Reconciling Inflation with Anisotropies at Small Scales
There have been persistent suggestions, based on several diverse data sets, that some aspects of our Universe were or are not isotropic. It is not easy to develop a coherent theoretical account of such a ``statistical anisotropy'', for, in standard General Relativity, intuition suggests that it contradicts the predictions of the very successful Inflationary hypothesis. We put this intuition on a firm basis, by proving that if we [a] make use of an Inflationary theory in which Inflation isotropises spatial geometry ---$\,$ this, of course, includes the great majority of such theories ---$\,$ and if [b] we insist on assuming that spacetime has a strictly metric geometry (one in which the geometry is completely determined by a metric tensor), then indeed all aspects of the ``Hubble field'' must be isotropic. Conversely, should a statistical anisotropy be confirmed, then either we must contrive to build anisotropy into Inflation from the outset, or we will have to accept that spacetime geometry is not strictly metric. We argue that the second option, implemented by allowing spacetime \emph{torsion} to be non-zero, would be by far the most natural way to accommodate \emph{some} such observations. Such theories can reconcile a non-isotropic Hubble field at the end of Inflation with a perfectly isotropic spatial geometry, and thus are able to reconcile Inflation with certain kinds of possibly observable anisotropies at relatively small cosmic scales (though by no means with all).