Ahh yes I see that now so it's like the reverse of big crunch.

I have one obvious huge issue the inertia of the galaxies !!!!!!!

In the big crunch you know the galaxies inflate out the expansion slows the stops reverses and then it all heads in for a crunch.

The reverse way around he has it like compressing a rubber ball or inflatable tube the universe is according to theory then springing back to size at the moment. The problem I have is the galaxies would want to keep sailing on with there inertia.

So I would say if you want this theory it should be more like a springy theory about a nominal size of the universe sometimes the universe would be slightly squashed and sometime it would be slightly streched hard to see how it couldnt be like that to be stable.

Interesting problem is it means the universe had to be born at the middle size and then got squashed or stretched to start the oscillation we are supposedly seeing.


I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.