Thought i would look up some of your stuff for you just for the heck of it and because i was bored.
I turned up 29 publications by Scott Tremaine.
Every one of them is related to cosmology of some sort. Black holes, the age of galaxies, determination of cosmological constants. that kind of thing.
Couldn't find anything about meteor dust in any of them though. I know you didn't specifically state that he did write about Meteor dust but you did say that his research helped to disprove evolution, presumably by age as that seems to be the main thrust of this thread.
Out of these 29 I just picked one at random and opened it. here is the abstract if you are interested.
quote:
Bibliographic Information
An estimate of the galaxy covariance function at small scales and low luminosities. Lake, George; Tremaine, Scott. Dep. Astron., Univ. California, Berkeley, CA, USA. Astrophysical Journal (1980), 238(1, Pt. 2), L13-L16. CODEN: ASJOAB ISSN: 0004-637X. Journal written in English. CAN 93:57922 AN 1980:457922 CAPLUS
Abstract
Holmberg's survey of companions of spiral galaxies were used to measure the galaxy covariance function x(r) on scales of roughly (5-40)h-1 kparsec. x(r) (rc/r)g, g = 1.52 0.19, Are consistent with the value g = 1.8 obtained at large sepns. The median abs. magnitude of the galaxies in the sample is M .apprx. -13 + 5 log h. Thus the consistency of the results with earlier measurements (at M .apprx. -19 + 5 log h) suggests that the covariance function is approx. independent of luminosity. The methods employed are suitable for use with automatic plate measuring systems, and offer a simple method for the reliable measurement of x(r) at small scales and low luminosities.
Indexing -- Section 73-7 (Spectra by Absorption, Emission, Reflection, or Magnetic Resonance, and Other Optical Properties)
Galaxies
(covariance functions of, at small scales and low luminosities)
Supplementary Terms
galaxy covariance function
In the main introduction he lays down a few of the things that "the majority of cosmologists agree on"
item 3 on the list says this.
quote:
(iii) Massive BHs inevitably spiral to the centre of their host galaxy as their orbits
decay from dynamical friction, on a time-scale approximately equal to
5 E9 yr(r/10kpc)squared(vc/250kms-1)(1E8 M,/M.):
Where r is the initial orbital radius, vc is the circular speed of the host galaxy,
and M” is the BH mass (Binney & Tremaine 1987, eqn 7-26).
It didn't copy over very well from the pdf I'm afraid but the point I wanteed to make is that the first term in the equation is
5 times 10 to the 9th years
It doesn't sound like Scott Tremaine would be likely to publish anything that says the universe is younger than this. Particularly since he was one of the original authors of this 'well accepted' equation.
If i continue to be 'bored' i may go and look up a few other authors in your list. However I am already pretty sure of what I will find. Not one of them will have ever said anything that supports your position other than an odd out of context quote mined sentence at one time.
As others have said though, why don't you do your research and let us know where exactly we should be looking to find this evidence that you speak of.
FYI I just did a document search on David Stevenson and turned up 77 results. There are actually a number of David Stevensons who have contributed papers on various stuff from femtosecond lasers to neucleotide synthesis. Even one paper by the name of "
A randomised study of GnRH antagonist (cetrorelix) versus agonist (busereline) for controlled ovarian stimulation: effect on safety and efficacy.Any idea where I should be looking?
I have no intention of sifting through 77 scientific papers before lunch.
I just don't see much of a connection between these authors that you claim as trusted sources and your actual topic.
™ Version 4.2