Response to "The Speed of Matter"
Barry Setterfield, March 25, 2006
In a recent TJ article (TJ 19(3) 2005, pp. 91-95), Justin K. Taylor of the US wrote an article entitled “The speed of matter.” He concluded from the evidence that he had presented that “Observations thus favour Humphrey’s and Hartnett’s cosmologies above Setterfield’s theory.” The evidence that Mr. Taylor presented includes jets from active galaxies that span millions of light years, along with colliding, merging or interacting galaxies, and galaxies with wakes or tails of matter that extend for large distances. In his section on the implications of these observations, Mr. Taylor concludes that “These observational data indicate that distant parts of the universe really are very old. This confirms that some sort of time-dilation has occurred in our near vicinity, as proposed by Humphreys and Hartnett. These data also indicate that the already-questioned cDK hypothesis, proposed by Barry Setterfield, is not sufficient to solve the entire problem.”
In view of that comment, it is interesting that Mr. Taylor came to all of his conclusions on the basis that the speed of light has remained unchanged throughout the history of the cosmos. Therein may lie part of the problem. For example, if he had admitted the possibility of a higher value for the speed of light, c, when discussing the jets from active galaxies, another option may have emerged. He mentions that the jets extend over 800,000 light years from the centre of the elliptical galaxy Centaurus A. He then goes on to state that if material from its active nucleus “had left the galaxy with an initial speed close to the [present] speed of light, it would have taken it several hundred million years (taking deceleration into account) to reach its present position.” Let us look at this.
Note first that the processes in the cores of these host galaxies are certainly capable of accelerating particles in plasmas to these extreme speeds. Also note that, in some cases, those processes may be more energetic with higher c values. Second, the reason that these particles cannot go any faster than c is the limitation imposed upon them by the speed of light itself, as outlined by Einstein’s Special Relativity. According to Relativity theory, particle mass increases as particle velocity increases until, at the speed of light, particle masses become infinite. This is therefore the limit velocity for any particle. However, if the speed of light was higher, so too would be this upper limit on particle velocity. Therefore, if the speed of light was higher, the accelerating process would allow much higher speeds to be achieved before any mass increase limited this. Now Centaurus A is about 11 million light years away. My recent work indicates that c was roughly 1 million times its current speed when the light we see today was emitted from Centaurus A. With the limit velocity therefore significantly higher, and the accelerating process thereby more energetic, the particles making up the jets could travel up to a million times faster. In other words, the jets in question could reach a distance of 800,000 light years in considerably less than 10,000 years, and the problem is thereby resolved.
As far as colliding or interacting galaxies, and galaxies leaving wakes are concerned, the higher speed of light in those earlier days would again have allowed faster movement of material. But there are two other points in addition to that. First of all, Mr. Taylor’s discussion about these objects assumes that the gravitational tidal forces from these objects caused the interaction. This may not necessarily be so. Some years ago, Hannes Alfven, who received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1970, pointed out that these wakes and streamers may in fact have originated in magnetic fields associated with the plasma out of which these galaxies formed. Admittedly, the study of cosmic magnetism has started to grow only recently, but one can nonetheless discern that examining the problem from this approach opens up possibilities that unchanging gravitational interactions cannot. It promises to be a fruitful line of enquiry, since Alfven predicted in 1963 the large-scale filamentary structure of the universe which was confirmed in 1991, to the dismay of many involved in Big Bang cosmology.
The second point about interacting galaxies that needs to be made comes from the emerging variable light speed model. Obviously, this is not the place to give a detailed explanation of that model, but some points are relevant. If the universe is created as a high density water plasma, Professor Ed Boudreaux has shown that all the elements can be formed in their known abundances in something less than 30 minutes. As the universe is stretched out (which God says in the Old Testament twelve times that He did), the plasma cools and supersonic turbulence acts to concentrate the cooling plasma to form the proto-galaxies, stars and planets. There would thus be a multitude of various size whirlpools within larger whirlpools. The whirlpools that formed the galaxies would initially be very close together, with some interpenetrating. But as the cosmos was expanded out, these interacting galaxies would be rapidly separated, leaving wakes and streamers as a result of magnetic interaction in the plasma. The rapidity of the expansion of the cosmos during Creation Week was possible with a very high speed of light initially. It also allowed very rapid motion in the turbulent eddies that formed the proto-galaxies, stars and planets etc. Without the initial high speed of light, these processes would take significantly longer than one week. But the variable c scenario, coupled with the rapid expansion of the cosmos that started as a water plasma, does allow an explanation for some of the otherwise enigmatic features that Mr. Taylor noted.