Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"

Ken Smith (
29 Apr 1995 15:33:04 GMT

In article <>,
Gil Hardwick <> wrote:

>Are you arguing here, Ken, that the "expanding universe" is all tied
>together with some sort of elastic phenomenon like gravity, such that
>it will all some day stretch to its limit and then time will reverse
>and begin to pull it all back in again?

Notice that I said it may happen. If there is enough mass in the
universe the gravity will overcome the expansion and the universe will
begin to contract some time in the distant future. This is what is
called a closed universe. If there is not quite enough mass the
universes expansion will reduce to zero as time increases to infinity.
This is the "flat" universe. If the stars will still be speeding away at
the infinit time this is called a open or "saddle" universe.

We do not yet know if there is enough mass in the universe to make it

>Better not mention such a thing to your military, who will be most
>upset to see all their outstanding victories in war being undone.
When the sun turns into a red giant the military victories will not
matter much. This will happen much sooner than the big crunch.

>Maybe the greenies will like the idea,

Not really. The one truely non-renewable resourse would be time. The
expression "stop waisting time" would take on a new meaning.

Ken Smith <>