Endless Universe: Beyond the Big Bang infinite collisions between our universe and a parallel world” According to this theory, the Big Bang was not the beginning of time but the bridge to a past filled with endlessly repeating cycles of evolution, each accompanied by the creation of new matter and the formation of new galaxies, stars, and planets. LIGHT FROM THE BIG BANG’ CASTS NO SHADOWS but According to BIG BANG theory, fireball should be the most distant light source of all, now If the big bang were true, the light from the fireball should cast shadows in the foreground of all galaxy clusters. ( )

Un'interessantissima ipotesi alternativa sull'Universo,spiegata con attenzione scientifica e divulgativa,ponendo bene in evidenza i rapporti con la teoria alla quale si oppone,i relativi punti di forza e di debolezza,i possibili sviluppi futuri e dando spunti di riflessione sul metodo scientifico.Il tutto da partigiani della teoria che gli Autori sostengono,ma senza estremismi di sorta.Lettura consigliatissima. ( )

I found this an accessible, even-handed book for general audiences about a very compelling competing theory to the standard model of the universe (i.e. inflationary theory, big bang, etc). Although I think the weaknesses of the standard theory are quite glaring, Steinhardt and Turok handle these weaknesses with a great deal of respect. I found myself challenged in areas of the book that discussed what are foundational aspects of cosmology (no matter how many times I read the section on the scale-invariant spectrum, I couldn't figure it out). I do think it was perhaps a little too light in terms of proof. Not that I'm a math mind by any stretch, I still would have liked to have seen some of the underlying math concepts that support the element of the cyclic theory that has the branes coming together. The authors mention the math for this element of the theory is still in developmental stages, but what, if anything, supports it?

I forgot to mention when I first posted it the coolest thing. Last year, scientists on the BICEP experiment at South Pole claimed to have found, definitively (five-sigma), proof of b-modes, which would mean the end to Steinhardt and Turok's dream of a cyclic universe. The world of science was abuzz--this was an intensely important moment. However, at the time, Steinhardt counseled caution (http://www.nature.com/news/big-bang-blunder-bursts-the-multiverse-bubble-1.15346), that the findings could be misleading, perhaps clouded by cosmic dust. And, in fact, nearly a year later, this seems to be exactly what happened down there: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2015/feb/03/galactic-dust-sounds-death-...

The BICEP scientists have pulled way back from their announcement of proof of b-modes in the CMB, and therefore the cyclic model is still on the table. I cheered. ( )

Overall an interesting read. Many parts of the book are quite technical, and way more than I could grasp. But it was interesting to see their theory, the cyclic model, against the current favored theory, the inflationary model. They basically contend that the 'big bang' was not the beginning, but one in a series of bangs our universe has and will experience. But it's considerably more complicated than that. ( )