S Michael Houdmann #crackpot gotquestions.org

And so we ask the question: How can the light of stars billions of light-years away reach the earth in only a few thousand years?

Gravitational Time Dilation

In the 1960s, physicists Robert Pound and Glen Rebka experimentally confirmed a theoretical consequence of Einstein’s Theories of Relativity called the Gravitational Time Dilation Effect (GTDE).

Now, let’s set aside the GTDE for a moment and consider another important astronomical phenomenon: stellar redshifts. Redshifts are a Doppler effect phenomenon whereby radiational wavelengths (like those of starlight) lengthen as they move farther away from an observer. The general consensus among astronomers is that observed stellar redshifts indicate that the universe is expanding (Hubble’s Law). By extrapolating this expansion backwards, it becomes apparent that the primordial universe was somewhat denser, more compact than it is today.

The implication is paradoxical: even if the entire universe was created all at once in the beginning (and should therefore be the same age), some parts can be substantially younger than others due to the relativistic nature of time. Light could travel billions of light-years over billions of years in some parts of the universe in what we on Earth would perceive to be a much shorter period of time. As the universe expands and matter spreads out across space, the universal gravity well would gradually even out, lessening the rate of time difference across the universe.

Many astrophysicists and astronomers reject the idea of a bounded universe with our galaxy, the Milky Way, near or at its center. But this is a philosophical presupposition, not a scientific conclusion founded upon empirical data. As world-renowned astrophysicist Dr. George F. R. Ellis candidly explained, “People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations... you can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.”

4 comments

Confused?

So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!

To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register. Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.