Those "religious" people....

Originally posted by lucifershammer
[b]The point I am making is that whilst there is some speculative science, there is typically some reason for that speculation...

In the case of the "multiverse" theory, that reason is simple - to explain why the Universe has precisely those values of the Universal constants that allow life (not necessarily carbon-based) to exist. Nothing to do ...[text shortened]... autious about confidently asserting it would not be sufficient for a 6,000-year old earth.[/b]

Well, a change in the speed of light would probably lead to a change in the theory of relativity, or a new theory, which would be to Einsteins theory what relativity was to Newtonian mechanics. Relativity would work here and now, certainly for the last 2 billion years. It might change a few dates, but nothing within the last 2 billion years. Even the changes, would likely be comparitively small above and beyond that.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Well, a change in the speed of light would probably lead to a change in the theory of relativity, or a new theory, which would be to Einsteins theory what relativity was to Newtonian mechanics. Relativity would work here and now, certainly for the last 2 billion years. It might change a few dates, but nothing within the last 2 billion years. Even the changes, would likely be comparitively small above and beyond that.

Once again, don't be so confident. 🙂

While what you say may very well be true if the speed of light is changing at a constant rate; it certainly won't be true if we're talking second-order rate of change. Under such a scenario, the Earth could very well be just 6,000 years old.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Once again, don't be so confident. 🙂

While what you say may very well be true if the speed of light is changing at a constant rate; it certainly won't be true if we're talking second-order rate of change. Under such a scenario, the Earth could very well be just 6,000 years old.

Oh man, you're so funny! So many opinions, so little knowledge!

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Oh man, you're so funny! So many opinions, so little knowledge!

Really? Are you going to tell me now that you've worked out the correct gamma factor based on the rate of change in the report I cited and mathematically demonstrated that nothing significant has changed in the last 2 billion years?

If not, then avoid the pot-kettle thing.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Really? Are you going to tell me now that you've worked out the correct gamma factor based on the rate of change in the report I cited and mathematically demonstrated that nothing significant has changed in the last 2 billion years?

If not, then avoid the pot-kettle thing.

They stated themselves it hasn't changed. Go figure.