>You have a [lot] more informed knowledge on this than I do

I read a lot of fringe research. As far as relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Big Bang I would have to go to school for about 8 years before I honestly claimed indepth knowledge of the topics.

>but I thought Plank predicts that the wavelenght of quanta will "get" longer as time passes.

This doesn't ring any bells for me.

Planck explained that the energy delivered by a wave would be in chunks (quantas) and you could only have one chunk, or two chunks, or three, but never 2.5 or 0.8 chunks.

Could you expand on what you said above? Perferably with some kind of cite?

>And - you are correct about the "NO CENTER". But I am a Euclidean critter, and though I approach understanding the "no center" thing - it is difficult

The traditional example:

1. take a deflated balloon and draw points on it.
2. Blow up the balloon.

Observation: If you were standing at one of the points on the balloon you would see all the other points receede away from you.

This is true for every single point on the balloon.

3. Now deflate the balloon.

Observation: No matter what point you're standing at, all the other points will race towards you.

So even in contraction (the Big Crunch) there is no "center", which isn't difficult to grasp from watching a balloon inflate and deflate.