Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: VadeRetro
I see two possibilities. 1) This theory does not vindicate CDK. 2) This theory is a crock.

Well, it certainly doesn't vindicate CDK, as we're talking about a change of one part in 100,000 over 12 billion years. As for it being a crock, this result isn't a theory but a measurement, and while it may be in error, I have no reason to doubt it (although I still don't see how a change in the electron charge can be ruled out any more than a change in the speed of light).

There is one possible mechanism by which the speed of light may have changed. If there are large (order 1 mm) extra dimensions, some models predict that the compactification scale (the radius of curvature for the extra dimensions) will "relax" slightly over time after the universe forms. A tiny change in the speed of light may be a signature of that relaxation. If this is the case, relativity is unmolested. What we are seeing is the principle of relativity applied to a universe whose geometric structure is changing slightly over time.

24 posted on 08/07/2002 6:20:52 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: Physicist
Well, it certainly doesn't vindicate CDK, as we're talking about a change of one part in 100,000 over 12 billion years.

A creationist would counter that magnitudes are unimportant where principle is involved. A woman who would have sex with me for a million dollars is a hooker, right? That clears the way to negotiate a better price! (OK, old joke!)

As for it being a crock, this result isn't a theory but a measurement, and while it may be in error, I have no reason to doubt it (although I still don't see how a change in the electron charge can be ruled out any more than a change in the speed of light).

I was merely establishing an either-or dichotomy between CDK vindication and reality. But I was wrong on one thing. The CDK loyalists don't seem to have the word yet.

26 posted on 08/07/2002 6:32:39 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: Physicist
There is one possible mechanism by which the speed of light may have changed. If there are large (order 1 mm) extra dimensions, some models predict that the compactification scale (the radius of curvature for the extra dimensions) will "relax" slightly over time after the universe forms. A tiny change in the speed of light may be a signature of that relaxation. If this is the case, relativity is unmolested. What we are seeing is the principle of relativity applied to a universe whose geometric structure is changing slightly over time.

Ouch! Can we have an ice pack over here? I think I sprained something trying to wrap my brain around this.

Did you say that if the shape of the universe is changing it could effect the speed of light?

a.cricket

28 posted on 08/07/2002 7:48:48 PM PDT by another cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: Physicist
relativity is unmolested

The theory of relativity won't be retired. It might have a small adjustment added, a fine structure velocity factor perhaps. There is no reason to altogether dump a theory that still has some uses, especially if a new replacement theory is vastly more cumbersome.

30 posted on 08/08/2002 9:27:32 AM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson