Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #381423 in Books
• Published on: 1996-12-31
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 137 pages

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.

Customer Reviews

The theory proposed in this book does not work
Starlight and Time proposes to solve the "light travel time problem" by postulating the existence of past gravitational time dilation in a bounded universe. This time dilation would, it is proposed, cause clocks to run slower on Earth than in distant galaxies, allowing light to travel billions of light years from distant galaxies during the passage of only a few thousand years on Earth. This is a very creative idea, but close examination of the physics shows that it does not work. Humphreys' time dilation proposal could work if the universe were static (that is, neither expanding nor contracting), but the universe is, in fact, dynamic --- it is expanding. More distant galaxies are receding from Earth more rapidly than nearby galaxies. This differential motion produces a differential time dilation effect ("moving clocks run slower") which exactly counterbalances the gravitational time dilation effect so that all clocks in the universe, whether on Earth or on distant galaxies, run at the same rate as the universe expands. There is no differential ageing of the outer parts of a bounded expanding universe compared with the center. This identity of the time-keeping properties of clocks on Earth and on distant galaxies is easily established by calculation of the relevant clock rates with respect to the expansion of the universe from the spacetime metric. Humphreys neglects to perform these calculations and ends up misleading himself and his readers. Starlight and Time was made public in 1994 as an attempt to reconcile "young-earth" recent creation theology with the evidences of astronomy that the universe is very large and very old. The theory has since attracted critical analysis which shows it to be false. The first of these analyses was published in Bible Science News, 9/95. A second analysis was published in the 6/97 issue of the Creation Research Society Quarterly. Still other analyses have been submitted to a number of Creationist organizations. Readers who are not familiar with General Relativity theory should not trustingly accept the conclusions of this book. It is flawed by a number of serious misunderstandings of relativity theory. Readers interested in the details of these flaws may consult the above-mentioned references. In fact, there are a number straightforward theorems which can be derived from Relativity theory which show that 1) If Humphreys' model of the universe is correct, then there can be no visible objects further away than about 6000 light years and 2) the redshifts of distant objects should be rapidly decreasing at the present time. Both of these predictions are found to be seriously in error. 1) The most distant observed objects are about 10 billion light years away (a distance estimate which Humphreys explicitly affirms). The upper limit on the distance of visible objects in Humphreys' model is only about one fourth of the distance to the Milkly Way, clearly an impossible prediction. 2) The observed upper limits on redshift changes in extragalactic objects is millions of times smaller than the rate of change predicted by Humphreys' model. These two predictions are consequences of any young-universe relativistic model, regardless of the precise details. Consequently, this entire class of model of the universe is ruled out by the observed properties of the universe.

Being Intellectually Honest
Having always been interested in the night sky from a very early age, reconciling what you see there to the Genesis account of creation has always been a challenge to me. Attempts by Dr. Ross to do so distort the scriptural words to beyond breaking point and have other profound theological consequences. Russel Humphreys here presents a paradigm which works logically and which fits scripture (exceedingly well as can be seen from all the references). Support for the physics is also given for those who can follow mathematics at that level, although this is not essential to be able to read and understand the book. Russel Humphreys is very well qualified in this field and has defended his paradigm well against criticism from the 'Big Bang' community (both secular and Christian). I vey much doubt that the 'technical' criticisms on this page are written by those with superior qualifications in this field so should not be taken too seriously. In regard to the 'God of the Gaps' criticism, Humphreys only actually uses two supernatural acts, the creation of the original matter and the stretching of space. It has to be remembered that the 'Big Bang' and all other cosmological paradigms require an appearance of energy/matter somewhere. You then have to change the state of where you were into the start of the 'Big Bang' itself and then of course as this process is effectively running contra to the Second Law of Thermodynamics (you are making distinction and order out of what before the process was more uniform), you have at some point to reverse this so that the second law as we know it today (with increasing entropy) applies. By my count that's at least three pretty big miracles to start with (and if you do not have God involved - all by chance too!). We shall never know in our earthly life the absolute truth in these matters but we need to be intellectually honest and if we are Christians scripturally honest too and chose a paradigm that we think best fits the facts. This is by far the best I have ever found.

Astrophysics Rules!!!!!
Reading this book is what first interested me in the field of astrophysics. Right now, I won't make any comment concerning the validity of Humphreys's theory because I am only 14 and I've not had any classes in physics. Be sure to read the appendix of this book; it goes more in-depth into the gravitation time dilation, as well as some other fascinating astrophysics info. I am looking forward to taking higher mathematics so I can better understand the equations and solve them for myself!