Strange

You can hope for that. But it is a waste of time.

I doubt it changes it at all. 1. I assume the variations are small. Quite possibly smaller than the error bounds on the age. 2. If the value is larger in one direction and smaller in another, then they probably average out 1. They don't say anything about the fate of the universe. 2. The universe is going to be around for a lot more than 5 billion years. 3. This won't make any difference to that.

That is my understanding. The R and M flags just record the status of the page (referenced and modified). The read/write flag controls whether it is legal to write or not (that is why you get a page fault attempting to write to a read only page). (There may be others not mentioned in the article that are not relevant to this algorithm.)

I don't either. But I assume that if they were not tiny, this would have been spotted long ago.

Why would you think, or even hope, that a god or gods are going to solve these problems now if they have never bothered in the past. Why? Why not take the rational approach: assuming gods don't exist (or, equivalently, don't care about what happens) then it is up to us the solve the problems. No one is going to do it for us.

She, he, they have never bothered before. It is almost as if they don't exist. No, hang on, that's not right. It is exactly as if they don't exist.

How can it? They are making measurements of (tiny) differences in expansion rates over millions of light years (and therefore millions of years n the past). Stop trying to bring everything back to "will it affect us in our lifetime". When talking about cosmology, the answer is ALWAYS "no".

But those apples and oranges always move at the same speed. More importantly, and something you haven't really addressed, they move at the same speed according to every observer. So not only is the speed of light constant (interesting but not very exciting) it is also invariant (very interesting and completely changes our understanding of the universe). There are no "corrections" required because it is always measured to be the same. This is such a fundamental fact that we now define the speed of light as a constant and other units (length) are derived from it.

! Moderator Note I am not supposed to moderate in this thread, but FFS Dimreeper, get a grip. I have moved your (drunken?) ramblings to Trash. Drop it. I don't think it is possible to answer at the moment. It isn't clear (to me) what the scale of these deviations are, even from skimming the paper. I doubt it is going to be a major change in our view of the universe, but it might provide some subtle details about how it has evolved. But only time will tell.

Just wait till Fox News has a "documentary" on how 5G is causing Covid-19 and he will be promising to bring down all the cell towers.

The press release is probably "right" in the sense that it correctly summarises the research work done. That does not mean that the results of that research are correct.

I think it might just be that science is popularly presented as being about absolutes, so if science says X, then X must be true.

I was just highlighting that the results are not definite (nothing in science is) and will need to be confirmed. From the article (bold added): "may"

Oops. Sorry, I missed that. I'll take a look and see if I can understand any of it! [That "whooshing" noise is the paper going completely over my head. Hopefully, someone else can comment.]

It occurs when an attempt is made to read or write the page. If the page is not in memory, then it will have to be fetched before the read or write can complete. The algorithm wants to keep track of which pages have been modified separately from those that have just been referenced / read. (I'm sure there is a good reason for that, presumably analysis shows that pages which are written to are more likely to be used again, or something). So it has to keep track of when pages are modified. The easy way to do that (with the performance overhead of detecting every single write) is to initially mark the page as READ ONLY. Then when the software attempts to write to it, that will cause a page fault (attempting to write to read-only memory). At the point you can set the M flag to indicate that the page has been modified (because that is used later in the algorithm) and set the READ/WRITE flag so any further writes to that page will not cause a page fault (ie. won't slow the processor down).

"May not be" It is unlikely to make much difference as I would assume the differences are very small (otherwise it would have been seen already). Possibly smaller than the error bars on the estimate of the age of the universe. We will have to wait and see when the paper is published (there didn't seem to be any numbers in that article). And then we will have to wait and see if their results are confirmed by others. And then wait to see what modifications (if any) this implies for current models.

Obviously not. Say I have a blue LED and a red LED, both 1 metre away from me. Are the photons from the blue LED travelling faster because they carry more energy? (Spoiler alert: no.) If the blue LED is 1mW and the red LED is 10mW, is the red light travelling faster because it is carrying more energy than the blue light? (Hint: also no.) But it doesn't measure speed. It measures power. That is like saying: my car is faster than yours because it makes more noise. You could use the Doppler shift to calculate the relative speed between source and destination. But it doesn't change the speed of light. Your analogy is silly and irrelevant to the physics.

Tell that to the dinosaurs.

But that isn't a measurement of the speed of light. It is a measurement of ... well, energy transfer rate. That is observer dependent (dependent on frequency or wavelength) while the speed of light isn't. We know this from basic theoretical considerations, confirmed by experiment.

That is where we differ. What gods are doing, or if they exist, is not important at all. There is nothing less important.

Close. That is the average speed between t=0 and t=4 (and as you can see, it is less than the 30 ft/s of the sharks speed). I'm afraid it is really late here and I am too tired to suggest a good way to work out the speed at t=4! But you might want to think about the fact it starts at 0, gets up to v (the speed we want to find) and the average is 15.

Then you have absolutely no reason for claiming that this vague half-formed thought can combine two deeply mathematical theories that you don't understand. I can't see any point to this thread.

There is a difference between the speed that shark is going (e.g. the speed it is going past the lifeguard station) and the speed it is moving away from the lifeguard station. To take the extreme case, at the instant that the shark is just passing the lifeguard station, it is not moving away at all: its distance from the lifeguard station is pretty much constant (90 feet). Perhaps you need to start by drawing a diagram with lines showing the distance between the lifeguard station and the shark at fixe intervals. That might help you visualise what is going on. Sound like that is a popular suggestion. (It was pretty much the first thing we were told to do for every problem in maths)

That doesn't fit with extrapolating back from the currently expanding universe. It also doesn't address the horizon problem.

You appear to have described what your "ASD" is like, but not actually said what it is. How is it useful? Can you use it to calculate known results in general relativity and quantum theory? You haven't shown any mathematics. If you can't do that, then it isn't a theory of anything, and certainly not a theory of everything.