(February 13, 2016 at 10:34 am)Alex K Wrote: There is a well defined notion of the spatial extent of the universe, and it is either finite or not. It could however be finite in one direction and infinite in another... All we know right now is that if it is finite, it appears to be bigger than the visible universe (otherwise it would show signatures in the CMB). If there was cosmic inflation, it is likely at least many many orders of magnitude bigger than the observable patch.
Ok, but still, am I wrong since currently we don't know something or nothing or infinite vs finite?
What would be wrong with thinking of nothing being temporary and something being temporary but going from one to the other over and over being infinite? I don't know. It just seems an obvious extrapolation considering everything we see now builds up then eventually breaks down. Why cant what we don't know before, and what we don't know after, simply be a cycle? Seems to be that way now.
Again, I am no expert of course, but if we are going to postulate one or the other and still admit we don't have that answer, why cant QM give us the third option of both depending on QM POV?
