If I'm not mistaken, I've read that:
Dark energy will also change our understanding of the fate of the universe forward. In the Cosmology Standard Model, the fate of the universe is determined by its geometry. If the geometry of the universe is spherical geometry (with the density parameter Ω> 1), the universe will continue to expand until a certain moment, then stop expanding, and begin to collapse. If the universe has a flat geometry (with parameter density Ω = 1), the universe will expand and continue to expand at speeds approaching zero. And if the universe has a hyperbolic geometry (with density parameters Ω <1), then the universe will continue to expand with the speed of development approaching a certain speed that is not zero. The three possible ends of the universe have in common, that the universe expands with ever smaller developmental powers.
How do you think about this?
Well, this has nothing to do with my post. But to answer your question, data points out that the universe is mostly flat. Then you have your answer. This being said, alternative exists, in which the cosmology is not standard.
Yes, I got it in one of the books. A student asked me about it. Incidentally I see your writing is not much bed with this problem so I am applying for you. Thanks for the respon.
Your said :
Is not cosmology entering a new phase. Various observational findings give us a current picture of the universe, which is somewhat different from the universe as illustrated by the standard model of cosmology.
In my coment :
I can not think if then the earth will shrink ... oh can not be imagined.
Do you mind specifying? Standard cosmology damned well agree with most data. At least way better than what any potential alternative does.
Don't worry, we will all be dead for a long time at that moment as Earth will already have been destroyed by the Sun ;)
I think... Alternative cosmological scenarios exist, which can produce a spectrum close to the cosmological invariance scale that is still random to explain the details of the CMB anisotropy spectrum. Most pentuing, alternative models can be distinguished from inflation within the framework of observation. The use of ground-based and satellite-based telescopes in the coming years will greatly help improve CMB mapping results as well as prove one of the alternative models or even provide new challenges particularly in regard to the physics that approach the Planck scale.
If then this is associated with a standard cosmology maybe this will be more perfect.
I have never said alternative cosmologies were not existing. They are models, and they are well alive. For these reasons, they deserve to be studied. Anything that is not excluded deserves to be studied. And the future will tell us what is viable and what is not. Personally, I prefer the standard cosmological model, because it is simpler. Anything simple is always good. But maybe this will not survive future data :)
The simple conclusion, a law of physics that has not been discovered causes the cosmological constant to disappear. But while many theorists love this constant to go, various astronomical observations-over the age of the universe, the density of matter, and the nature of the cosmic structure-all separately indicate that it may still exist.
What? No! At least I think (not sure to have fully understood your comment),
We have a model that features that constant and that agrees very well with data. This is currently the best model relatively to data, which is why it is commonly coined as 'standard' cosmology,
On the other hand, alternatives exist, some people are working on them, because we must stay open minded.
However, data today can not point to one or the other options. Which is why it is worthy to explore all options.