Comments on: Dark energy info coming soon

By: Gary Ansorge

Gary Ansorge — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 13:23:17 +0000

Hey Babe:
I’ve seen some of the type 1a data and there is nothing there that suggests varience in c. Show me the data you’re interpreting that way.

GAry 7

By: A Babe in the Universe

A Babe in the Universe — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 18:38:38 +0000

There is lots of evidence of c change, some of it gathered with Type Ia supernovae. It also explains CMB data, even the lack of low-l fluctuations.

By: Irishman

Irishman — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 17:27:22 +0000

kingnor, if I follow correctly, they are comparing the appearance of these really really distant (and therefore old) supernova with ones that are a lot closer (and therefore not as old). Because the appearances are the same, they conclude the Dark Energy that they have to account for now must have been in place then as well. Ergo, “Evidence for Dark Energy in the Early Universe“.

By: Sue Mitchell

Sue Mitchell — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:34:03 +0000

Risking a repeat post:

I can’t help thinking that the evangelical fundamentalist anti-science brigade has failed to notice the ‘Dark Energy Theory.’

No doubt, when they do, they’ll be campaigning to ban it and to return to the regular Light Energy version. {g}

P.S. Maybe they have noticed, and have begun the campaign by sabotaging this reply system…?
–

By: Sue Mitchell

Sue Mitchell — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:31:24 +0000

I can’t help thinking that the evangelical fundamentalist anti-science brigade has failed to notice the ‘Dark Energy Theory.’

No doubt, when they do, they’ll be campaigning to ban it and to return to the regular Light Energy version. {g}
–

By: antaresrichard

antaresrichard — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:02:10 +0000

404’s are coming up for me.

By: Thomas Siefert

Thomas Siefert — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 05:25:17 +0000

Somebody should tell BA of the errors we get when we post comments.