> [Entropic]: Assume for a moment that the theory that if you travel far enough in a straight line you will return to your starting point is true
Probably a majority of the people participating on this message board don't even accept the Big Bang, let alone the idea that space can be curved. So your question consists of an absurdity piled on a speculation.
> [E]: If an observer were at the solar system's position when all the light and particles were first emitted, with a powerful enough telescope, wouldn't he see the sun in every direction?
Not necessarily. Light would frequently be scattered or absorbed by intergalactic matter before it traveled that far. So the original photons might not make it back.
> [E]: I know some would be deflected but the universe is mostly empty so I think most would return to it's point of origin), everywhere, that this could cause the so called big crunch, the end of the universe and a new big bang starting a new universe? (I know this is a wild idea so feel free to flame me)
You won't get flammed here, but you are unlikely to find many who can take your premises seriously either. The simplest interpretation of the redshift is energy loss, not Doppler shift, meaning the universe isn't even expanding.
If we adopted BB premises to answer your question, the latest data indicates that the "expansion" is accelerating, not slowing, so all "Big Crunch" theories are on the ropes at the moment. -|Tom|-
