How Old is our Universe?

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Double-A Photons never change speed. The sun gives them a curved
path,and we are confusing this greater distance with saying they slowed
down. Light has a constant speed never changing speed even when passing
through glass or super cold sodium Photons never bounce and my "Spin is
in theory" gives the best thinking of reflection bert


You are wrong again, but thanks for playing. Not only does it slow in
glass, it has been slowed to a near walking pace based on recent
experiments.

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Double-A Lots of things that happen in my spacetime make me smarter than
Einstein. Poor guy never had a Cern accelerator. Never had a Hubble.etc
I'm smart enough to go beyond relativity's SR and GR. I have thought
about physics longer and harder than Einstein. bert


Apparently, it was your head you hurt and not your ankle. Delusional!!!

Of course the clock must have run slower in the early
stages due to increased gravitational density, but never mind that.

That is why it is quite strange to set an age for the universe.

If the flow of time was slower during the first billions, than during
the last billions of years.

Then of course you will get a wastly different number for the age of
the universe, if you include the shapiro delay in your calculations.

And there is a problem: How could the Big Bang have occurred while time was standing
still?

The big bang theory is exactly what your scientists regard as pseudo-
science. Unfortunately they will not accept this for quite a while.
The ruling class always wants to hold on to the theory they used in
the past. Just like they did when they believed that your planet was
flat, and that the sun was orbiting your planet.

If the flow of time is delayed locally until it reaches a maximum
delay at lightspeed, is there any flow of time at lightspeed then?

If even light cannot escape from the gravitational influence beyond
the event horizon of a supermassive black hole, is there any flow of
time beyond the event horizon of a supermassive black hole?

If a supermassive black hole experiences zero flow of time beyond the
event horizon.

Then how old is a supermassive black hole locally? Is not a
supermassive black hole zero time units old locally then?

On Jun 17, 10:01 pm, wrote:
If a supermassive black hole experiences zero flow of time beyond the
event horizon.

Then how old is a supermassive black hole locally? Is not a
supermassive black hole zero time units old locally then?


Black holes just don't pencil out when your think about them too much,
do they?

Double-A

Black holes just don't pencil out when your think about them too much,
do they?

Nor does a hole I discovered in the middle of a gif link to Conthia on
my webpage.

I knew gif images could support transparency, but not transparency to
things that are not directly behind them.

Double-A You are explaining gravities ability to curve space. Time is
related to density. and great mass density can bring time to a stop. In
the case of black holes at the right distance from its center you can
be in an area that has very slow time flow, If you parked your space
ship for a year there when you got back to Earth 100,000 Earth years
would have past. If you were going around this black hole at a
speed of 99.999999999999999999 of 'c' 200.000 Earth years would have
past. Best to keep in mind both velocity,and gravity control the flow
of time. Best to keep in mind time obeys the inverse square law. bert

Scott no matter how those that write the books estimate the universe's
age it will get older and older as we see further back in time. That
is the heart of my thinking. To say the universe's big bang went off
14.8 billion years ago,is no different then my saying 21.8 billion years
ago. bert

Scott your thinking is going with our most powerful telescopes that can
see galaxies 12 billion LY away.Now that's from our view point. Now
lets take these great telescopes to one of these 12 billion LY away
galaxies and look in the direction away from our Milky Way . Do you
think we would see the universe's horizon? After all it would only be
2.8 billion LY out. I say we would see what we see now. To tricky for
you to comprehend Scott and you are lost for its not in the books on
your desk Sad but true bert