Evidence for the Slowing Down of Light

--This paper is supporting a change in light speed near the beginning of the Universe and has nothing to do with decreasing the age of the Universe from 12-15 billion years down to 6000-10000 years. Sorry.CheersJoe Meert--If we see a ray of light that appears to be 12 billion years old, we're basing that off of saying it's 12 billion light years away, no?So if light has actually slown down, wouldn't that change how we estimate the ray of light's age?David

--The calculation is based on the constancy of the speed of light, yes. However, if the speed of light was greater than it is now for the first few seconds or few hundred million years after the big bang and then stablized at its current rate, the consequences for creationism are nil. The universe is still, basically far too old for Biblical Creation.--Davies is a Scientist who believes in evolution. His assumptions no doubt will be different than that of a creationist. But I do know what you're saying, so I'm not getting excited over anything. It will just be interesting to see how Scientist on the creation side react to this.One thing I did think of...Assumption of 12 Billion Years
Total Difference between Original Speed and Speed Now = D
Rate of Slow Down = 12,000,000,000/D= Slow Rate of Change at beginningAssumption of 6,000 years
Total Difference = D
Rate = 6,000/D= Fast Rate of Change at beginningNot being a astrophysicist, I don't know if that makes sense when all things considered. I noticed AiG mentioned this without talking about that, so I'm sure I've missed something. Nonetheless it could be an illustration on how assumptions change the outcome.David

<>

​

Not yet. By the way, don't feel bad about posting the TJ article. When I read what you said about quantized red-shifts, I went to AiG, ordered his book, and subscribed to both magazines. You made a sale!

​

I'm just hoping they send me the last issue they sent out, not make me wait til the next one is produced.

​

David