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

But that's still a puzzle. Why should the speed of travel change how the traveler ages? The idea is that after this trip at great speed to great distances the person returns to earth having aged not a bit or something like that, while time on earth has continued to a future he no longer fits into. Can you make sense out of that for me?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

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.

Time dilation - WikipediaConfusing, isn't it? But it is borne out by observation: see the bit on muon lifetimes. They really don't age so fast, because they are moving fast.

You forgot "... and produce a valid theory explaining how this can fit with what we observer".Making up silly fantasies is not going to overturn mainstream science.

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

No speed can exist without time. The speed we know for light on earth and in the solar system represents mass and time existing a certain way here in space. Take away the time and we can forget needing to imagine 'speeding up' or slowing down light!

Overturn? It is honest to point out what is known or not. Have you some theory that has support that says time exists as we know it where the stars are?

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

You keep forgetting that any viable theory has to square with existing observations. Of which there are millions.For example and on-topic, we have observed the decay of decay of 56Ni to 56Co in Supernova 1987A and it decays at the same rate it does on Earth. SN1987A is 167,885 light years away (measured by basic trigononometry).Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

General relativity. Probably the most-tested and most-confirmed theory in scientific history, and affecting many nearby phenomena. E.g. if GR is wrong, then GPS does not work. Does GPS work?

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.

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? The bible talked about the heavens or space being stretched out, I assume that would mean space and time.If 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.

Relativity does not even address the issue of time does it? It looks at earth time and space and extrapolates, and assumes it applies all over.Bent light does not prove time exists in deep space by the way.

No. Of course GPS does not work where SN1987a is.

Trigonometry involves using (as I already pointed out) time and space on and near earth. The base line for your triangle HAS to be here! You only assume that time as blended with our space represents reality where the star is. Decay is seen here too.