Basically, my christian friend gave me a religious/science book (because I'm a terrible atheist, ya know ) called "The Science of God" where he tries to show that if you look at the creation of the universe from a point in the big bang that it appears to have lasted six days, while on Earth it will have been 15 billion years.

 

[MATH]\frac{15 billion}{10^{12}}[/MATH] : [MATH]\frac{x*365}{1}[/MATH]

It is a ratio showing the 15 billion year old earth (I thought it was 13.7 billion years?) over the temperature at the end of the particle era ([MATH]10^{12}[/MATH] k, the whole thing started at [MATH]10^{15}[/MATH] k though). X*365 turns out to equal 5.47 days.

 

His reasoning for starting in the particle era was because radiant energy "doesn't experience the flow of time," and "Time truly takes hold when matter forms." Are these two statements correct? He claims that the singularity of the big bang is a proven fact (which, if I understood correctly, it isn't), so just to humor his assertion, wouldn't time still start with the singularity? It's been brought to my attention that this could possibly be numerology, but I'd thought I'd get everyone else' opinion as well.

Even if his reasoning was right, the Bible doesn't say "God created the world in 5.47 days".

Lol I know (good ol' six days), and (I don't know about every translation) it even says "...there was light... then he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day and the darkness night. Together these made up one day" paraphrased Genesis1:3-5 NLT

 

But both of us know, the religious will jump on his idea like a starving lion. But I'm really quite interested if the problem works out...