Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael Coslo wrote:
One of the things that help us in the determination of cosmological age, and all scientific endeavors is that most things end up fitting together pretty well. Atomic decay tends to mesh together with determination of the age of artifacts. It proved itself on items of known age. The concept simply works. That's just one example. Actually, there is an unexplained time drift between atomic decay and Bristle Cone Pine rings that can be explained if seconds are getting shorter. That isn't religion, it fits in with what we do know about physics. And of course, that is in the present space-time. But using a localized present space-time standard to obtain an absolute value for something that existed far outside of that present localized space-time just doesn't "fit". For all we know, the first half of the existence of the universe consumed all of one second of space-time as it existed way back then. What is the length of time that it takes for one entangled particle to have an affect the other when they are a million miles apart? -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|