If the universe is only 6,000 years (or so) years old, how is it possible we can observe objects billions of light years from Earth?
This topic is the result of
Pi, I've read your article on SN1987a, and conspicuous by its absence is any attention to the question of gravitational time dilation. As I challenged you before, as a result of deriving a new (non Schwarzschild) Einstein metric to explain the Pioneer anomaly, Humphreys has modified his white hole cosmology to give a better explanation of distant (deep time) astronomical phenomena as occurring over millions/billions of years while little (if any) time passed on the earth. I'm curious if you have had a chance to look deeper into this.
Sorry, it's taken so long. Thanks for your patience. Let's have a run at it....
First, a quick outline of the problem.... using the simple formula time = distance / velocity, it takes millions or billions of years for light from distant objects to reach Earth. Over time, YEC have attacked the distance measurements; the velocity of light; the rate of the passage of time; and more recently, the measurement of time itself in an effort to resolve the problem. As far as I know, there are no longer any serious challenges to the distance or the velocity of light. This has been the reason it became necessary to come up with more exotic solutions such as gravitational time dilation of Dr. Russell Humprheys' "White Hole" cosmology (which had flaws dealing with "nearby" objects so needed to be modified) and the measurement of the speed of light in Dr. Jason Lisle's "Anisotropic Synchrony."
For the convenience of readers, my Sn1987a article is at: http://www.evolution...com/SN1987a.htm
Humphreys' modified model is at: http://creation.com/...ation-cosmology
The Pioneer anomaly has been explained by NASA without the need for "waters above" or a new metric. It's the result of heat from the spacecraft itself. Link: http://www.jpl.nasa....elease=2012-209
My calculus was never very good and after many years of disuse, it's pretty much non-existent. I'm forwarding the link to Humphrey's work to my own physics guru for his input.
There are a few things I did notice....
1) Most of his justifications for his claims come from scripture, not actual observational evidence.
2) With or without the water sphere, the gravitational influence is a function of the inverse square of the distance. For that reason, the difference in gravitational time between relatively nearby objects, such as Sn1987a (167,000 ly), will be insignificant compared to that of very distant ones (billions of ly).
3) Humphreys claims God created the galaxy masses on Day 4. I'm not sure how this is a scientific explanation of the formation of galaxies.
4) Humphreys claims a second time dilation event with no justification other than his interpretation of a couple verses of the Bible and no supporting evidence at all.
Frankly, his whole proposal looks highly speculative and aimed more at Biblical apologetics than a scientific explanation.
I'll let you know if/when I hear from my guru.