<p>I am not an expert, just a enthusiast, so if possible please keep explanation simple.
That said I have start reading about universe expansion and the idea seems to me revolutionary (the image of an infinite bigger universe that inflate).
So I am questioning how researcher validate that specific theory excluding other causes that IMHO would be more intuitive?</p>
<p>For example how they exclude that the expansion is not only a local effect (that's happening on ours patch of observable universe)?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-10T18:31:07.590Z
Well, we can't exclude that, apart from using Occam's Razor: a theory that has uniform expansion in the observable universe but different expansion beyond the observable universe would be more complicated. The evidence of the expansion from the CMB radiation is *very* uniform, to better than 1 part in 100,000 over the entire surface of a sphere which is now ~46 billion light years in radius.
PM 2Ring
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-12T14:56:07.540Z
Intuitiveness is not a requirement for a theory to be accepted or we would not be using e.g. quantum theory or general relativity, which profoundly challenge our intuitions.  You kind of have to learn *new* intuitions to be comfortable with these theories.
StephenG - Help Ukraine
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-14T12:53:48.443Z
The immense size of the Universe will always be challenging intuition and especially might render every theory about it unfalsifiable. I am afraid cosmology will always suffer of that. Unless something totally new or about closed universe emerges.
Alchimista
<expansion>
Universe expansion data validation
Skary
# Universe expansion data validation

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-04-10)

I am not an expert, just a enthusiast, so if possible please keep explanation simple.
That said I have start reading about universe expansion and the idea seems to me revolutionary (the image of an infinite bigger universe that inflate).
So I am questioning how researcher validate that specific theory excluding other causes that IMHO would be more intuitive?

For example how they exclude that the expansion is not only a local effect (that's happening on ours patch of observable universe)?

**Tags:** expansion

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Well, we can't exclude that, apart from using Occam's Razor: a theory that has uniform expansion in the observable universe but different expansion beyond the observable universe would be more complicated. The evidence of the expansion from the CMB radiation is *very* uniform, to better than 1 part in 100,000 over the entire surface of a sphere which is now ~46 billion light years in radius.  
> **username_2**: Intuitiveness is not a requirement for a theory to be accepted or we would not be using e.g. quantum theory or general relativity, which profoundly challenge our intuitions.  You kind of have to learn *new* intuitions to be comfortable with these theories.  
> **username_3**: The immense size of the Universe will always be challenging intuition and especially might render every theory about it unfalsifiable. I am afraid cosmology will always suffer of that. Unless something totally new or about closed universe emerges.  

---

## 0 answers

