Hey, Donald -
What's a decade or so among
friends foamers?
Given that the generally accepted age of the universe is 14,000,000,000 years or so, and the earth is estimated by the non-superstitious to be about 6,000,000,000 years old, the difference between 1928 and 1938 is a mere typo - aka "brain fart".
Congratulations on being the first of those paying attention to post your concerns. Now all we have to do is determine whether 57-L-179 was something new, or merely the annual reiteration of standards that had been in place for nine or ten years - or more ... at Burnham, anyway.
- Russo (muy) Loco
p.s. It's not ALL my fault - my lovely 31-year-old neighbor stopped by while I was halfway through the post to "
borrow" share a glass (or two) of wine in exchange for a few slices of mushroom/sausage/jalepeno pizza ... (See [
ngdiscussion.net] and scroll to more-or-less the bottom.)
And her middle name is - I'm
NOT kidding - 'Shay'.
pps. I really don't understand why those who accept the Big-Bang theory - and the age of the universe given above - argue about the SIZE of the universe. If we accept Einstein's theory that nothing can travel faster than light, and that the universe originated in/as an incredibly dense tiny wee point of matter/energy ~14,000,000,000 years ago, then the maximum possible size of the universe is a sphere of radius ~14,000,000,000 light years ... q.e.d.