Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)

Trueorigins has a much lower quality of article. The kindest I could say is that it attempts to refute some parts of talkorigins. And usually gets it wrong.From memory the trueorigins essay on evolution can be summed up like this: (starting from the link on the homepage)
"Here is an essay showing that evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics"
"Here are a lot of quotes saying that the Second law of Termodynamics can't be broken.
But evolution doesn't break the Second Law of Thermodynamics so we'll make up some other rule and say that evolution breaks THAT.
Therefore evolution breaks the Second Law of Thermodynamics"What can you say about logic like that ?[Edited to correct errors - thanks Jon][This message has been edited by PaulK, 11-21-2003]

That doesn't make a lot of sense. What do you mean by time "not existing", where exactly does time "not exist" and how would it affect the measurements ?When you can actually explain your idea in a way that makes sense, we can get into the question of whether it is anything more than an outlandish ad hoc speculation.

So you are just handwaving .The first and obvious objection to your idea is that anything moving at a finite speed requires time to cover distance. Therefore light - which travels at a finite speed - could not pass through a region where no time passed.From this it follows that the fact that we can see the supernova indicates that there is no intervening region where time is not passing.

This is getting a bit off-topic.One of the basics of Special Relativity is that no matter how fast you are travelling the speed of light (in a vacuum) is constant - and nothing can go faster. So it really won't make a difference to the transit time between the supernova and us. Astronomers have been dealing with this for 100 years or so - so I think that they've got a good handle on it.I'd really suggest looking at popular-level science books for a fuller explanation. This is undergraduate level material and it will seem weird because things behave very differently from the way you'd expect from ordinary experience.Or you could start with this Wikipedia article Time dilation looks reasonably accessible, and deals with the specific point.

Exactly - a region of no-time is completely impassable. So obviously the light from the supernova cannot have passed through such a region.

quote:

---

False

---

You are going to have to make a case for that claim, if you want anyone to believe it.

quote:

---

In a time and space where no time existed as we know it here, obviously no time could be required,

---

It is certainly not obvious.

quote:

---

and if there was any time, it need not equate with time on earth! We don't know. That means that you cannot claim light years.

---

The evidence suggests otherwise. We don't have any evidence of time varying in any ways other than those predicted by Relativity.

quote:

---

Region? How would we know all of space away from earth did not have time as we know it here and in the same degree?

---

Why wouldn't we know ? We are observing what is out there. And we can see a lot of things. We have well-confirmed physical theories describing the relationship between time and space. If you want to reject that science you need more than your inability to imagine any refutation of your vague and nonsensical ideas.

quote:

---

something moved without time or with stretched out different time, how would we know here? If there just was not enough 'time' in far space to have a star take a lot of time to move, how would we know? My objection is that you claim to know. Just admit ignorance and be happy.

---

I suggest that you follow your own advice. Admit that you have no idea of the state of current science or the evidence. Accept that for all you know, your idea might be nothing more than crazy nonsense (at this point it IS)

quote:

---

Relativity does not even address the issue of time does it?

---

Odd that you missed the discussion of time dilation. Relativity very much addresses the issue of time.

quote:

---

You do not know because you do nothing but sit in your armchair on earth and look.The theories you allude to do not even address whether time exists as we know it there, they all assume and believe. Bad religion. Nothing more

---

According to your ignorant imaginings. Which is apparently all you have.

He's been given the benefit of the doubt and demonstrated that he didn't deserve it. He can't be bothered to do even basic research. He hasn't worked out his own ideas to the point where he can sensibly discuss them. He's arrogant, ignorant and babbles nonsense.Until he can get past those handicaps he has nothing to offer.