Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
112 online now:
dwise1, nwr, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Stile, Tanypteryx (6 members, 106 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,004 Year: 5,116/6,534 Month: 536/794 Week: 27/135 Day: 4/23 Hour: 0/3

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   SN2016adj
Member (Idle past 1374 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 17 of 52 (778876)
02-25-2016 3:09 PM

Thought it might be worth linking this thread to Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)

As I see it, there can be no way around the older Universe interpretation of the distance to supernova 1987A.

And I am talking about the GEOMETRICAL method of calculating the distance. This doesn't involve anything like standard candles, or relativistic redshifts but on good old trigonometry. (I do hope the YEC's accept trig.)

No way of varying the speed of light (one of the lamest concepts in YECdom) will at the same time explain this supernova being nearby and yet not changing the observed radioactive decay rates of the nickel and cobalt from the explosion.

This, and I stress, GEOMETRICAL distance gives a value of approx. 170,000 light years. No if's and's or but's about it

If for no other reasons that Eta Carinae was in the thread.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022