We will here investigate common objections to the conventionality thesis – the principle that the one-way speed of light cannot be measured but is instead stipulated.
We previously introduced this distant starlight issue and then examined potential solutions and their difficulties. We now move toward a solution to the issue. This solution is surprisingly straightforward, but will require some discussion of the nature of space and time as we now understand them. To that end, we will here investigate the concept of simultaneity and how this concept has developed over time.
In this article we will continue to explore additional proposed solutions to distant starlight. Creation astronomers and physicists do not currently have a consensus position on the solution to this perceived problem. Some creationists are bothered by this fact, but it is the nature of science that we don’t know everything and therefore we make hypotheses to be tested. Furthermore, science advances only when multiple models are presented and then systematically eliminated on the basis of observations until only the most probable model remains. In this spirit, I will here present some of the positions held by creation scientists, along with the strengths and weaknesses of such proposals.
Given the biblical timescale, that God created the universe roughly 6000 years ago, how are we able to see stars and galaxies that are billions of light-years away? If light takes one year to traverse a distance of one light year (about 5.88 trillion miles), shouldn’t light from a galaxy that is ten billion light years away take ten billion years to reach us? And we can see such galaxies, implying that the light has arrived. Does this imply that the universe is at least 10 billion years old?
Having had several years to think about the conundrum, Howe has provided a response to my question. He posted an article on his blog on June 18, 2020 entitled “How do I know that I know?” I appreciate the effort and I will respond here in the same iron-sharpening-iron spirit. Has Howe provided a satisfactory answer to the epistemological challenge? His article is in purple text, with my comments in black.