Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 39:
Line 39: − +
→Decrease in the speed of light: dewikify
This idea initially found wide acceptance by creationists, but is now widely rejected, although some still hold to the idea.
This idea initially found wide acceptance by creationists, but is now widely rejected, although some still hold to the idea.
One criticism of it by anticreationists was that if the speed of light had changed, we should see the difference in the [[Fine Structure Constant]] as measured by nearby stars versus distant stars, but this was not observed.
One criticism of it by anti-creationists was that if the speed of light had changed, we should see the difference in the Fine Structure Constant as measured by nearby stars versus distant stars, but this was not observed.
Yet in 1999, John Webb, a professor at the University of New South Wales in [[Sydney]], Australia, and his colleagues reported astronomical observations suggesting that the value of the fine-structure constant may indeed have changed. They subsequently published this in ''[[Physical Review Letters]]''.<ref>Physical Review Letters 091301, 2001</ref><ref>Sarfati, 2001</ref>
Yet in 1999, John Webb, a professor at the University of New South Wales in [[Sydney]], Australia, and his colleagues reported astronomical observations suggesting that the value of the fine-structure constant may indeed have changed. They subsequently published this in ''[[Physical Review Letters]]''.<ref>Physical Review Letters 091301, 2001</ref><ref>Sarfati, 2001</ref>
However, although this showed that mainstream scientists are open to new and controversial ideas, the methods Webb used were shown to contain simple flaws, which discredited the results.<ref>M. T. Murphy, J. K. Webb, V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. Lett., 99, 239001 (2007)</ref> A later study of 23 absorption systems using the 'Very Large Telescope' found no measurable changes.<ref>H. Chand et al., Astron. Astrophys. 417, 853 (2004)</ref>
However, although this showed that mainstream scientists are open to new and controversial ideas, the methods Webb used were shown to contain simple flaws, which discredited the results.<ref>M. T. Murphy, J. K. Webb, V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. Lett., 99, 239001 (2007)</ref> A later study of 23 absorption systems using the 'Very Large Telescope' found no measurable changes.<ref>H. Chand et al., Astron. Astrophys. 417, 853 (2004)</ref>