How Old is our Universe?

Scott You still will not answer the question. If light can
slow down to 3mph how does it get back to 'c' after leaving this cold
sodium medium that slowed it down.? What was in the medium that put the
brakes on the photons? Why does the closer to absolute zero slow down
photons? My theory answers these questions. You have know good answers
because photons never slow down. They cover a greater distance when
absorbed and emitted by atoms. They use this theory for photons leaving
the Sun's core and taking 100,000 years to reach the Sun's surface.
bert

Scott It is not reality to call my thinking "inane" You would not
be jumping to answer my posts if you thought them to have no
understanding(silly) Fact is my post cause you and others to think.
They are interesting. They go in lots of directions.Some years later are
written in science mags. bert

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Scott You are right I take up to date knowledge(that's not fudged) and
think about it,and try to add more thinking to it. Also like to share
my own ideas on science. I have a clever brain(very inventive). I hold
back no thoughts no matter if they go against some imperial thinking.
I've added to SR and GR. I've added to QM. You having no thoughts
other than those in your books have a mind that is in reality a closed
book. sad but fits bert


You delude yourself further in claiming you have added anything to SR,
GR, or QM. You add nothing. True, adding zero is a summation, but it
does not enhance that to which it is added. But, as with zan, the
weak-minded, you delude yourself as to your importance because it is all
you really have - delusions.

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Scott Picking on the fact that I'm old again. Shame on you. What age
do the imperial thinkers give for the Milky Way?. I say 9 billion I
have great knowledge on every science subject. The more I know the more
unanswered questions come to mind. Because to answer these questions(not
in the books) I use my own thinking. It is my original thinking that
upsets your tiny brain,and you call it babbling. sad but so very true
bert


Galaxy formation is estimated to have commenced some half billion to
billion years after the big bang. That would put the age of the Milky
Way at about 12 or so billion years, likely quite similar in age to the
other galaxies we see. So, what you say is the age is not supported by
the current data nor current theory. And you have no scientific basis
to claim otherwise.

As to your supposed "great knowledge of every science subject", it would
be nice if you could begin using that instead of typing garbage into
this newsgroup. You definitely do not demonstrate that which you claim.

"sad but so very true".

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Scott " Full of it" is close to the right answer as to showing the
difference when the space ship is very close to 'c' bert


More delusions.

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Scott You still will not answer the question. If light can
slow down to 3mph how does it get back to 'c' after leaving this cold
sodium medium that slowed it down.? What was in the medium that put the
brakes on the photons? Why does the closer to absolute zero slow down
photons? My theory answers these questions. You have know good answers
because photons never slow down. They cover a greater distance when
absorbed and emitted by atoms. They use this theory for photons leaving
the Sun's core and taking 100,000 years to reach the Sun's surface.
bert


See if your little mind can wrap itself around Huygen's principle. It
is used as the basis for constructing wavefronts in transparent media
and can be used to derive the law of refraction.

As to why photons should slow down in colder media - those media have
ever increasing optical densities. This reduces the mean free paths
available for photons to travel, "slowing" them down. In other words,
their "forward" progress is reduced over time and their velocity is thus
reduced.

In the Sun, the same thing applies - in the high-temperature plasma
state nearer the core, the mean free paths available to the photons are
quite small and they are not able to travel far without colliding with a
particle, slowing progress. Such a state of matter could be said to
have a large optical density. As the photon progresses outward, that
optical density is reduced, allowing the photon to travel greater
distances before interactions. By the time the photons reach the
"surface" of the Sun, they have reached a point where the optical
density is low enough to allow them to fly pretty much unhindered and
they travel great distances at their speed.

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Scott It is not reality to call my thinking "inane" You would not
be jumping to answer my posts if you thought them to have no
understanding(silly) Fact is my post cause you and others to think.
They are interesting. They go in lots of directions.Some years later are
written in science mags. bert


No, they cause confusion to people coming to this news group for answers
about astronomy. I and other jump you to point out to these people that
you are a loon with no real knowledge on the topic.

Scott your post is like all your posts just sweet fudge. You never once
mentioned the reality of photons leaving the Sun's core in the high
energy of gamma and it is this type of photon that atoms absorb and emit
as the case may be You claim they hit other particles and that is what
slows them down Hmmmmm That has to hold true for reflected light. like
a mirror having photons hit the silver they must like a ball hitting a
wall come to a stop before bouncing back. "RIGHT" Scott you are more
than just an idiot. You are a "complete idiot". bert PS
what type of particles do these gamma photons hit? They do lose energy
and come out in a photon mix(white light) You still have not told me
how a photon having a speed of 3mph can get its velocity back to 'c''
and you never will.

On Jun 21, 9:02 pm, Scott Miller wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
On Jun 17, 8:48 pm, Scott Miller wrote:

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

Scott what age did astronomers give for the universe 160 years ago. It
got a lot older in our spacetime,and it will get a lot older in the next
50 years bert

160 years ago, there was still the influence of religious thinking in
age determination. But, if you can prove the current observations are
in error, please step up to the plate.

The best SWAG of an open mindset, as based upon physics and the best
available science, is looking at 20+ billion years, although obviously
this is not the one and only universe that's out there, especially if
ours emerged from a mega black hole that obviously had to have
coexisted within a much greater mother universe.

However, 20 billion years is not suffiicient for complex DNA/RNA to
evolve via happenstance into the highly bigoted, arrogant and greedy
sorts of Zion folks like yourself, much less of the millions of other
life forms that are complex and having been so much smarter about
their survival than us humans.

Once again, Brad types words and says nothing. The mark of a loser.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And your fine contribution(s) to science and humanity is?????????
-
Brad Guth

On Jun 21, 9:00 pm, Scott Miller wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
On Jun 17, 8:50 pm, Scott Miller wrote:

BradGuth wrote:

On Jun 17, 6:04 am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Scott what age did astronomers give for the universe 160 years ago. It
got a lot older in our spacetime,and it will get a lot older in the next
50 years bert

Our Scott Miller is another devout Zion naysayer, or otherwise that of
a brown-nosed Atheist rusemaster of a minion to those Zions that are
in charge of just about everything that matters. In other words, if
it's not scripted as within their Old Testament, it simply doesen't
exist.
-
Brad Guth

Brad, have you finished those calculations of the position of Sirius in
the future yet? Too stupid I guess. I have done so - no need for
supercomputers to do it. Did it to check your math. But, that assumed
you were intelligent enough to do multiplication and division.
Apparently I overestimated you.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So, you still have nothing to share, except the usual infomercial
crapolla of a Zion.

Obviously intelligent design simply doesn't apply in your DNA/RNA of
Old Testament naysayism.
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell
-
Brad Guth

How humorous, you claiming I have nothing to share. You have been given
plenty to work with and have returned nothing. You are quite the loser
really, and your posts are the evidence.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Is a true Zion in denial as good as it gets?
-
Brad Guth