@cvl.UUCP> <1335@utastro.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 19
Summary: errata

In my previous article I referred to John Ellis when I meant
George Ellis.  People should strive for more distinctive names :-).

Also, the repeating universe idea does not explain the large scale
statistical homogeneity of the universe (the flatness problem)
unless the cycle distance is *very* short.  How short depends on
what you think a "natural" initial state might be.  If one assumes
total chaos then a few billion Planck lengths might be OK.
(About 10^-34 cm).  If one assumes more irregular, but not
totally chaotic conditions then perhaps sub-galactic scales could
be used.  Obviously since we know the cycle distance must be greater
than a few hundred mpc this isn't a promising way to solve the flatness
problem.  Which doesn't mean it couldn't be true on some large scale.
-- 
"More Astronomy                Ethan Vishniac
 Less Sodomy"                  {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan
  - from a poster seen         ethan@astro.AS.UTEXAS.EDU
    at an airport              Department of Astronomy
                               University of Texas