Cosmological Principle

I'm confused about the Cosmological principle as well. If the density of matter is pretty uniform, how could someone at the edge from the original center in the BB not observe less stars than others? It's a very peculiar type of expansion anyway. Seems impossible.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />The Big Bang violates the Cosmological Principle.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">It violates only the Perfect Cosmological Principle because it requires that we exist at a special time. However, in the BB, no point in space is special, and the universe looks the same from everywhere.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Although they use the balloon experiments to play down this fact, no balloon I have ever seen did not have a center. In fact, the big bang requires a point of origin, which would be a center of the Universe.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">As you probably know, I'm no fan of the BB. But it has always had an answer to your objection. There is no center in 3-space. In Friedmann-Walker (BB) universes, galaxies have very little motion through space. Instead, all of them get farther apart because more new space is being continually created between them.

The balloon analogy works only in showing how all the galaxies (dimes on the inflating balloon surface) can all get farther apart without actually moving on the surface, and why none of them is in a special place. However, the balloon is a two-dimensional surface in the three-dimensional space, so it has a center in the third dimension. In BB, the universe just has three expanding space dimensions. It is expanding in time, but not into a fourth space dimension, so there is no center in space. -|Tom|-

Tom,

With all due respect, I have never seen a two dimensional balloon inflate. The analogy only goes to prove that in an expanding universe from the point of origin of a Big Bang or the hole of a balloon there is a special place, the point of origin.

In Meta Modal there is no origin or boundaries, thus no violation of the cosmological principle. The Big Bang on the other hand does not share such exception and requires special location that includes a center. Bang....expand, had to start somewhere and thus violates the cosmological principle in 3D space sense.

Hey, don't force me to defend BB! It is what it is: a mathematical model with a poor physical interpretation that violates several principles of physics. But just because something is physically impossible doesn't bother many scientists who take their guidance from the math and attribute the rest to the limitations of our imaginations. -|Tom|-

Tom:

My intentions are not to force you to defend the Big Bang, in fact, I intended to help you accumulate ammunition against it. As popular cosmology stands today, until we can devise a method to observe the non-radial motion of galaxies, the cosmological principle stands and your model is the only one I have seen that upholds it. BBers should be attempting to observe such motion because the cosmological principle and the BB are not compatible. This issue must be resolved if a theory supports a finite Universe. One could use a circle and balloons to create an intellectual illusion that makes this issue disappear, but in reality this issue remains steadfast.

The above Hubble photo is said to show some galaxies going back to 700 million years after the Big Bang. Now, it would not come as a shock to learn that the sky looks the same over there ....