NASA scientist claims time travel is POSSIBLE because ‘speed of light is changing’

www.dailystar.co.uk ^ | Published 29th April 2019 | By Simon Green

[Pikachu_Dad]

and here is a link to her paper. "Abstract Background Studies of the Moon, with thanks to NASA and Johnson Space Center, have quantified an anomaly in measurements of lunar orbital evolution. This finding may have significance for cosmology and the speed of light. The Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment from Apollo reports the Moon’s semimajor axis increasing at a rate of 3.82 ± .07 cm/yr, anomalously high. Findings Sedimentary data indicates a rate of only 2.9 ± 0.6 cm/yr. From historical eclipse records we can accurately calculate a rate of 2.82 ± .08 cm/yr. A detailed numerical simulation of lunar orbital evolution predicts 2.91 cm/yr. LLRE’s laser light differs from independent experiments by up to 12σ. Conclusions Several possible explanations are considered. The author’s hypothesis proposes that the speed of light decreases at rate ċ/c = − 0.24 × 10− 10 yr− 1. This predicts that LLRE will differ by 0.935cm/yr, precisely accounting for the lunar anomaly." https://planetary-science.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/2191-2521-1-1

[Hot Tabasco]

The author’s hypothesis proposes that the speed of light decreases at rate ċ/c = − 0.24 × 10− 10 yr− 1.

I've already discovered a miscalculation in that equation. It should be c/c=-0.31 x 10-11 yr- 2.......

[lepton]

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/speed-light-not-so-constant-after-all

[Richard Kimball]

I’ve been hearing that the speed of light is not a constant since the mid 90s.

Ever since I was a kid the statement that the speed of light was constant seemed like it couldn't be correct. If a change in direction means a change in velocity, it seems like light striking a mirror and bouncing back or bending when it goes through water would require it to change speed.

Up until the last century, the speed of light being a constant was fine, as we couldn't really measure anything closely enough to be able to make any difference. It's like nobody worried about synchronizing time between towns until railroads and telegraphs. Before then, it didn't make any difference if one town called noon twenty minutes later than another.

I'm still not smart enough to figure out what the ramifications of this study could be, and pop media talking about flying faster than the speed of light with Whoopie Goldberg as our bartender doesn't help.

As far as time travel, they're talking about going into the future. We're doing that all the time anyway, and putting someone in stasis would be easier to accomplish, technically. Going back in time still looks to be impossible, and that's probably a good thing. Personally, I'd get a copy of Gray's Sports Almanac, 1950-2000, then go back to 1955 and bang Leia Thompson.

[Richard Kimball]

Yes but moving a femto-second backwards in time really doesn’t get you much

It's enough time to correct one mistake.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks fieldmarshaldj. [singing] the lightspeed it is a-changin' [/singing]

---

· String Theory Ping List ·

---

---

· Join · Bookmark · Topics · Google ·
· View or Post in 'blog · post a topic · subscribe ·

---

[SunkenCiv]

[SkyDancer]

Cool!!!

[InterceptPoint]

If this woman is right, what she seems to be document is light speed decay, something that was long speculated about until scientists decided the evidence for it must all be artifacts of measurement error. However, if it can be shown to be actually happening, then it throws all sorts of “settled science” into disarray, for example, calculations about the age of the universe, the size of the universe, and basing measurements of the distance to other stars on red shift.
+++++
Way late to this very interesting discussion. But I am very much in agreement with your disarray comment. I’m not sure if this effect, if real, could explain our current failure to identify the source of DARK MATTER and DARK ENERGY. Perhaps they don’t exist and are not needed to explain the past and future state of the universe. If so, it’s a very big deal.

Occam may turn out to be the smartest guy in the room.

[BrandtMichaels]

So you put your thoughts to the test please, search and see how many natural clocks there are and see what apparent time each shows long ages or short. Here’s a hint even your own DNA is devolving thru mutations and can’t last more than 20,000 years.

Uniformitarianism is a big fat lie and that is exactly how you defend long ages by assuming you/science knew both the starting conditions and that all things experienced the same boring hum-drum rate of change for eons.

Here’s a website I bet you’ll dare not read nor watch the videos that systematically refutes everything you think you know about history, evolution,and long ages. It answers all the tough questions that today’s science cannot!

Center for Scientific Creation
https://www.creationscience.com/

Considering your tagline it’s time either defend the Bible or don’t - you can’t have it both ways!

[MHGinTN]

There is only present. The illusion of past and future are due to spatial positioning, and there are several dimensional variables to space that we have yet to nail down.

[Chode]

this theory has been around since at least 2013

https://www.livescience.com/29111-speed-of-light-not-constant.html

[freedumb2003]

Well that is all well and good but most ATMs do indeed default to dispensing $20 bills.

[Tell It Right]

The web site you link to is giving the 500 Internal Server Error.

I promise you I've read much of the young earth stuff. It seems like I've read that web site too, but don't hold me to it.