little in nature is a straight line. circles within circles, cycles within cycles, patterns within patterns, chaos within order or order within chaos... to me it all seemed much more fitting with observations and experiences.
yet again, there is also that thing called April Fools Day or people pulling a quick one...
yes, yes, i did see it, i'm still a bit skeptical.
i'm also skeptical about infinity and some of those proofs of mathematics which end up coming up with the ideas that there are different types of infinity, but they are based upon the idea that there is such a thing as infinitely subdivisible and when it comes down to reality that might not be the case. so it's theories vs. observations and what makes sense as far as i'm concerned. to me it makes no sense at all to talk about infinitely subdivisible if the subdivisions don't do anything important or can't be detected or have no effects upon other things.
if it is all chunkable and we're only dealing with things that are detectable then it can be ones and zeroes and continuity doesn't go all the way down. that means that real numbers and the various kinds of infinity are only theories and not reflecting what is there there.
as for the universe and expansion i'm not sure the Big Bang is the end of that story either. you could not tell if we are in a local bubble or not - perhaps it is more bubbly areas than we can see from here and each does it's own thing, expands, contracts, bubbles up and down.