Astronomers have been saying recently, that the universe is expanding at such a rate that in X billion years, if you were to look at the night sky, you wouldn't see as many stars as you can see now. Therefore, to me it seems that the universe is still expanding. This also seems to me that Astronomers (rightly or wrongly) are putting Earth OR The Milky Way, which is our Galaxy, (I'm not trying to get you to suck eggs, so please bear with me) which Earth is a part of, at the center of the Universe.

Now, it strikes me that if this analogy were true, then whatever point in the sky we were to look at, whether it be north, south, east, west, up, down, whatever, then the stars and galaxies would all be going away from us at a constant rate. Surely, to prove the point that we aren't in the center of the universe, we should be able to measure the relative distances of our local galaxies. i.e. if we were at a constant distance from, say, Andromeda, this would prove that we are travelling through space at a relative speed with all the other galaxies and therefore, NOT at the center of the universe.

The only problem that I can see from this is that we are on an outer spiral arm of the Milky Way and in (lets say) 1 million years we will have spun away from Andromeda due to the axis of the Milky Way and not from the fact that Andromeda is moving away from us because we are at the center of the universe. Therefore, the way I see it, when we arrive back to where we are now (in about 5 billion years, or however long it takes to do an orbit around the Milky Way) we will be able to see what we see now at the present time.

Don't forget, it isn't all that long ago when Astronomers thought that the Earth was at the center of the universe.

Feel free to put me right if you think that my argument is wrong.

__________________
Doh, i'm with Stupid.
There is life out there, let's find it.