RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
November 26, 2013 at 6:46 pm
(November 26, 2013 at 2:44 pm)orogenicman Wrote:(November 26, 2013 at 10:54 am)Optimistic Mysanthrope Wrote: The two-way speed of light is isotropic in ASC - It's only the one-way speed that would be anisotropic. So the one-way speed could be 50 billion times faster than c.
Except that there is no evidence whatsoever that that is the case.
Well, no. That's kinda the point. If there was evidence, it wouldn't be a convention. It's what Lisle's relying on.
Quote:Except that one could argue from symmetry and make a perfectly reasonable argument that we would expect the one-way speed of light to be the same or nearly the same to the tiniest fraction of a percent as the two-way speed of light. Why? There is no scientific reason to suppose otherwise, no physical property of light that would support it being other than symmetrical and constant. Once again, we are talking tiny fractions of a difference, and no matter how you count up those differences, you can NEVER get a 10,000 year old universe. Ever. So your claim that it isn't an adequate argument against a 10,000 year old universe just doesn't fly.
I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, the evidence currently doesn't. What we're left with is essentially an argument from incredulity. Unless of course, we find another basis on which we can disprove it. Arguing against ASC using the speed of light simply doesn't cut it.
