Saturday, July 19, 2014

Distant Star light - The distances are wrong.

This questions if the distances are being measured accurately since you can not use a ruler to do it. The basic method of measurement which is stellar parallax is based on geometry and would be quite accurate but it only works up to about 100 Light years, so go further required other forms of measurement. This idea suggested that the other forms of measurement may not be accurate. However the assumptions behind using Cepheid stars and galactic redshift are reasonable enough that they are probably off by no more than a factor of 10 not the factor of 2,200,000 needed by this claim.  

The most basic way of determining the distance to star is by way of parallax. This method is based on geometry but it is useful only up to a dew hundred light years because then the angle get too small to measure.
Cepheid variable stars
Cepheid variable stars are large bright stars that vary in brightness over days and based on Cepheid variable stars close enough for their distances to be measured by Parallax their absolute brightness can be shown to be related to the length of their period of variability this means that they can be used as a standard candle for measuring distance. This method works up to about 50 megaParsec  (163 million light years)
Galactic Redshift


It was as a result of easements of Cepheid variable stars it was found that the light from galaxies is resifted proportionally to their distance. This works to at least 10's of billions of light years.


Type Ia supernovae


These are new commers to the list the are a result of whift dwarf stars that build up material from a large commpanion star that builds up until it explodes in a vary predictable way, resulting in a constent brightness, producing a new standard candle that is good for billions of light years.


The fact that these methods can all cross checked and are ultimetly based on the gomotry of Parallax shows that any error in calculating distances would is no greater than a factor of 10. But since this idea requiers a factor of 2,200,000 it is clearly wrong. While questioning the assuptions behind scientifc conclusions is a good thing to in this case it just dose not pan out.




------ Charles Creager Jr.

Genesis Science Mission

Online Store

Genesis Mission

Creation Science Talk


This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

No comments:

Post a Comment