OK, let me ask you a question. Suppose that physicists have produced these two models of the universe.
Model A has a uniform background radiation temperature of 1K.
Model B has a uniform background radiation temperature of 3K.
Both models are extremely large (infinite, if you prefer), so both models will contain some observers whose observations suggest a temperature of 3K, as well as observers whose observations suggest a
temperature of 1K.
Our own observations suggest a temperature of 3K.
In your view, does that observation give us any reason at all to favour Model B over Model A as a description of the universe? If so, why? If not, how can we do science when some scientific models
imply a very large (or infinite) universe?
OK, let me ask you a question. Suppose that physicists have produced these two models of the universe.
Model A has a uniform background radiation temperature of 1K. Model B has a uniform background radiation temperature of 3K.
Both models are extremely large (infinite, if you prefer), so both models will contain some observers whose observations suggest a temperature of 3K, as well as observers whose observations suggest a temperature of 1K.
Our own observations suggest a temperature of 3K.
In your view, does that observation give us any reason at all to favour Model B over Model A as a description of the universe? If so, why? If not, how can we do science when some scientific models imply a very large (or infinite) universe?