Recent content by Jaime Rudas

On the other hand, the margin of error in calculating the age of the universe is on the order of hundreds of millions of years, so what happened in the first 380,000 years is irrelevant for calculating the observable universe radius.

I consider the radius of the observable universe to be, by definition, the greatest distance that anything could reach during the age of the universe propagating at speed ##c##, that is, without taking into account that, on average, the speed of light in a given non-empty medium may be less than...

I think you underestimate the enormous retrospective adaptability that these "theories" have always demonstrated.

The Gaussian curvature ##K## of the hyperboloid ##x^2+y^2-z^2=1## is ##\frac {-1}{(1+2z^2)^2}##. Thus, when ##z=0##, the curvature ##K=-1## and when ##z \neq 0## the curvature ##K## remains negative, but greater than ##-1##. It follows that the curvature of the hyperboloid is always negative...

The German Wikipedia says: Which, translated, would be: I understood that the hyperboloid didn't have constant Gaussian curvature. Am I also wrong about that?

Yes, I think I was wrong. Although I don't know if it's possible to define curvature at the "edge" of the pseudosphere (i.e., at the points furthest from the axis of revolution).

Yes, maybe, but there is no such surface embedded in Euclidean three-dimensional space.

No, two-dimensional saddle-shaped surfaces have negative curvature but this is not constant.

Not in this case. The curvature parameter ##\Omega_{\kappa}=0.0007 ± 0.0019##, meaning its zero value is WITHIN the margin of error. According to the model, the universe is homogeneous, so knowing the characteristics of a small portion is enough to infer those of the whole.

The best model of the universe we have (the ΛCDM model) is fully compatible with both a finite and infinite universe. Moreover, the most precise measurements we have (Planck 2018) have such a margin of error that it is impossible to determine whether the curvature is positive, negative, or zero.

Do you have a reference that supports this?

Yes, maybe I didn't clarify that this was a sarcastic response.

Yes, those official scientists always try to refute everything.

Yes, but it is still worrying that more and more people responsible for this type of decisions think the same nowadays.

Do you have a reference that supports this?