Omega;
This will be my last response to you in this thread, as I am running out of patience. Discussing things with you has no possible chance of progress.
BGV is one of many possible theories. Please stop treating it as the correct and proven theory.
And Im not even arguing against it...just that it is not even close to being proven, and there are other theories and possibilities. That is where you have the massive disconnect.
Here is another theory:
The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) has confirmed that the universe is flat with only a 0.5% margin of error.[1] Within the Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) model, the presently most popular shape of the Universe found to fit observational data according to cosmologists is the infinite flat model
In a flat universe, all of the local curvature and local geometry is flat. It is generally assumed that it is described by a Euclidean space, although there are some spatial geometries that are flat and bounded in one or more directions (like the surface of a cylinder, for example).
The alternative two-dimensional spaces with a Euclidean metric are the cylinder and the Möbius strip, which are bounded in one direction but not the other, and the torus and Klein bottle, which are compact.
In three dimensions, there are 10 finite closed flat 3-manifolds, of which 6 are orientable and 4 are non-orientable. The most familiar is the 3-Torus. See the doughnut theory of the universe
In the absence of dark energy, a flat universe expands forever but at a continually decelerating rate, with expansion asymptotically approaching some fixed rate. With dark energy, the expansion rate of the universe initially slows down, due to the effect of gravity, but eventually increases. The ultimate fate of the universe is the same as that of an open universe.
Euclidean space is flat and infinite, and a flat universe can have zero total energy and thus can come from nothingBoom. See how there are other theories out there? Some accepted by most physicists and flying directly against your assertions? Now can you see where I am coming from, and why is is monumentally pointless in discussing anything with you?
So no
please. I should use it towards you to illustrate your complete lack of ability to consider any other possibilities and/or theories that may not feel right to you. You have a stubborn attachment to one view, and that type of behavoir is not condusive to discussions here.
Good Day.