C not so C

This is a new discovery to me. Does anybody have research or knowledge concerning these issues? http://www.setterfield.org/index.html


http://www.setterfield.org/report/report.html

In December 1979, Astronomer Barry Setterfield was given the book Mysterious Universe, a Handbook of Astronomical Anomalies. Much to his surprise he found it chronicled several hundred years of experiments by scientists which indicated the speed of light had been slowing. The book also presented reprints of articles from respected peer-reviewed journals which discussed the changing speed of light. His interest aroused, Barry began what he thought would be a couple of weeks of research to find the instrumental or human errors that would indicate this changing 'constant.' However, he found himself beginning research which has spanned thirty years of his life. His findings are documented.

Also- There is only ONE place in the Old Testament where we have a secular historical date corresponding to a Biblical date. It is the Scriptures indicating the length of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar whose nineteenth year corresponds to the eleventh year of Judah's last king, Zedekiah (II Kings 25:1-8). There are other secular dates such as the first year of Cyrus (wherein II Chronicles 36:22 with Ezra 1:1), but that can only be determined by applying the seventy prophetic years of the Babylonian Captivity mentioned by Jeremiah and Daniel. This is a valid indication, but it involves the interpretation of prophetic time and not simple historical facts like matching the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar with the eleventh year of Zedekiah. And in the New Testament there is also only ONE place where secular history intersects precisely with a New Testament chronological statement. That is the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1-2), which matches the year Jesus commenced His ministry following his baptism by John and anointing with the Shekinah as God's Messiah and Holy Temple (Daniel 9:25), and was either a Sabbatical year (Tishri AD27 to Tishri AD28) or was pointing to the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb for the True Atonement, completing the sixty-ninth Week of Daniel's prophecy and the Pentecostal Jubilee.

http://ldolphin.org/barrychron.html

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/a...un-082310.html
It's a mystery that presented itself unexpectedly: The radioactive decay of some elements sitting quietly in laboratories on Earth seemed to be influenced by activities inside the sun, 93 million miles away.

Is this possible? http://www.projectworldawareness.com...tating-matter/




http://news.discovery.com/space/is-t...-particle.html
When probing the deepest reaches of the Cosmos or magnifying our understanding of the quantum world, a whole host of mysteries present themselves. This is to be expected when pushing our knowledge of the Universe to the limit.

But what if a well-known -- and apparently constant -- characteristic of matter starts behaving mysteriously?

This is exactly what has been noticed in recent years; the decay rates of radioactive elements are changing. This is especially mysterious as we are talking about elements with "constant" decay rates -- these values aren't supposed to change. School textbooks teach us this from an early age.

Many fields of science depend on measuring constant decay rates. For example, to accurately date ancient artifacts, archaeologists measure the quantity of carbon-14 found inside organic samples at dig sites. This is a technique known as carbon dating.

Carbon-14 has a very defined half-life of 5730 years; i.e. it takes 5,730 years for half of a sample of carbon-14 to radioactively decay into stable nitrogen-14. Through spectroscopic analysis of the ancient organic sample, by finding out what proportion of carbon-14 remains, we can accurately calculate how old it is.

But as you can see, carbon dating makes one huge assumption: radioactive decay rates remain constant and always have been constant. If this new finding is proven to be correct, even if the impact is small, it will throw the science community into a spin.

Interestingly, researchers at Purdue first noticed something awry when they were using radioactive samples for random number generation. Each decay event occurs randomly (hence the white noise you'd hear from a Geiger counter), so radioactive samples provide a non-biased random number generator.

However, when they compared their measurements with other scientists' work, the values of the published decay rates were not the same. In fact, after further research they found that not only were they not constant, but they'd vary with the seasons. Decay rates would slightly decrease during the summer and increase during the winter.

SLIDE SHOW: Seeing the Sun in a New Light, The First Solar Dynamics Observatory Images

Experimental error and environmental conditions have all been ruled out -- the decay rates are changing throughout the year in a predictable pattern. And there seems to be only one answer.

As the Earth is closer to the sun during the winter months in the Northern Hemisphere (our planet's orbit is slightly eccentric, or elongated), could the sun be influencing decay rates?

In another moment of weirdness, Purdue nuclear engineer Jere Jenkins noticed an inexplicable drop in the decay rate of manganese-54 when he was testing it one night in 2006. It so happened that this drop occurred just over a day before a large flare erupted on the sun.

Did the sun somehow communicate with the manganese-54 sample? If it did, something from the sun would have had to travel through the Earth (as the sample was on the far side of our planet from the sun at the time) unhindered.

The sun link was made even stronger when Peter Sturrock, Stanford professor emeritus of applied physics, suggested that the Purdue scientists look for other recurring patterns in decay rates. As an expert of the inner workings of the sun, Sturrock had a hunch that solar neutrinos might hold the key to this mystery.

Sure enough, the researchers noticed the decay rates vary repeatedly every 33 days -- a period of time that matches the rotational period of the core of the sun. The solar core is the source of solar neutrinos.

It may all sound rather circumstantial, but these threads of evidence appear to lead to a common source of the radioactive decay rate variation. But there's a huge problem with speculation that solar neutrinos could impact decay rates on Earth: neutrinos aren't supposed to work like that.

Neutrinos, born from the nuclear processes in the core of the sun, are ghostly particles. They can literally pass through the Earth unhindered as they so weakly interact. How could such a quantum welterweight have any measurable impact on radioactive samples in the lab?

In short, nobody knows.

If neutrinos are the culprits, it means we are falling terribly short of understanding the true nature of these subatomic particles. But if (and this is a big if) neutrinos aren't to blame, is the sun generating an as-yet-to-be- discovered particle?

If either case is true, we'll have to go back and re-write those textbooks.

I enjoy that kind of reading!

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1E...1Yjdj&hl=en_US

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkcrusade

This is a new discovery to me. Does anybody have research or knowledge concerning these issues? http://www.setterfield.org/index.html


http://www.setterfield.org/report/report.html

In December 1979, Astronomer Barry Setterfield was given the book Mysterious Universe, a Handbook of Astronomical Anomalies. Much to his surprise he found it chronicled several hundred years of experiments by scientists which indicated the speed of light had been slowing. The book also presented reprints of articles from respected peer-reviewed journals which discussed the changing speed of light. His interest aroused, Barry began what he thought would be a couple of weeks of research to find the instrumental or human errors that would indicate this changing 'constant.' However, he found himself beginning research which has spanned thirty years of his life. His findings are documented.

Also- There is only ONE place in the Old Testament where we have a secular historical date corresponding to a Biblical date. It is the Scriptures indicating the length of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar whose nineteenth year corresponds to the eleventh year of Judah's last king, Zedekiah (II Kings 25:1-8). There are other secular dates such as the first year of Cyrus (wherein II Chronicles 36:22 with Ezra 1:1), but that can only be determined by applying the seventy prophetic years of the Babylonian Captivity mentioned by Jeremiah and Daniel. This is a valid indication, but it involves the interpretation of prophetic time and not simple historical facts like matching the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar with the eleventh year of Zedekiah. And in the New Testament there is also only ONE place where secular history intersects precisely with a New Testament chronological statement. That is the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1-2), which matches the year Jesus commenced His ministry following his baptism by John and anointing with the Shekinah as God's Messiah and Holy Temple (Daniel 9:25), and was either a Sabbatical year (Tishri AD27 to Tishri AD28) or was pointing to the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb for the True Atonement, completing the sixty-ninth Week of Daniel's prophecy and the Pentecostal Jubilee.

http://ldolphin.org/barrychron.html

---

There is a 110 year correction that must be applied to most all dates in Old Testament. Because time was kept according to the Year of the King. And if you are a student then you know that there were many kings who sat as king for much less than one year.

Appendix 50 is a good starting point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I enjoy that kind of reading!

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1E...1Yjdj&hl=en_US

---

So happy you approve,I would also verry much enjoy your opinion on the issue as i think you are still open to the new information and challenge assumptions,preconceived notions and the propaganda that flies in the face of the Anomolies that shatter the house of mirrors

No doubt,i appreciate all the replies ,Michael Joseph's also.

'' There is a 110 year correction that must be applied to most all dates in Old Testament.......Appendix 50 is a good starting point. ''

Will check that link-Iam not unfamiliar with the 110year correction, but i have not researched it to conclussion. (So few diamonds in the dungheap!) Thank you for the link.


Submitted for considerations.....
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/update...inside-li.html


The point defect in diamond known as the NV center—a nitrogen atom substituted for a carbon atom and adjacent lattice vacancy—has become a promising ingredient in recent efforts to develop atomic-scale sensors. When optically excited, the defect exhibits stable fluorescence, even in a crystal as small as 5 nm. And its ground state is magnetically sensitive—the spin 0 level is separated from degenerate spin ±1 levels by a microwave transition of 2.9 GHz. That sensitivity allows one to detect weak magnetic fields by observing the quantum spin state, which can be manipulated by microwave pulses and then read out optically by monitoring the fluorescence intensity

And I wish I had time to properly write about Science. One glance at the first link though, my impression is the fellow is a scientist. Pure and simple. For a real quick glance though - a picture is worth a thousand words - just one of my many handy bookshelves. I glanced around for my copy of The Book of Jasher:

I have been saying that light stands still and we only perceive it as moving because we view it with material eyes, since when I worked for Honeywell SSED. I remember discussing it in the clean room.

When that became Atmel I moved over to the Microelectronics Research Laboratory, sponsored by Ramtron and we were inventing the FRAM predecessors to the SD Cards when I began to understand Einstein's thoughts about Relativity.

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7...relativity.jpg