The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old

[orogenicman]

If you only use one clock to compare the time of arrival of the signals through the cable, then any conclusion you draw about when the signal originated at the other end of the cable must implicitly assume the signals to have traveling through the cable moves at the known speed through the cable regardless of the paths and orientation of the direction, ie isotropically.

But to validate the signal actually travelled isotropically, you would need another clock at the other end of each cable. Hence the need to synchronize clocks over distance.

So if you actually remove the assumption that signals travel isotropically from every stage of your experiment, you would eventually end up with an untestable clock synchronization assumption.



Regardless of your assumption, I think your experiment is a good one, because your assumption is an absolute minimal one, and all other assumptions are equally untestable, but all are more elaborate, and therefore contrived.

This is why your assumption is not a problem for me.

I raised the point because you brought up the time dilation issue. I wanted to point out lack of time dilation does not remove the fundamental assumption. But the experiment is convincing even with the fundamental assumption,

The problem I am having is that I don't see an assumption being made. You said "then any conclusion you draw about when the signal originated at the other end of the cable must implicitly assume the signals to have traveling through the cable moves at the known speed through the cable regardless of the paths and orientation of the direction, ie isotropically."

But there wouldn't be any assumption being made there, since you can rather easily measure the signals in the cable for calibration purposes. You can do it 1 time, or a thousand times and take the geometric mean. Either way, you are taking a direct measurement, not making an assumption about what is happening in the cables.

All this said, the entire argument warped one is trying to make is absurd anyway, since we send and receive telemetry (travelling through the vacuum of space at the speed of light) from satellites around other planets and can predict with great precision when the satellites will receive them and when we will receive responses. It is all very absurd to try to argue for a 10,000 year old universe based on some lame argument about a well known constant.

You know, the argument they used to make was that the speed of light was much faster and that it somehow slowed down in 10,000 years to get to the speed it is now. So we had to believe that its speed became what it is just when we started looking at it. How ridiculous is that? Just as ridiculous as warped one's argument.