Posted on 01/16/2009 4:48:42 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
And light has mass. So it would be affected.
Now, construct a model where light travels a million light years in 6,000 years.
That would be some amazing gravity.
According to a broad class of creation cosmologists, gravitational time dilation and 5D (space-time-velocity) Cosmological General Relativity caused the physical processes of the expanding universe to speed up. Thus, from the standpoint of physical processes, the universe aged billions of years, whereas the earth only aged for thousands of years, and yet they both owe their existence to the same creation event (thus giving starlight from billions of light years away to reach our young earth).
I don’t need to, it has already been done.
Where is your proof, then? I am not a mathematician or I would attempt it myself.
PS These same creationist cosmologists are making accurate predictions where their big bang counterparts are failing miserably.
Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity
Quantum Mechanics: Uncertainty, Complementarity, Discontinuity and Interconnectedness
It is not my intention to enter here into the extensive debate on the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics.8 Suffice it to say that anyone who has seriously studied the equations of quantum mechanics will assent to Heisenberg's measured (pardon the pun) summary of his celebrated uncertainty principle:
Along the same lines, Niels Bohr wrote:We can no longer speak of the behaviour of the particle independently of the process of observation. As a final consequence, the natural laws formulated mathematically in quantum theory no longer deal with the elementary particles themselves but with our knowledge of them. Nor is it any longer possible to ask whether or not these particles exist in space and time objectively ...
When we speak of the picture of nature in the exact science of our age, we do not mean a picture of nature so much as a picture of our relationships with nature. ... Science no longer confronts nature as an objective observer, but sees itself as an actor in this interplay between man [sic] and nature. The scientific method of analysing, explaining and classifying has become conscious of its limitations, which arise out of the fact that by its intervention science alters and refashions the object of investigation. In other words, method and object can no longer be separated.9 10
An independent reality in the ordinary physical sense can ... neither be ascribed to the phenomena nor to the agencies of observation.11Stanley Aronowitz has convincingly traced this worldview to the crisis of liberal hegemony in Central Europe in the years prior and subsequent to World War I.12 13
A second important aspect of quantum mechanics is its principle of complementarity or dialecticism. Is light a particle or a wave? Complementarity ``is the realization that particle and wave behavior are mutually exclusive, yet that both are necessary for a complete description of all phenomena.''14 More generally, notes Heisenberg,
the different intuitive pictures which we use to describe atomic systems, although fully adequate for given experiments, are nevertheless mutually exclusive. Thus, for instance, the Bohr atom can be described as a small-scale planetary system, having a central atomic nucleus about which the external electrons revolve. For other experiments, however, it might be more convenient to imagine that the atomic nucleus is surrounded by a system of stationary waves whose frequency is characteristic of the radiation emanating from the atom. Finally, we can consider the atom chemically. ... Each picture is legitimate when used in the right place, but the different pictures are contradictory and therefore we call them mutually complementary.15
(this is just a snip, the very long study is at the link...)
I beg to differ. It's hardly obscure.
thanks.. i’ll take a look.
I can't find fault in that.
You are trying to pull (I hope) a fast one.
The article you link to is the most famous hoax in scientific history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
Very funny stuff.
You are mixing this up with the David Sokal hoax, different item (same last name throws folks sometimes.)
read later
My mistake too. I thought the hoax accusation was just a cover-up.
they found that light from the edge of the ring closest to Earth reached the satellite 80 days after the first detection of the supernova explosion. Ultraviolet emissions from the ring's farthest edge did not arrive until 340 days later. This time difference allowed the researchers to calculate the ring's diameter of 1.37 light years.
How do they get the 1.37?
If the far edge's light gets here 340 days after the near edge's light, doesn't that mean they're 340 light days apart? Therefore the diameter is 340 light days, or about 0.93 light year.
Nope. Alan Sokal, who had this article published in an “academic journal” despite it’s being a parody that makes absolutely no sense. He later wrote a book about the writing of the article and the response to it.
Here is a brief synopsis of one of their predictions
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5181
Here is a link to the technical paper
http://creationontheweb.com/images/journal_of_creation/vol21/5181creationist.pdf
Also see #77
If the light took x amount of time to reach the rings, you can calculate by trigonometry how long it would take to reach earth. The number of light years is independent of the speed of light.
If the speed of light is variable and is slowing down, it makes this particular calculation even less compatible with a young universe.
Well count me out. I'm not telling him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.