nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 162:
Line 162: +
→Young earth?: Such a mass is the point.
Yes, I agree. But it's only significant when you're near a very massive object. Out in empty space, which is where the light spends virtually all of its time in transit, the effect is so small that it can be neglected. We could probably estimate how small just from the 1/r^2 law of gravity.--[[User:Mackronking2|Mackronking2]] 00:43, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
Yes, I agree. But it's only significant when you're near a very massive object. Out in empty space, which is where the light spends virtually all of its time in transit, the effect is so small that it can be neglected. We could probably estimate how small just from the 1/r^2 law of gravity.--[[User:Mackronking2|Mackronking2]] 00:43, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
:According to Humphreys' and Hartnett's models, the universe was very small to start off with, which meant that there was a very large mass, i.e. your "very massive object". That's the whole point of their models. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 03:11, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
::::::::::::How did the moon got THAT ammount of craters in only 6000 years?[[User:Aknot|Aknot]] 15:19, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
::::::::::::How did the moon got THAT ammount of craters in only 6000 years?[[User:Aknot|Aknot]] 15:19, 12 May 2007 (EDT)