|
Starlight and Time: Solving the Puzzle of Distant Starlight in a Young Universe
|
| List Price: | £9.99 |
| Price: | £8.99 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Delivery. Details |
Availability: Usually dispatched within 24 hours
Dispatched from and sold by Amazon.co.uk
30 new or used available from £0.01
Average customer review:
(13 )
Product Details
- Amazon Sales Rank: #116568 in Books
- Published on: 1996-12-31
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: .39 pounds
- Binding: Paperback
- 137 pages
Editorial Reviews
From the Author
The critic is using a bad mathematical foundation
I'm glad three of the four reviewers like my book --- that's not a bad batting average for a new cosmology! The only critic, Mr. Conner, is a supporter of the "big-bang" theology of Dr. Hugh Ross. Though my cosmology first appeared in a peer-reviewed scientific publication, none of Mr. Conner's criticisms (the 6/97 critique not being his) has yet done so. Mr. Conner also neglected to mention my replies, which appeared in the same issue of each publication. Now Mr. Conner has finally submitted his criticisms to the peer review process of a scientific journal. If all goes well, both his critique and my rejoinder will appear in this summer's issue of the *Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal* (CENTJ). For information on that journal, call *Answers in Genesis* toll-free at 1 (800) 350-3232 .
In his CENTJ critique, Mr. Conner did not use the argument he uses above, that "velocity" time dilation would cancel out gravitational time dilation. The more technical readers of that journal might realize that a galaxy moving along with the expansion of space experiences no velocity time dilation. As my book (pp. 98-99, 120-121) and some graduate-level relativity texts clarify, galaxy red shifts are caused by the expansion of the intervening space, not by Doppler shifts (contrary to some undergraduate texts) and not by velocity time dilation.
My CENTJ rejoinder cuts to the root of Mr. Conner's criticisms --- the "metric" equation on which he bases all his arguments, as he admits above. Recent articles in general relativity journals show that his metric is inadequate for the black-hole / white-hole situation of my cosmology. Being based on a bad mathematical foundation, his criticisms are wrong. On the other hand, the recent developments give strong support to my cosmology and the metric I used.
