Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: The human defined unit of time called the second is simply a way to measure time. The universe doesn't age one second with each passing second of subjective-arbitrary Earth time so what good is any estimate of the age of the universe? A scientist living somewhere else in the universe will get an entirely different result. One of the cornerstones of science is that if the results are not reproducible everywhere at every time then they are invalid. Nonsense. The universe most certainly does age one second with each passing second within the frame of reference where the second was defined. If a scientist living somewhere else in the universe uses the same frame of reference, he will get the same result. If he uses a different frame of reference, he will get a different result which can be converted to our frame of reference and the result will be the same. GPS satellites are in a different frame of reference but manage to provide results that agree with our frame of reference. What I really don't understand is why understanding frames of reference is so difficult for many evidently otherwise intelligent people. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|