Technically wrong. The "dark ages" was a span of time after the big bang where light was still not able to move freely. The oldest light would be from the end of these dark ages.
I am pretty sure (so sure I won't look it up) that this is wrong. The universe was all "light" for the first 300,000 years while the matter was so dense (and ionized) that light wasn't free to move through space.
After that the "haze" cleared and light moved freely. This started the dark ages because there was nothing emitting light anymore.
Then the first stars formed and the dark ages ended. I don't remember how long that was (100 million years?).
To help get around this difficulty we reduce the space-time problem to the two spatial dimensions of the ballon's surface and one time dimension of the balloon's expansion.
Sometimes trying to help only muddies things.
In the current analogy that CaveDiver is using There is only one dimension of space and one of time (since the beach balls surface is 2 dimensional that is all we have to work with).
The space dimension is along lines of latitude and the time dimension is along lines of longitude.
In the more common beach ball analogy space has the two dimensions you describe for the surface of the ball and time is represented by a third dimension as the ball expands when pumped up.
I believe CaveDiver is, in this case, using a better analogy since the universe is understood to exist for all time and all space (all spacetime) all at "once" ("once" being a bit fuzzy here). T=0 is marked as one "pole" of the ball and the end of time as another. But the are both "frozen" and there(existing) just as much as the point in space you occupy is there while a point on the far side of the moon also is still there.
That is how the GPS can figures out where it is at. By the difference in the amount of time it takes for the signal to reach it.
If the GPS is mobile it can calculate where it is with every signal received. If it has a program with maps in it, it can place itself on that map. That is what I was referring to.
But, ICANT, those calculations do not work because space time itself is twisted by the motion and position of the satellites. They only work if both general and special relativity are included to account for that.
I think evolution tries to deal with the problem of design but doesn't actually tell us anything useful about such wonderfully different yet brilliant design.
Then you didn't read the thread. Evolution tells us very clearly that you designs were not the result of any brilliance at all. They are exactly the kind that is produced by utterly mindless processes. The signature of those processes is carved into each animal and plant.
An observer on the ground will observe the clock on the satellite running a little faster than any clock he has on the ground. An observer on the satellite will observe clocks on the ground running a little slower than any un-adjusted clock he has on the satellite.
I'm not actually sure that JonF's statement above is correct. I was waiting for cavediver to correct it.
If only SR effects are considered then both observers will see the others clock as running slower I think.
This is because, again I emphasize I think because it isn't the clocks that are changed but space and time itself. All the clocks run just fine but the space and time involved with the different observers isn't the same.
Remember space and time are not separate things. Spacetime is what we are really talking about. If you mess with one part (by moving in space for example) then you mess with the other part (time).
Time does not exist except when man uses the concept of time to measure duration/existence.
There is no time. There is no space. There is only spacetime where the two are tangled together and related by relativistic equations. You can not pull them apart and that is why the clocks don't run in synchronization.