Posted on 05/03/2012 3:05:41 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Some questions come to mind as I read this article:
How many published papers are affected by this change?
Papers often quote radiometric dates to 4 or more significant figures. Theorists rely on these values.
If values are not discovered but adopted, is it possible there was motivation by theorists to adopt a different value to create consistency with other chronometers?
Does the new value make the assessed chronology of events in the early system more or less plausible?
What will be the ripple effect from here on for a chronometer that ticks 33% faster than previously thought?
Who will go back and correct theories based on the previous value?
Here we go.
After that, other clocks that are easier to read become available.
Want some popcorn? :) /popcorn
/mark
Evolutionists are not going to be happy...
Thanks . . . I'll wait a bit. ( ^8 }
I think you understand correctly. It specifically affects theories that involve separations of materials, as the article says. The actual age of the solar system is pretty well established. For instance rock ages on earth are measured by looking at Uranium and its decay products. These half-lives are quite accurately known and not in question.
None of this affects anything as recent as the development of life. It Has zero impact on TOE
This makes my head hurt.
Doesn't General Relativity predict that any clock in a gravitational field will run slow? Thus, any clock in the vicinity of the big bang will run slow?
How's anything going to get done if it takes forever for a clock to tick? To an observer external to this nearly infinite gravitational field, isn't it going to appear that nothing happens for a very long time?
When it is stated that the universe is, say, twenty billion years old, just whose clock are they using? Are there any Freeper cosmologists who can summarize twenty billion years for me?
The gravitational forces in our solar system are very week, and therefore general relativistic corrections are parts in a million or much less than that. They can be measured only with the most precise and stable atomic clocks.
Bookmark
Thanks for the ping!
Cool! I read about this in the future.
“The formation of the solar system came long long after the big bang”
Spirited: In other words, before all else there was a void (nothingness) out of which emerged self-created primordial matter, the beginning of all things, a cosmic egg.
Circling the cosmic egg was Chronos (Time) who split the egg apart (big bang)to form the universe of earth, sea, sky, and life.
In Darwin’s tale, the cosmic egg was lain upon primordial waters of the earth.
Returning to the big bang version, that Chronos split apart the cosmic egg is evidenced by “The presence of heavy elements...” that show “...that we are a later generation development - condensed out of (hatched out of) the remnants of earlier supernovae explosions.”
Now either the living, personal supernatural God IS, and He called all things into existence from nothing (creatio ex nihilo) or primordial matter (cosmic egg) spontaneously generated itself from nothing (void, abyss) after which all things and life evolved (hatched) over Time (Chronos) into what they are today.
Here you ask a very good and very deep question. It is "our" clock transformed into a fictive clock that is extrapolated at its present ticking rate back in time to when the big bang had to have occurred past upon the measured separation rates of galaxies. It assumes that "our clock" would have remained in a weak gravitational field the entire time. What it means to extrapolate into the high gravitational fiedl at the time the big bang occurred is a hard philosophical question.
Paging Ken Ham, paging Ken Ham.
Why is God having created the egg not allowed?
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.