Galactic Tidal Tails - more evidence it's an old Universe !!

See, the difference between them and you is that they don't think it's appropriate to lie in the service of Christ, or to act like a crank. That's why they're not going to rush to your aid - you're doing more harm for your cause than good by acting rude and disrespecting the forum in the way that you are.[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 02-02-2004]

You do understand that the majority of Christians also understand and agree with science (well, understand to varying degrees anyway).You might note that there are some of those Christians who are so upset with being associated with fundamentalists that they have claimed that they are not 'real' Christians but are, instead, cultists.I don't really see what the rest of your post has to do with anything at all.

---

Common sense isn't

Sorry, I did not intend to be disrespectful and I have not lied in this debate. I was not paying attention because I was typing away trying to prove god to you.Let me ask you a question here?Why would you want to believe that death is when you cease to exist.
Would'nt you want to believe that you could continue living?

The disrespect isn't anything you're saying; it's in not opening new topics to discuss new points. This thread is about galactic tidal tales; anything else you want to talk about should go in a new thread. Let me ask you a counter-question: would you rather know the truth, or knowingly lie to yourself to try to escape fear?Maybe it's just that I'm twice your age, but I spent as long as you've been alive lying to myself. I guess I got sick of it.What you or I want to believe has no bearing on what is. And I'd rather know the truth, and come to terms with it, than spend my life living a lie. But maybe lies and fairy tales are ok at your age?[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 02-02-2004]

Reality does not bend to our wishes.

Why would you want to believe that throwing your grandmother's favorite porcelain teapot against a brick wall with all your might would cause it to break? Wouldn't you rather believe that it would bounce back to you?

1rst of all you have not answered my question.2nd of all let me ask you another question?What if you die and stand before the living god and he asks you "Why didn't you accept me? What will you reply."

This is off topic for this forum. It is also out of place in one of the science based threads. Of course, you're not the only guilty party here.If you wish an answer to this you may open a thread or find an appropriate one. Personally, I might have part of an answer.[This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 02-07-2004]

OK, Let's direct the conversation back to it's original topic.God designed the universe the way he wanted since he is a god of order he organized it in such a way that scientest would begin to speculate the age of the universe using the relationship between black holes and the galaxies holding them and etc.[This message has been edited by Guidosoft, 02-07-2004]

If God designed the universe I would agree with that statement. It is the majority opinion of believers (both scientists and non scientists). It is also an opinion that only a few of the non believers have an argument with. They are happy to leave your beliefs alone.

Well I dont find it to wierd since that mass that pops out of nothing really pops up from huge concentrations of energy. because energy is constant(neither created nor destroyed) but mass cannot be reversed back to energy. Now thats intresting. I wonder what is the evos version of the origin of energy

I think interaction betwen two galaxies would be disastrous. I think if two galaxies collide nothing but debris would come out. Imagine all the stars of both systems crashing in one with the other. It would be a disaster. I suspect that since galaxies are in movement through space maybe galaxies have circular movement also. I mean rotates just as the earth does but the galaxies would leave tails of dust which would be the tidal tails

quote:

---

because energy is constant(neither created nor destroyed) but mass cannot be reversed back to energy.

---

Actually, mass can be transferred into energy. Matter/Anti-matter convert all mass directly to energy. There are other examples in other threads, I could possibly dig them up for you. I seem to remember that in particle accelerators you can have atomic collisions that result in a loss of mass and a release of energy. I'm sure someone on here can give more details, but I am pretty sure that mass-->energy is not a problem.

i know about this but it all lab experiments. You wont see this happening naturally unless really special conditions are met. For example we can melt the planet and evaporate it to such degree that it would return to energy. I guess a very high impact collision can make this happen

The gaps between stars in a galaxy are very large. It is likely that two galaxies would pass through each other without any stars crashing into each other at all. What is more significant is collisions of gas clouds, resulting in heating and compression of the clouds, and also disturbance of motions by virtue of gravitational forces, and this can cause the tails discussed in this forum. A galaxy moving through space without other interactions will not leave tails; all the stars and dust and so on in the galaxy continues to move as a unit.You need something to pull out the gases. After all, think of the Earth. It moves at high speed through the solar system, but does not leave a tail of gas from the atmosphere behind it. Before people understood how gravity works, they found the idea of Earth being in movement to be ridiculous. But common place experience is a poor guide. In conflict with normal intuitions, Earth's motion does not mean things are likely to fall off and be left behind. Same for a galaxy.For your entertainment, here are some images, linked from astronomy picture of the day, with links to the discussion. Colliding galaxies:
The result of a collision:
Interactions of this kind can only be explained by an old universe. Groups like Answers in Genesis are pushing (cautiously) the models of young earth creationist Russell Humphreys, who proposes a weird relativistic model in which the universe is billions of years old while the earth is only six to ten thousand years old. The model is complete bunkum for various reasons, but it is the only attempt around to actually deal with the obvious great age of the universe by a young earth creationist.Cheers -- Chris