A young sun - a response

Lizard Breath says:

quote:

---

I'm not going to stand with a telescope in one hand and the New Living Translation in the other and cross out the galaxies that don't jive with the Genesis account.

---

You're not? You said before that when science and the Bible disagree, you stand on the Bible. You obviously feel that God doesn't want you to understand natural phenomena the same way atheists do, because when your faith is confronted with reality, you deny reality. And that's what you call an informed, mature, realistic faith?

quote:

---

I want to know exactly,if possible, the jest of what the Bible is saying about the hows and whats of the construction of this place, and digest the science using the Bible as a fork and spoon

---

This makes absolutely no sense. If you really think the Bible was intended to be used as a science book, that's your choice. But does it work? Give me an example of how this methodology has been useful in your quest for answers about the age of the Sun.

quote:

---

I thought it noteworthy to answer the question as to why I felt the Bible and science should agree if they are telling the same story. If they are telling a different story, then either one or the other or both has issues.

---

Every time we compare them, however, they seem to tell different stories. That's why we conclude that one is intended for spiritual guidance and the other is for understanding the material bases of natural phenomena. Like we've been saying, what good has one set of tools ever been for doing the other job?------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

It is only a problem"" if the historical connections to its incorporation is not far enough removed from the actual research that no longer "gleans" from others'. This is much like a teenager saying to me as President of the Hunterdon County 4-H Herpetology Club that he or she CAN NOT join even though they have an interest in herps and desire to be a part of the group because they would have to SAY the 4-H pledge which independently they"" dont want to do - I pledge my head to clearer thinking, my heart to... and my health for my country...Now we ask if we can say the Pledge of allegiance so I guess we must to be politically correct not recongize not a nation but a local group that kept teenagers off the street and is still going strong 30 yrs after I started it.I am not skilled on the newest ICR cosomology as this requries some kind of understanding of differential equations solutions and or hamiltonians etc but LB is asking if the writing is worth reading- given the number of responses here-- it seems to be. My understanding is that there is another "culture" of doing interpretation growing in warmer America tht may indeed get beyond a simple prefigureing of a different point of view that is at least sociologically established as far as I am concerned. Think of ICR as an Growth from Price that only ONE age is the time seen phenomenolgically in geology and USING this perspective DO astromony? That there is Biblical motivation is supplemental to this object but not to the subject- hence the pledge that is no wood cleaner nor a blight on any potato!You seem to have confused a "method" and a "principle"???

What is happening that causes electron neutrinos to be created when the hydrogen atoms fuse? Do the neutrinos actually have an energy value associated with them? This is somewhat puzzleing to try to understand what a neutrino is and what part it plays in understanding solar mechanics.1) Are the electron neutrinos streaming off the sun alligned with the rest of the energy being emitted or is it extremely random stuff flying off the sun's surface?2) Are the electron neutrino's different that are made from hellium fusion vs. hydrogen fusion.3) How do scientists know that electron neutrinos are changing form after they leave the sun and travel the 93 million miles here? Do they know this for sure or is this an assumption because the muon and tau neutrino's appear in too great of an abundance to be considered from any other neutrino generator?4) What is the governing factor controlling the neutrino change that happens at some time after emission from the sun. Is there any type of gaseous compound that could be introduced into earth's geo stationary orbit that could react to the neutrino stream and cause it to floress like a dye in the sky?5) Can a neutrino stream be simulated on earth through hydorgen fusion in a lab enviorment?6) Do electron neutrino's carry a negative charge only 1/60000 as strong as a free electron? If so, could the stream be detected in space by measuring a dirrectional electrical charge that increases as the instrument is focused on the sun?7) Will the consuption of electron neutrino's in place of pasta and french fries aid to an overall reduction in caloric intake and prove beneficial in an overall weight loss strategy? I've heard they taste just like chicken. [This message has been edited by Lizard Breath, 11-24-2003]

1) The neutrinos are produced as part of the fusion process. They are electron neutrinos and are produced in several different energies depending upon which reaction they are from.H + H -> D + positron + neutrino neutrino energy ~ 0.263 MeVBe + electron -> Li + neutrino neutrino energy ~ 0.80 MeVB -> Be + positron + neutrino neutrino energy ~ 7.2 MeVN -> C + positron + neutrino neutrino energy ~ 0.71 MeVO -> N + positron + neutrino neutrino energy ~ 1.0 MeVThe original detectors only could detect the 7.2 MeV neutrinos. Unfortunately this is a rare reaction.But newer experiments (and ones planned) are sensitive to the other reactions which also contribute many more neutrinos.2) Off the top of my head i cannot remember the neutrinos produced in Helium burning but they would have characteristic energies just as the hydrogen burning ones do.3) The flavour change has been directly observed at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory because it is sensitive to all neutrinos via different reactions. Also in Japan the neutrino flux from a nuclear reactor has been observed to do this.4) The determining factor is distance. Neutrinos interact so weakly with matter there is nothing you could 'fluoresce' as you put it.5) Neutrino's are produced by nuclear reactors but tey fly off in all directions. Remember they interact so weakly you cannot focus them or anything.6) Neutrino's have NO charge. (Hence the term NEUTrino as in neutral)7) Ha Ha

They are absolutely facinating particles to me. Do neutrinos have an actual purpose in the galactic role call or just a resultant occurance produced from fusion reactions? Do they add any quality to matter in the universe or alter/direct any event in the heavens?

Well neutrinos are important in some astrophysical processes. Though they hardly interact with normal matter (trillions going through your body every second) if matter is very dense that can change.In a star the neutrinos are basically an energy sink, their energy escapes the star, end of story.But in the core of a massive star you can reach a situation where the density gets high enough towards the end of the stars lifetime where the neutrinos are more easily absorbed. This energy is thus not allowed to escape and stays in the stellar core.Many nuclear processes then can occur which normally do not. This is important in the stages just before the star goes supernova.Also neutrinos, since we now know they have mass, are a contributor to the so called 'dark matter'. However it seems they are not the largest constituent of the dark matter. Neutrinos fall into what is called the Warm Dark Matter component which it seems is not as important as the Cold Dark Matter which at present is not known what it is composed of. (maybe WIMPS - Weakly Interacting Massive Particles).

The sun, in order to do what it needed to do for God's living creation on earth must needs have been created with appearance of age it would seem. Scientifically speaking, the sun, when created on day four of Genesis would appear to a scientist if he were observing at that time as having age, would it not? After all, Adam came on the scene with appearance of age and he lived hundreds of years after that before he died.LB, I just finished reading the whole thread, and I certainly do admire your philosophy of how to cope with the Bible and science, especially as I read of those here in town who've tossed their precious saving faith overboard because it appears to them that human science has it all figured out already.Having been a student of the Bible for 58 years, I've become apprised of the fulfilled prophecies and nothing will ever trump these so as to disuade me from total confidence in the Bible. These plus all the personal spiritual experiences and answers to prayer have made me, like you a dyed in the wool Biblicalist. Keep on keeping on, dear brother. Having read this thread has been truly a blessing to me and an encouraging refreshing testimony from someone who makes real good sense. Thanks alot!!

Question: Scientifically speaking what should the sun look like when it was 100 or 1000 years old if emerging on the scene naturally? Would it be able to heat the earth as it does today to do what it needs to do for the earth at exactly the right temperature?

Every so often this idea of "appearance of age" comes up. The question that always has to be answered is: Are you saying that God made the sun (in this case), the rocks, the radioactive elements, the stars and so on so that no matter how hard you look the earth always has the "appearance" of being 4.5 Gyrs old? Is that your answer to this?

No! A 100 year old (or 1000) Sun is quite a different object. Also what do you define as the year zero?But proabably more relevant is the fact you claim to have studied the Bible for 58 years and yet are still interpreting it completely in a literal manner.Are those hares still ruminants to you? Last time I checked they don't chew the cud as expressed in the Bible.What part of literal being wrong don't you get?Also by one of your previous posts you just flat out imply no knowledge can trump you Biblical literalism. Why even be on a forum such as this asking questions or commenting.Do you function in daily life on such a base, gullible level. I mean people who accept the Bible hook, line and sinker would not (I hope) accept other things in their life so readily and with so little evidence. (Actually evidence to the counter)Also why are the Biblical literalists so much a minority in the Christian World?They seem to be confined to the North American Bible Cults (Baptists, Nazarenes, Adventists, Pentecostalists etc.) but not the large Christian denominations (Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican). The other common source of literalism also seems to be the poorly educated. Where Christianity has been introduced in the 3rd World initially Biblical literalism has a strong hold but has the population becomes better educated it's hold lapses and more mainstream Christian ideology takes over? I wonder why this is? The conclusion one can draw is that education and literalism seem mutually exclusive of one another.

Ned please answer my question. Wouldn't the sun have to show age in order to do what it needs to do for the earth to function?

Eta please answer my question. Wouldn't the sun have to show age in order to do what it needs to do for the earth to function?

I don't understand your question.What do you mean by 'have to show age'?That makes no sense to me - please elaborate.

quote:

---

I don't understand your question.
What do you mean by 'have to show age'?

​

That makes no sense to me - please elaborate.

---

That if it was created on day four of Genesis 1 as the Bible states, it would have had to be created with the appearance of age. See my post above to that effect which you previously responded to for details.

No, Buz I don't think it "has to show" age. Eta can answer better but I think that the sun could produce heat just fine without haveing just the right amounts of some elements to indicate it had been burning a long time, etc.It could also produce a lot of heat for long enough (a few 1,000's of years) without fusion taking place. Eta could tell us if there are any other things.