At this point that's a quibble that loops back around to Big Bang theory - the OP was postulating we somehow discover that that theory is not correct, and my po

At this point that's a quibble that loops back around to Big Bang theory - the OP was postulating we somehow discover that that theory is not correct, and my point is that if it's not - if the universe isn't bubbles of matter evaporating out of each other's spheres of influence - then you run into serious problems with why the night sky looks the way we are. You've just looped it back around: expanding space gives finite, shrinking, observable universes. Which is just exactly the Big Bang theory. EDIT: Dark patches in the sky though don't work with infinite light sources - at the very least you have to explain why far away ones apparently switched on in a finite time in the past. But that's the issue too - we're deliberately ignoring evidence in this discussion which points away from that - i.e. the red shift which shows us galaxies are rushing away from us.