(February 25, 2018 at 6:57 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:(February 23, 2018 at 7:07 pm)Cathooloo Wrote: This..
Though I can how understand someone with a passing familiarity with cosmology might misunderstand what the observational evidence tells us.
The observational evidence can hardly begin to help us understand the universe. If we could pinpoint the center of the universe from which it all began to expand, we'd understand a lot more. But shifting time/space has obliterated the center and ergo the boundary.
In the BB model, there is no 'center' to the expansion. Every point in space looks like every other space at that time. There is no boundary to space, no center to the expansion, nothing at all like that.
So, for example, from the point of view of the Milky Way galaxy (ours), every other galaxy far enough away (so that gravitational effects are irrelevant) is moving away from us at a rate that doubles as we go double the distance away. So, from our viewpoint, it looks like we are the center.
But if you go to another galaxy half a billion light years away and calculate what would be visible from *that* galaxy, you find that every galaxy except for those very close is moving away at a rate that doubles when you double the distance.
This is true for *every* galaxy and is part of the reason we say that space is homogeneous. Every place will look out on the universe and see basically the same picture: other galaxies are moving away at speeds that double when you double the distance away.
So, it isn't that we cannot determine the center. It is literally that the model has no center and that model fits the evidence we see. So thebelief is that there *is* and *has never been* a center ot the expansion.
