Posted by: FLPatriot | February 3, 2009

How does this effect the age of the universe?

I read an interesting article:

The basis of this article is that the speed of light may have been faster in the beginning of time. If this is true, could the age of the universe not be as old as currently thought? Does this mean we can no longer use the speed of light coming from a distant star as measurement of time? I predict a lot of back peddling by pro-evolution scientists now.


on a side note, I am working on an article to the reliability of the Bible, as requested before, but it is taking me a lot more time than expected. But rest assure it is coming and then we can have tons of fun with that topic.



  1. Greetings,
    I recently discovered your blog linked from that of a rude, foulmouthed little girl (Intelekshual) who I am sorry to say is my neighbor in the great northwest.

    Anyways, I looked at with interest your post on the speed of light and relativity position that may show inconsistency with time as we know it. I have been aware of this for some time and so have many scientists. However, even if there is inconsistency with this measurement, it still doesn’t drastically alter the overall model accepted by most cosmologists who have added these variables in their equations. so don’t expect a lot of backpedaling. I hate to say it, but the young earth argument doesn’t hold a lot of water when it comes to special relativity.

  2. Why are your reading such tosh, mcoville? Cdk007 addresses all the cosmological conjectures proposed by YECs In his set of 5 videos: “Why Young Earth Creationists Must Deny Gravity”. If you have the time to read those articles and post on them, you have the time to properly educate yourself on the subject matter.

  3. Rickr0ll, to “properly educate” does not mean to listen to only one side of the debate. I will re-watch those videos and comment on them here. But did you read the article I linked to or did you dismiss it?

    P.S. What does ‘Tosh’ mean? Never heard that one before 🙂

  4. look it up. It’s a synonym for “rubbish”- though with a distinctly upper-class flair. Anyway, it light is indeed slowing down, it will be the LIGO and LISA satellites that will show the evidence.

    In fact, light should be speeding up slightly, because the frame-dragging caused by the mass of the earth is lessened due to it’s slowing rotation; and the moon is getting slowly away from us, so relativistic effects ought to be lower.

    But the article is tosh because such a number as 60 orders of a magnitude simply is dumbfounding- a change like that to any of the physical constants would be disastrous. There is no physical way this could be happening at that great a rate of change (i won’t go into it further now- cdk007 did a much more thorough job at it.)

    Now, ask me again if light is slowing. I might be inclined to say yes. there is a reason for this as well: Dark Energy and Dark Matter have effects that are not well understood.

    But i find it insulting that people would simply insist such things are actually occurring without anyone being able to tell the difference in the current state of the universe. Tosh i say! Have you even read the comments on that page?

    Oh, and if the speed of light was drastically different in the past- not that “the past” would mean anywhere the same thing when the speed of light varied so much- that still utterly fails to jibe with the evidence that the earth is 4.3 Billion years old!

    Here is an article from 2003 that has a great deal more technical information to back up it’s claims than simply an assertion that “what might be might be”:

  5. I am going to try and use “tosh” more often, fun word.

    So what your saying is that because a scientist that is sticking to the accepted norm writes one thing that any deviation from that norm has to be wrong?

    I never said that the guy in the article had to be right, all I asked was, how would it effect the common belief in the age of the earth if it where proven that light speed is not constant and there for could not be used as a measurement of age.

    “such a number as 60 orders of a magnitude simply is dumbfounding”, so is 4.3 billion years and you believe in that one.

  6. Just because you don’t understand science, don’t assume other people don’t. 60 orders of magnitude difference would be disastrous- in the we wouldn’t exist kind of way.

    simple enough for you?

  7. 4.3 isn’t dumbfounding. the factor that calls for that it only a couple of thousand over what it was 100 or so years ago- based on how long it would take for things to be constructed geologically. Or do you think that things like Continental Drift are other Red Herrings that Yahweh seems to get pleasure out of putting in front of our instruments?

    Do a little check up on Inflationary Big Bang Cosmology and then come back to me. Put your money where your hands are. I suggest something fun like “the Elegant Universe” or “The Fabric of Spacetime.”, both by Brian Greene- a physicist- not just an author!

  8. Personal Failure: Why so defensive? I never said that 60 orders of magnitude was easy to comprehend, in fact I agreed. In stead of trying to prove the scientist in the article wrong, why not speak to the subject of the post.

    What would happen to the modern science world view if it could be proven that light does not travel at a constant speed and therefore could not be used as a measurement of time? Would that not change the way scientists interrupt data?

  9. um the theory of evolution does not rest on the constant speed of light mcoville, it rests on carbon dating. as one commentor posted on the article, in the beginning of the universe light probably could have been different- however the current spped is steady 3.0times 10^8.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: