Re:Age of universe at 26.7B years, nearly twice as old as pr...
by gigs on Thursday July 13, 2023 @04:18PM
(#36715377)
The article really should not have even mentioned tired light. It's not really what Gupta is proposing. He is instead proposing that Dirac was correct about some things we view as constants not actually being constant.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Age of universe at 26.7B years, nearly twice as old as pr...
by shagie on Thursday July 13, 2023 @04:29PM
(#36715536)
That tickled a tangent to a different theory that is also fairly recent...
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2380881-time-appears-to... (paywalled)
https://www.sciencealert.com/time-appears-to-have-run-5-time...
https://www.advancedsciencenews.com/time-ran-slowly-in-the-e...
> Scientists have confirmed that just 1.5 billion years after the Big Bang, time ran five times slower than it does today, 13.8 billion years later. Though scientists have long been aware that conditions just after Big Bang were radically different than those in the cosmos we see around us today, the discovery shows that time is relative in regards to the age of the Universe, too, just like Einstein predicted.
The referenced paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-023-02029-2