1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Speed of Light and the Age of the Universe

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Wandering Monk, Jul 4, 2019.

  1. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    3,813
    Ratings:
    +490
    Religion:
    None
    Oh, you mean like the universe sprang into being without
    time, space, energy, physical laws or even a reason?
     
  2. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    32,713
    Ratings:
    +19,193
    Religion:
    Atheist
    That really has nothing to do with time dilation. And there may have been some similarities between Titan and the Earth, but it would have been huge differences. For one thing there is no water in the "Seas of Titan".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    3,813
    Ratings:
    +490
    Religion:
    None
    I am not into 'time dilation'
    Don't think anyone else should be either as we simply have no idea what time is.
    Early earth was dark, cold and oceanic. At one stage it was nearly frozen solid too.
    But I suspect the Genesis account begins right here, at a point where a human can
    comprehend (you can't comprehend M-theory hyper-dimensional geometries that
    might have formed the big bang!) and it begins with the here-and-now, not from the
    viewpoint of someone in space (what's that????)
    So there was no light and no solid earth... but the universe was already out there.
    That's the bible's take on it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. wellwisher

    wellwisher Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    786
    Ratings:
    +278
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Einstein theory of relativity pointed out that there is no preferred reference. The mistake that is often made in this type of discussion is everyone is assuming the earth reference, which sees the universe as being15 billions years old, is the absolute reference. According to Einstein this is a relative reference.

    The way I approached this problem, years ago, was to reverse engineer the problem. I assumed, for the sake of argument, that the bible is true, and God created the universe in six days. The question now becomes, would have to be God's relative reference, so he sees it the way he says it was in the Genesis; God's relative reference?

    That much compression of time and space; 6 days, relative to earth reference; 15 billion years, would require a reference, essentially at the speed of light. This reference would then need to be slowing,very slightly, from essentially the speed of light, to a speed that still is very close to the speed of light. This is inferred from the first day representing the longest time duration, and the last day the shortest time duration, in terms of earth reference.

    So what could cause such a reference and what would look like? One possibility would be an equilibrium between energy, matter and anti-matter, where matter and anti matter is condensing from energy but immediately reversing.

    The result is not exactly matter-anti-matter or energy, but an average paradoxical state that is at the speed of light, but also slightly below the speed of light, at the same time. The matter and antimatter and energy is appearing-disappear, like a sine wave but of slowing frequency.

    This model, is occurring at the smallest states of matter and energy, instead of the bulk macro state, yet is inducing the bulk macro states; alpha generating the omega. This is similar to particle physics assumptions. Earth reference uses the macro omega reference.
     
    #64 wellwisher, Jul 6, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2019
  5. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    3,813
    Ratings:
    +490
    Religion:
    None
    Occam's Razor to the rescue. Why do you believe in 'six days' when the bible uses numbers
    in highly symbolic and often contradictory ways to make spiritual messages?
    ie
    How many are saved in the resurrection? A few? 1440,000? ten thousand times ten thousand?
    All these are employed.
    How many churches were there in Revelation? Seven? What about the other churches mentioned
    in the New Testament? Seven was a symbol of completeness.
    How many people were there in Adam's day when he had Cain and Abel? Four? Who were the
    tribes that Cain fled to?
     
  6. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    22,906
    Ratings:
    +17,322
    Religion:
    None
    Please provide your evidence of fact

    Can you actually provide a breakdown of the logical steps you took to reach your decision

    Reason/opinion has nothing to do with it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    22,906
    Ratings:
    +17,322
    Religion:
    None
    The sun and earth formed at roughly the same time, sun first closely followed by planet formation so no, earth was not dark. And doubtful it was oceanic, early earth had little atmosphere so much of earths water (if there was any) would have boiled off in the vacuum of space.

    Titans seas are methane.
    Along with nitrogen, carbon gasses, hydrogen sulphide and amonia, earths atmosphere contained quantities of methane which aided the development of organic life.

    Science is in no way convinced life came from fresh water. It is a hypothesis with some support, as is life originating by fumaroles, life developing in shallow seas and life being delivered along with water by asteroids.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  8. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium Ahaṁ Brahmāsmi
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    9,025
    Ratings:
    +11,779
    Religion:
    Advaita Vedanta
    Yeah...that's what I thought.

    Nice attempt at deflection, though.
     
  9. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    3,813
    Ratings:
    +490
    Religion:
    None
    I think it's
    1 - sun first
    2 - then planets and their moons
    Went to a few lectures of Dr. Andrew Prentice - he worked with NASA to determine
    the size, number and characteristics of the planet's moons before the Voyager probes
    reached them - isn't that amazing?

    I think the sun and planets all formed together.

    Anyhow, the earth was a cloud planet, like Venus. And it was an ocean planet, a bit
    like Titan but on a larger scale, and with water. Probably the bulk of extra-terrestial
    earth planets are water worlds it is thought.
    So yes, cold, dark and wet.
    And until 20 years ago the earth was thought to be bone dry. And two years ago it
    was still through life emerged in the saline oceans.
     
  10. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    15,487
    Ratings:
    +16,896
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Well, that's part of the point. Every location in the universe 'looks the same' as any other location. There is no edge to the expansion.

    Instead, the expansion is *everywhere*. It isn't an explosion, but instead an expansion of space itself.

    And this follows naturally from the laws of gravity given by general relativity. If you want details, I can give them, but you have to start thinking in terms of a four dimensional spacetime, not just a three dimensional space with time added. The geometry of spacetime is more integrated than that image conveys.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    15,487
    Ratings:
    +16,896
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Every calculation of a probability relies on some assumptions. In most of the calculations of the type you mention, it is assumed that events are uncorrelated whech we *know* full well are, in fact, correlated.

    This is manifested by multiplying a lot of numbers together to get a small probability without considering how one event affects later events. A *correct* calculation is much, much more subtle than a simple multiplication.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    15,487
    Ratings:
    +16,896
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    No, actually, it does not. General relativity *predicts* singularities of various forms.

    It also predicts that the universe is expanding from a condition that was hotter and denser in the past. It is *this* part that is the standard Big Bang scenario. The singularities of GR are recognized as being due to an incomplete theory. And we know that we have to integrate quantum mechanics into this, but have no experimental evidence to guide us on how to do this. Thnat means we have several speculative ideas about quantum gravity but no way to test between them currently. It also means that we simply don't know what, if anything, happens prior to about a nanosecond into the current expansion.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    15,487
    Ratings:
    +16,896
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    There is no 'leading edge'. Every point looks the same: everything is expanding away from every location.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. shmogie

    shmogie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,033
    Ratings:
    +1,874
    Religion:
    Christian
    Not deflection, a point. Se if you get it.
     
  15. shmogie

    shmogie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,033
    Ratings:
    +1,874
    Religion:
    Christian
    That is my whole point, thank you.
     
  16. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium Ahaṁ Brahmāsmi
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    9,025
    Ratings:
    +11,779
    Religion:
    Advaita Vedanta
    I can assure you that I get it, as will most who read this thread. It's quite simple, really. If it was not a deflection, you would have posted evidence or told me you had none.

    Therefore, since you chose to deflect rather than to address my query, we can conclude that you have no evidence, objective, empirical, or experiential, or otherwise, of God as a creation agent.

    Thanks for playing.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. Bob the Unbeliever

    Bob the Unbeliever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    7,139
    Ratings:
    +4,491
    Religion:
    unbeliever
    Nonsense! As a Last Tuesdaist, I find your pushing of Last Thursdaism to be Heretical.

    Forsooth!
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  18. Bob the Unbeliever

    Bob the Unbeliever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    7,139
    Ratings:
    +4,491
    Religion:
    unbeliever
    This thread was an Interesting Read-- it's quite apparent, that one of the major posters? Is both a creationist, and someone I have on "ignore" (and thus, never see anything they post, not even quoted by others).

    Makes for some amusing posts, though.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    22,906
    Ratings:
    +17,322
    Religion:
    None
    Which?

    It seems that Venus has only become a cloud planet fairly recently in cosmological terms, NASA hypothesises that if was habitable up to 2 billion years ago.

    Recent discoveries when in sampling atmosphere in 3 billion year old magma bubbles suggest earths atmosphere was only 1/2 as dense as it is now

    Here is a link to facts on Kepler descovered habitable exoplanets.
    Kepler-22b: Facts About Exoplanet in Habitable Zone

    Sun shining - dark? I think not
    Given the discoveries on atmospheric density i also think not wet. As i understand it, early earth was too hot to hold water, later the atmosphere too thin to keep hold of much.

    It is still though by many that life developed in the sea.
    Here is a livescience link that confirms there are many different theories

    How Did Life Arise on Earth?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  20. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    32,713
    Ratings:
    +19,193
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Where do you get that idea from? You are probably misinterpreting sources or using sources guilty of that. The surface of the very early Earth was almost certainly dry.
     
    • Like Like x 2
Loading...