I used to share the same idea than you -- the fact that the manifold and curved space answers most of all the cosmogony. But I hit a snag.

Let's say that what they say about the light emissions is real. That means : the further you look, the older the time. That explains amongst other the cosmic microwave background.

That implies then that if the universe was at a time incredibly small, I should see that point at 14 billion light years away, everywhere around me. In my perception, I'm in a sphere centered around me whose borders are reduced into a single dot. Just like I was in a hyper-droplet (to continue with 2D perception, as If I were in a piriform (tear-droplet) shape).

Problem : this assumption is true for every point of the universe. How is it possible geometrically ?

]]>Anis a topological subspace of such that given any pointn-dimensional (real) manifoldxin there exists a real number (depending onx) such that the open ball is homeomorphic to .

]]>

Einstein's Theory of Relativity includes a similar concept...curved space. It is postulated that in curved space you could throw a dart in one direction into space... and it would ultimately return from the opposite direction, after an infinite length of time.

How do you think the universe (energy & matter) came into being w.r.t the theory of the conservation of energy & matter?

Rgds

]]>Let us use the surface of the sphere as an analogy. As I've said, the surface looks flat over a small area – so much so that to a flatlander living in that area, the surface appears to be an infinite 2D plane extending boundlessly in all directions. But the surface is not boundless: it is finite. In the same way, the Universe may appear boundless on a small scale – we think we see space as infinitely stretchable in every direction we look – but the Universe (so I believe) is finite in the way the surface of a sphere is finite.

Lines that are "straight" on the surface of a sphere are actually curved in the 3D space the surface is embedded in; they're arcs of great circles. Travelling on a straight line on the surface means moving along the circumference of a great circle such as the equator. If you keep travelling along this "straight" line, you will eventually end up where you started from. Indeed, no matter how you move on the surface, you can never escape from it. In the same way, I'm convinced that straight lines in the Universe are actually curved in the 4D hyperspace in which I believe the Universe to be embedded. If, starting at a point in the Universe, we could keep travelling on and on in a straight line, we would eventually end up where we started! This is because lines that are straight in 3D are actually curved in 4D hyperspace. And no matter how we move around in the Universe, we will never escape from it.

Back to the sphere analogy. If the radius of the sphere increases, the surface area also increases: the world of the flatlander expands. This, I believe, is also why our 3D Universe is expanding: because the hyper-radius of 4D hyperspace is increasing. The Big Bang was the moment at which this hyper-radius was zero.

And this is my metaphysical theory of the Universe – which I will never be able to prove. I don't expect anyone to agree with me anyway (or even understand what I'm saying in the first place).

]]>