Re: Alternative cosmological model

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 21:45:17 GMT, Ulf Torkelsson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  It does make a couple of assumptions on the universe that seem strange.
>Firstly in general you need gravity to get convection.  The hot, light
>fluid elements rises and expands while the dense, cold elements fall
>down.  Thus you need to assume either a global direction in which
>gravity is pointing in the universe, or you need to assume that the
>universe has a center of mass, and thus gravity. 

Randall-Sundrum cosmologies provide for this in modelling our universe
as a brane wrapped around a 5-D bulk.  The center of the bulk provides
both direction and a source of gravity (in one variant).

>in conflict with the cosmological principle, which says that there
>is nothing special with our position in the universe.  Essentially the
>universe looks the same from all points in the universe, which
>means that the convection currents will not know in which
>direction they should go.

That's another beauty of Randall-Sundrum, in that each place in the
universe has a unique orientation, or polarization, respective to the
5-D center.  Thus it confers an absolutism; indeed, the absolutism is
essential, else the math fails.  

Eric