Oh, you mean
that "flatness of the universe"! Well, if you think
that has the remotest connection with empirical observation, then we are indeed inhabitants of different universes. This nonsensical statement, for example:
;D ;D ;D
So much for dark matter, then?! So much for the supposed infinite size of the universe?!
And this one:
;D ;D ;D Oh yeah? Based on what observations, exactly? The cosmic news that we've now observed the Big Bang or anywhere close to it somehow slipped me by.
Again, both entirely theory-laden. That the CMBR derives from the Big Bang is
itself entirely inferential. Any measurements of it can not possibly be measurements of curvature of space-time, but at most deviations from homogeneity, which could have any number of alternative explanations. The supernovae proposal also depends on prior assumed theories, of course. For their distribution or preponderance to have any signifcance for this question observationally, you would have to propose what observational
differences would be expected given different actual curvature values. And what would those be, do you suppose?
No - not the same at all. What observations are proposed that would demonstrate that the universe is not flat? What's the
experimentum crucis? As there is with the Higgs hypothesis?
The small variances in the CMBR do not confirm any theory, or falsify any. It depends entirely on what it is, and where it comes from. Logically, there are an infinite amount of possible theories that would generate the observed CMBR, to perfect precision. That's why you can't prove a theory. What you can do is disprove one. What's the falsifying condition for the CMBR to be in that would disprove inflation theory? There isn't one. If it was, say, ten degrees instead of three, its proponents would monkey around with the equations and say, well that shows the inflation must have been this fast, or must have happened at this time, instead of that one. If it was not as uniform as observed, they'd say, well that shows there was a bigger anisymmetry than we thought (based on the lack of uniformity we do in fact observe.)
You want quotes from leading theoretical physicists saying exactly that? How many?