Maybe in your sci-fantasy world. Ha, here is another thing you won't source and will just repeat ad-nauseam
Genesis creation narrative are myths borrowed from older myths-
"Borrowing themes from Mesopotamian mythology, but adapting them to the Israelite people's belief in one God,[2] the first major comprehensive draft of the Pentateuch (the series of five books which begins with Genesis and ends with Deuteronomy) was composed in the late 7th or the 6th century BCE (the Jahwist source) and was later expanded by other authors (the Priestly source) into a work very like Genesis as known today.
Mesopotamian mythology refers to the myths, religious texts, and other literature that comes from the region of ancient Mesopotamia in modern-day West Asia. In particular the societies of Sumer, Akkad, and Assyria, all of which existed shortly after 3000 BCE and were mostly gone by 400 CE.
Genesis creation narrative - Wikipedia
Various themes, plot elements, and characters in the
Epic of Gilgamesh have counterparts in the
Hebrew Bible—notably, the accounts of the
Garden of Eden, the advice from
Ecclesiastes, and the
Genesis flood narrative.
Heh,
Noahs ark is borrowed mythology
"
Andrew George submits that the
Genesis flood narrative matches that in Gilgamesh so closely that "few doubt" that it derives from a Mesopotamian account.
[41] What is particularly noticeable is the way the Genesis flood story follows the
Gilgamesh flood tale "point by point and in the same order", even when the story permits other alternatives"
Noah's Ark - Wikipedia
Mesopotamian precursors
"
For well over a century scholars have recognised that the Bible's story of Noah's ark is based on older Mesopotamian models.[11] Because all these flood stories deal with events that allegedly happened at the dawn of history, they give the impression that the myths themselves must come from very primitive origins, but the myth of the global flood that destroys all life only begins to appear in the Old Babylonian period (20th–16th centuries BCE).[12] The reasons for this emergence of the typical Mesopotamian flood myth may have been bound up with the specific circumstances of the end of the Third Dynasty of Ur around 2004 BCE and the restoration of order by the First Dynasty of Isin.[13]
There are nine known versions of the Mesopotamian flood story, each more or less adapted from an earlier version. In the oldest version, inscribed in the Sumerian city of Nippur c.1600 BCE, the hero is King Ziusudra. This is known as the Sumerian Flood Story and probably derives from an earlier version."
The most obvious borrowing is from the Epic Of Gilamesh
Epic of Gilgamesh - Wikipedia
dying-rising savior gods pre-dating Christianity. Actually Christianity was the last savior god of the bunch.
All sourced here:
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13890
"Within the confines of what was then the Roman Empire, long before and during the dawn of Christianity, there were many dying-and-rising gods. And yes, they were gods—some even half-god, half-human, being of divine or magical parentage, just like Jesus (
John 1:1-18;
Matthew 1:18-25;
Luke 1:26-35;
Philippians 2:6-8 &
Romans 8:3). And yes, they died. And were dead. And yes, they were then raised back to life; and lived on, even more powerful than before. Some returned in the same body they died in; some lived their second life in even more powerful and magical bodies than they died in, like Jesus did (
1 Corinthians 15:35-50 &
2 Corinthians 5:1-10). Some left empty tombs or gravesites; or had corpses that were lost or vanished. Just like Jesus. Some returned to life on “the third day” after dying. Just like Jesus. All went on to live and reign in heaven (not on earth). Just like Jesus. Some even visited earth after being raised, to deliver a message to disciples or followers, before ascending into the heavens. Just like Jesus."
biblical cosmology was what I said it was:
Biblical cosmology - Wikipedia
"In the Old Testament the word
shamayim represented both the sky/atmosphere, and the dwelling place of God.
[31] The
raqia or
firmament – the visible sky – was a solid inverted bowl over the Earth, coloured blue from the heavenly ocean above it.
[32] Rain, snow, wind and hail were kept in storehouses outside the raqia, which had "windows" to allow them in – the waters for
Noah's flood entered when the "windows of heaven" were opened.
[33] Heaven extended down to and was coterminous with (i.e. it touched) the farthest edges of the Earth (e.g. Deuteronomy 4:32);
[34] humans looking up from Earth saw the floor of heaven, which they saw also as God's throne, as made of clear blue
lapis-lazuli (Exodus 24:9–10), and (Ezekiel 1:26).
[35] Below that was a layer of water, the source of rain, which was separated from us by an impenetrable barrier, the firmament (Genesis 1:6–8). The rain may also be stored in heavenly cisterns (Job: 38:37) or storehouses (Deut 28:12) alongside the storehouses for wind, hail and snow.
[36"
Therefore you are authorized to speak of it after it arrives. No more.
troll science until sourced.
Your theories are only valid in the fishbowl, get used to it. We do not need to know the unknown. But one assumes that anything at all including light that exists in an area where time exists a certain way would need to operate accordingly there.
troll
Sure. Explain in your own words and in simple terms what those equations are based on and represent. You see, math uses little symbols and letters like "C" that represent something.
I'll ask agin, what evidence do you have that in space classical electrodynamics is different. Your attempt to not answer the question was an obvious dodge. Please try to to make just one point tha's valid? I feel like I'm beating up a child.
Good luck with that! Since you do not know what the unknown space and time out there is like. You seem to have a compulsion to invent theories based on not knowing!
Ok that's one. You just said you DON'T KNOW. There you go. You do not know. All your pretending that the laws are definitely different is pure troll juice.
Now how can we know? Well we can make observations. So far they support physics being the same through the entire universe. Is there anything special about our solar system ......no. Is it ordinary...yes.
Do we see events that require the same laws...yes.
Except they are a steaming pile of foolish nonsense! How about the black hole predicted for sn1987a? Is that still M.I.A.? Ha.
Uh, yes they found a neutron star.
You think space is a 'law of physics'? You thought time was 'a law of physics'?? Ha.
It's called "spacetime" they are connected and follow the laws of physics.
Were you not asked for two examples?
I gave examples of GR in deep space? Black holes, neutron stars. galaxy formation, galaxy clusters, pulsars, superclusters....You ask this EVERY SINGLE POST? Seriously, what is wrong with you?
Nope. I said nothing from origin science. QM is like electricity and other things that actually exist and work here. NOTHING to do with origin sciences!
Oh, I get it, you just don't know stuff. All origin models involve QM. The microwave background has irregularities because of QM. All alternate models involve QM in some way.
"One model, using
loop quantum gravity, aims to explain the beginnings of the Universe through a series of
Big Bounces, in which quantum fluctuations cause the Universe to expand. This procreation also predicts a
cyclic model of universes, with a new universe being created after an old one is destroyed, each with different
physical constants.
[3] Another procreation based on
M-theory and observations of the
cosmic microwave background (CMB), states that the Universe is but one of many in a
multiverse, and has budded off from another universe as a result of
quantum fluctuations, as opposed to our Universe being all that exists."
Lol, did you think creation science involves wizards and ancient myths?
False, as explained that all depends on knowing distances.
Suns of various sizes emit distinct frequencies, wavelengths, color spectrums and depending on brightness we can tell the difference. You keep asking for science behind things but then when I GIVE THE SCIENCE you switch to "oh it doesn't matter because fishbulb..."
Which is one big trollathon. Seriously, do better.
I'm no longer responding to fantasy science unless it's sourced. Statements without points with just one word like "false" also just mean - "I don't like what you are saying but I have no actual argument".