geocentrism

GRMorton@aol.com
Sun, 15 Oct 1995 19:59:48 -0400

Concerning the recent discussion of geocentrism. Humphreys has an article in
the 3rd ICC. I have read it and done a little research. His model attempts
to explain the age of the universe compared to the supposed young age of the
earth by having an event horizon pass over the earth. An event horizon is
the boundary of a black hole (or the white hole in Humphreys cosmology. The
problem my amateur eyes see is that he does not treat the mathematics of the
event horizion correctly.

To cross an event horizon, an infinite time traverses for the rest of the
universe. Humphreys says that only a finite time passes.

He claims:

"Although the Schwarzschild time goes to infinity at point B,[the event
horizon-grm] the proper time [tau] does not. As the astronaut continues
falling past the event horizon, the Schwarzschild time *decreases (even while
the proper time is increasing), all the way to point C. [C is the
singularity-grm] Thus although the Schwarzschild time goes to infinity at
the event horizon, the *net* amount of Schwarzschild time elapsed in going
from A to C is finite. The proper time elapsed is also finite, and it is
smaller than the net Schwarzchild time time elapsed." p. 278 D. Russell
Humphreys, "Progress toward A young-Earth Relativistic Cosmology", in Robert
Walsh Ed., Third International Conference on Creationism, {Pittsburgh:
1994}.p. 278.

Compare this to Misener Thorne and Wheeler, Gravitation, 1973,p. 821 speaking
of falling into a black hole. In the quote below, the gravitational radius
is the event horizon.

"...to reach the gravitational radius, r=2M, requires a finite lapse of
proper time, but an infinite lapse of coordinate time:"

This latter was what I always thought. A traveler could not really enter the
black hole before the universe engaged in the Big Crunch.

Humphreys, diagram also does not show the time coordinate inside the event
horizon inverting its direction. and becoming a +(ct)^2 rather than the
normal -(ct)^2.

Would any physicists out there care to comment? Is my understanding correct?

glenn