|
QuickSearch
Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] |
EvC Forum active members: 67 (9078 total) |
| |
harveyspecter | |
Total: 895,035 Year: 6,147/6,534 Month: 340/650 Week: 110/278 Day: 8/24 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: If our sun is second or third generation, does this not conflict with Genesis ? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2162 days) Posts: 397 Joined: |
Dude you're a genius. I am a believer once again! So which is it? God flies about at very nearly the speed of light, he resides in a very great gravity well, or he is constantly accelerating at a very great rate - while creating? ETA So god moving at high speed will cause the age of the earth to appear even greater in God's frame then the already long 4.5 billion years. Edited by shalamabobbi, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
No, you are wrong. I'm surprised that nobody has pointed out your exact error. The question or joke is not whether any light existed before the sun or whether the sun is the source of all light throughout creation. It would be easy to postulate a source of light other than the sun. Instead, the question was and is what was the source of Day and Night on earth before the Sun and Moon were created on day four. Yeah, there was electomagnetic radiation in the visible portion of the spectrum present in the universe before the sun or stars existed, but not such that the light could create day and night or morning and evening on a non existence earth. For that, both the sun and a rotating earth with an atmosphere are necessary. And guess what. You have yet to answer that question in a way compatible with science. The scientific answer is that the Earth did not even exist until the sun was billions of years old. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : Grrr apostrophe errors Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1573 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd If we start talking like that, I know another one: The whole universe is an illusion. Welcome to the matrix! "Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory." Darwin
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1573 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd There you go, problem solved.
Was that the question? I hear that for the first time in my life. Well, some source of light, and a rotating earth is enough. "Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory." Darwin
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1573 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd Since that days of Aristoteles, about 2300 years ago, the scientific viewpoint was that the universe was eternal, without beginning or end. So then the earth was not yet formed, had not yet been created. And if those first six days lasted only 24 hours, why then are they not counted in the calendar? So then what? Every spot in the universe has its own time. On the surface of the sun less time has passed by since creation than on earth, because the bigger mass of the sun slows down time. As we know, time is relative, and is affected by for instance mass, speed, and space. The temperature there was so high that no matter could form, only pure energy existed in the form of electromagnetic radiation; light. And the universe kept on expanding, and pressure and temperature kept on falling. And when space got bigger, the wave length of the electromagnetic radiation, the cosmic rays, were stretched out. The wave length became longer, the frequency went down, the cosmic clock started to tick slower. When space is inversely proportional to time, and space is also inversely proportional to temperature, that means that time is proportional to temperature. The Bible counts with six days of cosmic standard time, and almost 6000 years earth time. And I think we can work something out concerning the Kool-Aid "Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory." Darwin
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Not surprising. Do you really think that scientists were asking how could there be photons in the universe before the sun was created? Really? What you have done is set up a doofus question that noone would ask and claim to have solved some profound issue. Well you missed the boat.
Duh! So what was the source? You did claim to have the answer to the question of the ages. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
No, that's not true. Einstein believed in a steady state universe and he attempted to model such a universe using general relativity, but he made no proof. The truth about the universe was demonstrated during Einstein's life time. It would be best if when you were making stuff up, you avoided doing that with physics or the history of physics because you will be too easily caught out.
Wrong. There are no such places and your faux relativity spouting does not suggest that there are. But let's pretend that such a placed did exist way off in some distant galaxy-sized black hole 13.7 billion light years from earth. Is it your position that such a place is what the writer of Genesis was contemplating? Surely not. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 20953 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 3.1
|
But science is talking like that. You claimed that science is becoming more in line with the Bible, but science can't really say whether the universe is eternal. We know there was a beginning for the current expansion of the universe, but whether that was the ultimate beginning is unknown. And as I said before, time is not part of the math describing our universe, and science believes it possible that time is just an illusion, though, as Eiinstein said, a very persistent one. And even Hubble's original discovery of the expanding universe didn't align with the Bible's "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...", because while it could be argued that universe *was* created at the beginning, it wasn't until millions of years later that there were any stars (the heavens), and not until billions of years later that the earth was formed. If within your own mind you'd like to believe that science is coming more and more into line with the Bible then that's your business, but here in the real world science is becoming better and better aligned with the evidence from reality. --Percy
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1573 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd Sure. And science also says that the universe doesn't exist.
Of course not, there was a beginning.
The whole material world is a very persistant illusion. Only the spriritual world exists.
Time is relative. God didn't use earth time when there was no earth.
What you experience as "reality", the physical world, that just doesn't exist. It is all mental. "Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory." Darwin
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1573 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd What was it that was created by the big bang? Matter? Or light? "Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory." Darwin
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
What was created? That's an interesting question, and I'm not sure I can answer it. The question might well by metaphysical rather than physical. What does seem clear though is that matter and energy were likely repeatedly converted from one to the other in the very early universe, and at least some of the energy was in the form of electromagnetic energy. Of course during the period of time when the e&M energy of the big bang was in the visible light spectrum, neither the sun nor the earth even existed. Currently the residual radiation is in the microwave region of the spectrum. Surely you are not suggesting that the earth was illuminated by visible big bang radiation? I don't see how any of that helps explain morning light on a non-existent planet, but please feel free to make up more Star Trek physics. It's good for a laugh, but it's destroying your credibility. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 20953 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 3.1
|
Hi Eliyahu,
I'm describing actual views within science while you're just making things up as you go along. You seem self-satisfied with your "explanations", but to anyone familiar with science they're transparently superficial and wrong. And you continue to ignore rebuttals. For example, it was explained in detail why "time is relative" is not an answer, and yet here you are many posts later just declaring "time is relative" as if that explained anything. There is no manner in which "time is relative" is a meaningful answer. We can look back to almost the beginning of the universe right now (cosmic background radiation), so by your argument today and the period near the Big Bang are occurring at the same time. But we know the light from back then took billions of years to get here and that the period near the Big Bang is not occurring right now. And so do you, you just choose to play dumb. The facts are that the Big Bang was 13.7 billion years ago, the first stars (the heavens) formed around 13.5 billion years ago, and the earth formed around 4.56 billion years ago. Genesis declares they were all created simultaneously: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth..." Not much of an agreement there. Hubble's discovery of an expanding universe is more in line with the Bible only in that it says this universe had a beginning. That's about it. --Percy
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1573 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd Ah, when you say something it is science, and when I say something it is not science. And you think that is a serious argument in a discussion??
You take yourself way to seriously, and especially your attempts to rebut something. It is of course totally ridiculous to think that if somebody has a certain viewpoint, that after you tried to rebut that viewpoint, the other is no longer allowed to hold that viewpoint.
That is, as in time counted on earth right now. Time on earth was not always the same, the expanding universe slows down time, and in other places in the universe time flows with totally different speeds. So you cannot bluntly say: "the big bang was 13.7 years ago". And there is of course still the fact that there are no facts in science. NOW science says the big bang was 13.7 billion present earth years ago. Tomorrow they might discover something new that completely uproots that assumption. So don't try to sell present presumptions as unshakable facts.
And that is already an enormous stap toward the Bible. "Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory." Darwin
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1573 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd I explained in message 151 what time is used for the first six days of the creation story. "Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory." Darwin
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 20953 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 3.1
|
No, that is incorrect. You seem to be having big problems understanding plain English. I said that I described actual views within science and that you're just making things up. This is true because the things I described are views that scientists actually have and that appear in actual scientific journals, while the things you described appear nowhere but in your own mind. Is that clear enough this time, or should I translate it into the Dutch for you?
You are again having problems with simple English. The problem is that you're ignoring the rebuttals. You're free to hold whatever opinions you like, but it's not a discussion if you ignore the rebuttals and just continue asserting your beliefs.
Says the person operating under the mistaken belief that he understands both English and relativity.
And this is what makes it evident that you don't understand relativity. Time flows at the same rate in all inertial reference frames. We may observe time flowing more slowly in other inertial reference frames that are in motion or are accelerating with respect to our own, but within those other reference frames time flows at the same rate as within our own.
You *really* don't understand relativity. Even if you were 50 billion light years from here, your observations would still measure the Big Bang at 13.7 billion years ago.
You're welcome to believe that. As I explained before, science does not believe the heavens and earth were both created in the beginning, and there is no certainty within science that the beginning of this universe was the beginning of existence. There is even speculation that there may be many universes - certainly the laws of physics permit it, and it falls naturally out of some forms of string theory. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Clarify sentence about time flow in other inertial reference frames.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022