Scientifically, earth could be at the centre of the universe

It is interesting to note that there are many theories which are consistent with scientific evidence. The Big Bang theory is just the most popular one.

I quote internationally renowned Astrophysicist George F. R. Ellis:

"People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the scientific observations…. For instance, it is possible to construct a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and it cannot be disproved based on any current observations….

You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds.

In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. Philosophically, why would earth be the center of the universe? Why should it?

What is important is that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that."

~Astrophysicist George F. R. Ellis

Of course, if we bring many religious views into it, it is highly likely, according to those viewpoints, that the earth is the center of the universe. The viewpoint of Copernicus that the earth moved around the sun was based on his limited view into the universe. Modern technology allows us to 'see further.' As Ellis stated above, there is now, with modern technology, no longer concrete evidence that the earth is not the center of the universe. It is a philosophical assumption (admitted by those who created the big bang model), that it is highly unlikely that earth is the center of the universe, since there is no reason for it to be.

I would say it would be philosophically correct to say that if there was creation, rather than the big bang, that the earth-centered theory, which can now no longer be any more disproved than the big bang theory, would be the most likely case.

The model chosen depends on a philosophical assumption.

When the church expelled Copernicus for his sun-centered theories, it was based on the assumption that creation was not compatible with a non-earth-centered universe. With today's technology, Copernicus's theory would NOT have been accepted, remembering that the choice of model depends on one's philosophical views. There is no scientific observation as of today, 09 March, 2007, which exclude the possibility of an earth centered model.

However, the flaw in the church's logic at that time was the assumption that if creation took place, that God would have made the earth in the center of the universe. Perhaps, he would have preferred the earth to be off-center.

So why does the Big Bang theory prevail? Because, although there is a lot of evidence against it, it is the theory which has the most evidence in favour of it, with the philosophical assumption that there is no reason why earth should be the center of the universe.

[edit on 31-10-2007 by Saurus]

[edit on 31-10-2007 by Saurus]

reply to post by Saurus


If we accept that the universe is infinitely large then does it not follow that everywhere has an equal claim to be its centre, including the Earth?

If we accept that the universe is infinitely large

Why should we accept that the universe is infinitely large? Many models say it isn't, and this is exactly my point - we don't know which model is the correct one!

We choose our models based on philosophical assumptions!

[edit on 31-10-2007 by Saurus]

???

I've always heard the universe is expanding at a constant rate. The points you brought up were pretty intriguing but doesn't seem right, for me at least. I've also heard/read of people taking lightwave measurements that are getting progressively further and further away. Wouldn't that mean to some extent that if the universe isn't growing, it is drifting away from us? Who's to say it isn't us who is drifting, you know? I'm no expert and science is very interesting to me, and I don't follow it closely enough to be on the same level. If those seem like pretty broad comments, I apologize. Give me a week and I'll give you a run for your money.

Yes, the hubble constant is accepted as fact by all scientists (although its exact value is in contention), as is the fact that the universe is expanding.

However, although this evidence fits in with the big bang theory, it also fits in with all the other models. (Any model which does not have an expanding universe is discarded, since it is obviously wrong, according to our observations.)

The fact is still that we have chosen the big bang model above the others based on the assumption that 'there is no reason why the earth should be at the center of the universe.' The universe could be expanding away from the earth. The scientific model which is currently accepted is still based on a philosophical assumption...

Am I right in thinking that our observations indicate that the universe is moving away from us at a constant rate whichever direction we look in?

Am I right in thinking that our observations indicate that the universe is moving away from us at a constant rate whichever direction we look in?

Yes, the universe is moving away from us whichever direction we look in.

No, it is not at a constant rate. The further away a galaxy is, the faster it is moving away from us. This is described by the hubble constant mentioned by DeadFlagBlues above, which describes by how much faster the universe is moving away from us the further it is from us.

reply to post by Saurus


Yes, I got that bit but is the universe expanding at the same rate(s) whether we look due North or due South? (I'm not sure those terms are strictly correct in an astronomical sense but you know what I mean).

No - the speed at which the object is moving away from us depends on the specific object which we are observing. The direction is irrelevant - each star/galaxy/nebula is moving away from us at its own speed.

These objects are roughly equal in distribution in all directions.

[edit on 31-10-2007 by Saurus]

reply to post by Saurus


OK, I understand.

I'm not sure that it helps to answer your original point very much but it's interesting nonetheless.

Ta.

then the 'center' of the universe must be at least large enough
to contain the Earth/solar systems orbit through the Milky Way
some ~26,000 light years Radius,


therefore the 'center' Could more correctly be assigned to our
Galactic Core, (AKA; Sagitarrius 'A', the Black Hole)
and the Earth & Sol, merely specks of matter, forever circling the crucible of creation...the Galactic core



but, yeah, the Earth could be near the 'center' of the universe
( ? perhaps a sphere which might be 365LY in volume?) ,
as opposed to a 'center' in philiosophical terms.







[edit on 31-10-2007 by St Udio]

The earth could be the exact center of the universe. Then, the planets and galaxy evolve around the earth. This is very easily described by a mathematical model.

It is no harder than creating a model where the earth revolves around the sun and moves in the galaxy.

I would think that if the universe is expanding, then it must be finite in size. Is something is infinite in size, how can you expand upon it? So if the universe is finite in size, there must be a center. I don't know whether or not the Earth is a the center, or what the significance would be if that were the case.

The way I've been told to think about it is to imagine the universe as the surface of an ever expanding balloon. You can't pinpoint the centre of the balloons surface.

However a problem arises when putting the earth at the centre mainly due to the fact that our place in the universe is rather young in galactic terms and also the fact that we are moving around the sun which moves around the milky way and also oscillates up and down so wouldn't this put paid to the notion of earth being the centre?

G

If earth is at the center of the universe, then it would not be surprising that everything else in the universe is running away from them. Earth is a planet in denial, led by the USA. Just look at the people that are elected to their office's. BTW, I heard a rumor that the galatic federation endorses that Kucinich guy.

Actually everything and everyone is at the center of the universe. One can keep moving forward in any direction and eventually end up being back where they started.

how does one define the center point on the surface of a sphere?

reply to post by Saurus


small things go around big things, the earth does go around the sun, as the sun goes around the galaxy.

small things go around big things

Not always the case...

Black holes are tiny, yet everything spirals around them, irrespective of size.

Similarly, with two objects of different masses going around each other, they both move, not only the small one!

ofcourse the earth is the center of the universe.
why?

Because we can only look 13.2 billion lightyears in any given direction. There is no direction where we can see a few billion lightyears more. Sure maybe we arent in the physical center but for us we are in the viewable center.

great point! since we can't see the "end" of the universe, we don't know where the walls of the sphere are. hense, there's no way to know if we are at the true center or not.