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

Yup, we do. We have mountains of supporting evidence. I've mentioned a few.Your ignorance of why we make that claim is not proof or even an indication of its validity.

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)

Nope. As I posted in another thread, it makes predictions of what we would see if time as we know it exists throughout the universe. Those predictions have universally (heh!) been borne out.If you want to propose that there's no time out there, you should not say anything until you have a theory that squares with millions of observations. GR predicts the bending of light, and predicts time exists throughout the universe. If there is no time out there GR is horrendously wrong and there is no theory of what bends that light. What do you propose as a cause?

Having a little reading comprehension trouble? I never said anything about GPS working out there. GPS works here. If General Relativity is wrong, then GPS does not work on Earth.Does GPS work on Earth?Where's your theory of why GPS works? (The satellite clocks run slightly faster than they would on Earth, and without compensating for that GPS fixes would be way off).

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.

Nope. You don't. That was easy. The evidence you refer to is not able to stand. Not at all. It is religion.

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.

Time is not involved in trigonometry. If you are going to invoke some tremendous warping of space you are going to come up with a much more complex theory than the one you need but don't have. No, actually for SN1987A it's out there. You really should not speak with such limited knowledge. I.e please stop [i]assuming/i about what you do not know. That conclusion (not assumption) is the only one we have that fits all the observations. Where's your explanation? Yuppers. And the same rate of decay is seen hundreds of thousands of light-years away. Got an explanation for that?

Not time away from earth where stars are.

Relativity is relative! To earth and our quadrant.

Of course time is involved in a measure from earth where time exists. You kidding?

Don't tell me, let me guess. You are incapable of explaining why it does not stand, you are just sure it must because otherwise your fantasies would be wrong.This is a science forum in which we introduce and critique evidence. I've mentioned some briefly and can go into much more detail were you going to actually discuss. If you want to discuss your religious beliefs (including your religious belief that mainstream science is a religion) please use one of the theology forums.

Why? We have a theory, GR, and it works wonderfully well. We're not going to give it up unless a better theory that makes the same predictions about our observations comes along.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Relativity describes our entire universe from the largest scale to almost the very smallest scale. It makes predictions and those predictions are borne out. If time and space were significantly different out there, those predictions would not be borne out.You are quickly becoming boring. You have no clue of how to discuss science and evidence. Hint: repeated unsupported and downright silly assertions are not it. If you can't address the problems with your claims and present evidence for them you are in the wrong place. You should be on a YEC board like evolutionfairytale.com where you can get lots of agreement and no worries about your claims fitting reality.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Well, the observation does involve the passage of time on Earth. But you seem to agree that time exists here. But the trigonometry arises strictly from geometrical observations.