|
|
|
|
|
by improbable22
2013 days ago
|
|
Yes, a spatially infinite universe, with no expansion, but finite time since the stars all turned on, doesn't have this paradox. I think people didn't like this answer because it needs a beginning of time (or at least, of time with stars). Having expansion just-about implies there must be such a time. Because if you run it backwards, eventually the stars will all be touching each other, and clearly can't then behave exactly like stars do -- something else must have been going on. Our modern answer does have such a time, and expansion. And the answer for why no stars shine before some time is that they took a while to condense into dense clumps from the initially quite smooth hot gas. What you see in the gaps between them is precisely this hot gas, at the moment it first became transparent to light, this is the microwave background radiation. In their scenario of infinite time, matter which isn't lit up doesn't help. It would, like your eyeball, get the light of the stars from all directions, and would soon equilibrate to the same temperature as these surfaces. |
|
I see, that may be the crux of the paradox.
But if we assume that stars were born at some time then dark planets could be too. And if stars became to existence at some time it is not too crazy to think that new stars might be continually become into existence and planet too so new planets would get created continually to block the light.