Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You mean that young earth creationists hypothesize that it has changed, but the evidence shows that it hasn't? I don't need to forget it, since it does not contradict my statement.
The radioactive decay constant does not have to be a constant, right?
Is that what this is about, whether space is 'real'?
True, people misjudge things; I don't see the relevance.
I don't know what you're getting at. Care to explain?
That is contradicted by more recent work: Decay rates of radioactive substances are constant.
Not much for creationist's argument, but it is about physical science. The radioactive decay constant does not have to be a constant, right?
Yes, it does.I was referring to the Lorentz transformation - the means for relating inertial frames. I'm more familiar with Newtonian physics, so correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that involve c?
Yes, it does.
I think you misinterpreted - it's the measurement method that reduces unwanted disturbing influences, not the data analysis (which means that, if anything, the data needs less manipulation in analysis).Of course, but when you start compensating the data to match your beliefs......
"PTB used the so-called TDCR liquid scintillation method which largely compensates disturbing influences on the measurements."
So once you get finished statistically altering the data - the data basically says anything you want it to say. Ask yourself why they couldn't just accept the data as it was, without filtering out all the data that did not coincide with their beliefs? It's those very disturbing influences they are removing from the equation that we are after all interested in. Standard change the data to suit your beliefs instead of changing your beliefs to fit the data.
As I understand it, alpha relates the electric charge of the electron, the speed of light, and Planck's constant, so if it changes, it implies that one of those factors has changed.... It seems obvious to me that a change in c would imply a change in time. I don't know if a change in alpha has similar ramifications.
The accelerating expansion of the universe is a result of spacetime itself expanding, not the acceleration of its contents - galaxies and so-on - so there is no change of inertial frames of reference involved; it's not a comparable situation to the Twin Paradox....If his decay rate is different, the constant is not constant from frame to frame - but only within the frame at any given velocity. Since the entire universe by their own claims is increasing in acceleration...
As I understand it, alpha relates the electric charge of the electron, the speed of light, and Planck's constant, so if it changes, it implies that one of those factors has changed.
There is no a priori reason to assume that it is constant. After investigation, there is an a posteriori reason to conclude that it is constant (within the limits of measurement).
You're welcome - it's probably still worth asking a physicist thoughCool! Thanks for the info.
I think you misinterpreted - it's the measurement method that reduces unwanted disturbing influences, not the data analysis (which means that, if anything, the data needs less manipulation in analysis).
The accelerating expansion of the universe is a result of spacetime itself expanding, not the acceleration of its contents - galaxies and so-on - so there is no change of inertial frames of reference involved; it's not a comparable situation to the Twin Paradox.
As I understand it, alpha relates the electric charge of the electron, the speed of light, and Planck's constant, so if it changes, it implies that one of those factors has changed.
On the other hand, I'm not a physicist...
No; they're looking for changes in nuclide decay that are dependent on the distance between the Earth and the Sun, so they want to minimize unrelated disturbing influences on the measurement, such as changes in air humidity, air pressure, and temperature. The TDCR liquid scintillation method is less affected by those disturbing influences.I think you misunderstand.... it is those disturbing influences we are interested in - they are after all disturbing the decay rate. If you remove them from the equation then you get the answer you sought from the beginning, not the real answer.
No; they're looking for changes in nuclide decay that are dependent on the distance between the Earth and the Sun, so they want to minimize unrelated disturbing influences on the measurement, such as changes in air humidity, air pressure, and temperature. The TDCR liquid scintillation method is less affected by those disturbing influences.
The measurements are done in a single frame of reference, not between frames. Which do you suggest changes under acceleration, the electric charge of the electron, the speed of light, or Planck's constant?They do change. Since acceleration changes the rate at which clocks tick, then decay rates proceed differently for things at different velocities. We do after all measure time by the rate of its oscillation (it's decay).
The measurements are done in a single frame of reference, not between frames. Which do you suggest changes under acceleration, the electric charge of the electron, the speed of light, or Planck's constant?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?