[fishtank]

The golden “proof” for an old universe just went out the window.

You say, “The world is not 6,000 or so years old.”

I say, “Prove it.”

You can’t prove it now.

The universe as we know it has changed.

I told one of my students today that we are witnessing a bigger change in our perception of physics than even the discovery of radiation itself.

All of nuclear physics has been turned upside down with this news of a non-constant nuclear decay rate.

Just FYI, I have a BS and MS in Nuclear Engineering and a PhD in Mechanical Engineering. That in itself doesn’t mean that I am correct, it just means that I have a small amount of education.

[tacticalogic]

All of nuclear physics has been turned upside down with this news of a non-constant nuclear decay rate.

All of nuclear physics? Upside down, you say? Strangely quiet for being upside down, they are.

[Sirius Lee]

You say, “The world is not 6,000 or so years old.”

The actual, countable annual layers in ice cores can be counted back to 20,000 years after which the ice has compacted so much it becomes difficult to distinguish them. However the ice cores themselves are steeper still by miles. But just for the sake of proof, you already have 14,000 years of ice that existed before the people who misinterpret the Bible say the universe existed.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3409400161.html

[R7 Rocket]

Just FYI, I have a BS and MS in Nuclear Engineering and a PhD in Mechanical Engineering. That in itself doesn’t mean that I am correct, it just means that I have a small amount of education.

If there is a non-constant nuclear decay rate for objects at rest relative to us, and you claim you're a credentialed "Nuclear Engineer", why aren't you calling for every nuclear reactor in operation to be scrammed?

[R7 Rocket]

Is fishtank’s credentials in “nuclear engineering” real?