Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-27-2017 12:49 AM
422 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, PaulK, Theodoric (4 members, 418 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 801,995 Year: 6,601/21,208 Month: 2,362/2,634 Week: 25/525 Day: 0/25 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
111213
14
1516Next
Author Topic:   If our sun is second or third generation, does this not conflict with Genesis ?
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1059
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 3.5


(2)
Message 196 of 231 (720585)
02-25-2014 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 185 by Eliyahu
02-25-2014 12:08 AM


Re: Mythology...
After talking to my friend a bit in dutch, I explained to her in Hebrew that I just told my friend that the very solid table from which we were eating, that if we would leave the room, close the door, and then nobody would observe the table, that that table then would go out of existence.

About this her only comment was: "That is correct."


It is not correct, there is no theory in physics were objects cease to exist upon observation by concious entities.

As I mentioned above quantum mechanics does say that objects become less classical when removed from interactions, but:

1. "Interactions" are not the same thing as "observations by concious entities".
2. "Less classical" is not same as "does not exist".

Even ignoring quantum mechanics and taking what you've said at face value, if the table stopped existing, why would it exist again when you walked back in? That would imply all the physical information of the table was stored somewhere waiting to enacted upon your re-entry. Where is this information stored? Who/What stores it? How is it tied to concious thought? Secondly the effects seem to be identical to if the table still existed the whole time, so it is completed untestable.

Edited by Son Goku, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Eliyahu, posted 02-25-2014 12:08 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Percy, posted 02-25-2014 10:05 AM Son Goku has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 15491
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 197 of 231 (720587)
02-25-2014 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by Eliyahu
02-25-2014 12:05 AM


Re: Time is relative
Eliyahu writes:

Well, to tell you the truth, I'm not sure. It could be one, or the other. Or both of 'm. Or none of 'm.

Or both of 'm and something more. Or one of 'm and something more. Or the other one of 'm, and something more. Or none of 'm and something more. Or ... Well, the possibliities are endless. All I can say about it is: "Who am I to judge?"

Let me repeat the question. After someone makes a summary statement, what perverse part of your nature makes you request it all be presented to you again?

Cosmic standard time? You mean like the scientific version of cosmic standard time? The one where the Big Bang happened at time 0 and the Earth formed at time 9.14 billion years?

That would be earth time.

That would be everyone's time. We know better than to think that everything we see through our telescopes is all happening at the same time. Simultaneity isn't governed by when the light arrives at your eyes. Even if we were looking at the Big Bang and Earth from somewhere else in the universe we'd still just take distance, relative speed and acceleration into account, just as we already do from here. We'd still get the same answer for the time of Earth's formation after the Big Bang.

These adjustments to relative speed and distance and expansion of the universe are how we know, for example, when distant supernova actually happened. We know the supernova observed by Kepler in 1604 actually occurred about 20,000 years before because it is about 20,000 light years away. For very distant objects we have to take red-shift, distance and expansion of the universe into account to know how far back in time we're peering. That light from both the 1604 supernova and from galaxies 12 billion light years away arrive at our telescopes at the same time does not fool us into thinking we're watching simultaneous events.

Light falling into the gravity well of a black hole will experience the same slowing as everything else. An observer will not see "an enormously high frequency."

The enormous gravity will slow down time, not everything else.

Your unfamiliarity with relativity is again very evident. A gravity well will slow time *and* motion, including the motion of light. It's obvious when you think about it. Let's say you're observing a clock in a strong gravity well. You can tell that time is flowing more slowly because the hands of the clock are moving more slowly. Motion is how we measure time, so of course the slowing of time must also mean the slowing of motion. Including light's motion.

This is why an observer at the bottom of a strong gravity well will not observe the outside universe to be in frenetic motion, because the arrival of light from the outside is also slowed.

So, keeping in mind that light falling into a gravity well is slowed along with everything else, tell us again how your observations from the bottom of a gravity well correspond with Genesis.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Eliyahu, posted 02-25-2014 12:05 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15491
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.3


(2)
Message 198 of 231 (720590)
02-25-2014 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by Son Goku
02-25-2014 9:26 AM


Re: Mythology...
You can make it even more obvious. The food is hot on the table and a candle is burning when there's a sudden emergency, everyone leaves and doesn't return for an hour during which the table and the food and the candle are completely unobserved. When everyone returns the food is cold and the candle has burned down a couple inches.

So if the table and food and the candle go out of existence while unobserved, what causes them to return to existence in such a way as to perfectly match the passage of an hour of time? In other words, it isn't enough just to store the state of the table somewhere while it is non-existent. You must also store the effects of the passage of time.

The example actually needs a little improvement because the unobserved room is still connected to the rest of the universe. Some of the heat from the food and the candle will escape the room where they can be observed, and of course there are innumerable other connections with everything else. Isolation from all observation is required for this to be the example Eliyahu intended it to be, but even if that were the case there's still all the things you mentioned.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Add a little more detail at the end.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Son Goku, posted 02-25-2014 9:26 AM Son Goku has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15491
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.3


(2)
Message 199 of 231 (720592)
02-25-2014 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 185 by Eliyahu
02-25-2014 12:08 AM


Re: Mythology...
Eliyahu writes:

I'll explain this a bit. A while ago I was having the shabbat dinner in the house of a dutch friend here in the Judean desert. He is married to a russian woman who happens to have a university degree in physics, she is an engineer in physics. After talking to my friend a bit in dutch, I explained to her in Hebrew that I just told my friend that the very solid table from which we were eating, that if we would leave the room, close the door, and then nobody would observe the table, that that table then would go out of existence.

About this her only comment was: "That is correct."

That's what she said, but what she was thinking was, "If I tell him he's right, maybe he'll shut up."

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Eliyahu, posted 02-25-2014 12:08 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by NoNukes, posted 02-25-2014 12:28 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15491
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 200 of 231 (720593)
02-25-2014 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 188 by Eliyahu
02-25-2014 12:28 AM


Re: Mythology...
Eliyahu writes:

Like I said, science discovered this almost a 100 years ago. How come you don't have a clue?

Could it be that we are being lied to by the scientists...

Science discovered the universe doesn't exist a hundred years ago, and now they're lying to us about it, but you have somehow uncovered their dark secret?

Are you testing the limits of how ridiculous you can be?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Eliyahu, posted 02-25-2014 12:28 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9324
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 201 of 231 (720610)
02-25-2014 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 182 by Eliyahu
02-24-2014 11:21 PM


Re: Mythology...
And you don't even know the the universe doesn't exist?? I mean; it is not like that is a recent discovery or something, science discovered it almost a hundred years ago, and you don't know about it?

If only Galileo had met you.


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Eliyahu, posted 02-24-2014 11:21 PM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15491
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 202 of 231 (720613)
02-25-2014 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 181 by NoNukes
02-24-2014 9:55 PM


Re: Mythology...
Eliyahu made clear that he doesn't believe "in the beginning" means a single point in time. I'll go along with whatever interpretation he likes, but it does seem hard to avoid the interpretation that creation of heaven and earth was the opening act of the first day.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by NoNukes, posted 02-24-2014 9:55 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9324
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 203 of 231 (720620)
02-25-2014 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by Percy
02-25-2014 10:06 AM


Re: Mythology...
That's what she said, but what she was thinking was, "If I tell him he's right, maybe he'll shut up."

ROFL!

Sometimes, when the straight man is as good as Eliyahu, the comic followup is almost superfluous. When I read Eliyahu's post, I could almost see the woman's eyes roll up in her head. But then Eli went to the bathroom and the woman and her husband vanished into non-reality. And then I

ABE:

Seriously, if Eliyahu's point relies on the existence not existing, I don't see the value in probing his thinking too deeply.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Percy, posted 02-25-2014 10:06 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 158 days)
Posts: 286
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 204 of 231 (721145)
03-04-2014 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
02-21-2014 1:58 PM


Re: I study Genesis and the rest of the Torah non-stop.
you want to imply because other people had myths about floods that yours must be true

Bs'd

What I say is, that the fact that every old culture has a flood myth, that that is the proof A worldwide flood really happened.

In fact, if it was global and all humans are descended from the Noahic family line then we should see these identical flood myths in not just a lot of cultures, but in all cultures because they all stem from the same initial breeding population.

And that's exactly what we see.

However, the biggest death nail is that one culture (which we know a great deal about) does not have nearly a similar flood myth.......The Egyptians. Their flood myth does not even end with the deaths of all of the Egyptian people, but rather the God responsible for causing it, Hathor, floods the world with the blood of those she kills. Ra decides the punishment, while not total, has been enough and orders slaves (Living humans after the flood happens) to make a lake of beer for Hathor to drink while she is drinking the blood. She drinks it, gets drunk and gets bored of slaughtering everyone...

And then, the few survivors, start the human race again.

Because these myths have been transmitted orally you cannot expect them to be all exactly the same after more than 4000 years,

But still, every ancient culture has its flood myth. Also the Egyptians.



"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 02-21-2014 1:58 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by NoNukes, posted 03-04-2014 9:52 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 206 by Taq, posted 03-04-2014 10:57 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9324
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 205 of 231 (721153)
03-04-2014 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Eliyahu
03-04-2014 7:28 AM


Re: I study Genesis and the rest of the Torah non-stop.
What I say is, that the fact that every old culture has a flood myth, that that is the proof A worldwide flood really happened.

1. That would not be proof.
2. You cannot establish that every old culture has a flood myth anyway.


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Eliyahu, posted 03-04-2014 7:28 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 6014
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 206 of 231 (721158)
03-04-2014 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Eliyahu
03-04-2014 7:28 AM


Re: I study Genesis and the rest of the Torah non-stop.
What I say is, that the fact that every old culture has a flood myth, that that is the proof A worldwide flood really happened.

It is proof that each of these cultures experienced a flood, which really isn't that shocking. That does not require a simultaneous, world wide flood. On top of that, not every culture has a flood myth, and many of the flood myths contradict each other.

And that's exactly what we see.

Here is a chinese flood myth:

"According to the main mythological tradition, Gun's plan of flood control was through the use of a miraculously continuously self-expanding soil, Xirang.[1] So, Gun choose to obtain the Xirang by stealing it from the Supreme Divinity, which he did; however, the Supreme Divinity became quite angered at this importunity.[1] Year in and year out, many times, and to great extents, Gun applied the magical Xirang earth, attempting to block and barricade the flood waters with dams, dikes, and embankments which he built facilitated by utilizing the special powers of the magic soil, yet Gun was never able to abate the problems of the Great Flood. Whether Gun's failure to abate the flood was due to divine wrath against him or to defects in his approach to hydrological engineering remains an unanswered questionalthough one pointed out over two thousand years ago by Qu Yuan, in his "Heavenly Questions".[11]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_(China)

That is nothing like the Noachian flood myth. It also shows that the flood was localized. Gun did not put his family in a boat with animals, and wait out the flood.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Eliyahu, posted 03-04-2014 7:28 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
Blue
Inactive Member


Message 207 of 231 (726043)
05-05-2014 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CogitoErgoSum
05-10-2011 9:34 AM


Creation of light
CogitoErgoSum writes:

First posting, having read these forums from afar, so bear with me. Not my specialisation really, I teach Biology, but having to teach life cycles of stars I did a little research. If our sun is second, or third generation ; as they have found out by looking at the composition, does this not negate the whole "let there be light" narrative. The fact that our sun actually formed from a supernova of a previous sun means we have already had light. I await being torn apart with trepidation !

Genesis 1:1 is creation of the universe, which includes all matter/energy, space and time. This can be described in gravitation theories like bb, or any theories revolving creation of all material, space and time.

Genesis 1:2 The spirit of God is in the earth and darkness covers the earth, after it was created. We don't know much about the creation of the earth except that it was created with the universe. I would presume the darkness was carbon dioxide, methane, etc filling the atmosphere as is shown in Science.

Genesis 1:3 is when light penetrated the atmosphere for the first time here on earth. Later verses that discuss creation of the stars, lights, etc are mere past tense grammatically.


Sincerely

Blue


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CogitoErgoSum, posted 05-10-2011 9:34 AM CogitoErgoSum has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by PaulK, posted 05-06-2014 1:15 AM Blue has responded
 Message 209 by NoNukes, posted 05-06-2014 9:38 AM Blue has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12442
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 208 of 231 (726050)
05-06-2014 1:15 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by Blue
05-05-2014 11:28 PM


Re: Creation of light
quote:

Genesis 1:1 is creation of the universe, which includes all matter/energy, space and time. This can be described in gravitation theories like bb, or any theories revolving creation of all material, space and time.

That's an assumption, rather it seems to be summing up the following verses - which certainly do not describe the creation of the universe as we know it.

quote:

Genesis 1:2 The spirit of God is in the earth and darkness covers the earth, after it was created. We don't know much about the creation of the earth except that it was created with the universe. I would presume the darkness was carbon dioxide, methane, etc filling the atmosphere as is shown in Science.

In fact we know that the Earth came into existence about 4.5 billion years ago, a LONG time after the Big Bang (about 13.5 billion years ago). In fact this is closely related to the point of the post that you are supposedly replying to.

I have no idea why you think that "darkness" would mean the atmosphere either. And you don't mention the references to the ocean (which seems to be the Primordial Ocean, common to Middle Eastern mythologies).

quote:

Genesis 1:3 is when light penetrated the atmosphere for the first time here on earth. Later verses that discuss creation of the stars, lights, etc are mere past tense grammatically.

Where does it mention light penetrating the atmosphere ? Where is the suggestion that light existed prior to this point ? And why do you decide that the "darkness" in this verse is completely different from that in the preceding verse ?

In fact this verse seems to refer to the establishment of the day-night cycle, as verse 5 clearly states that the separated light is "day" and the darkness "night".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by Blue, posted 05-05-2014 11:28 PM Blue has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by Blue, posted 05-06-2014 3:07 PM PaulK has responded
 Message 212 by Blue, posted 05-06-2014 3:41 PM PaulK has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9324
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 209 of 231 (726061)
05-06-2014 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by Blue
05-05-2014 11:28 PM


Re: Creation of light
I would presume the darkness was carbon dioxide, methane, etc filling the atmosphere as is shown in Science.

Aren't both of those gasses invisible?

. Later verses that discuss creation of the stars, lights, etc are mere past tense grammatically.

So day four does not come after day two?

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by Blue, posted 05-05-2014 11:28 PM Blue has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Blue, posted 05-06-2014 3:50 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Blue
Inactive Member


Message 210 of 231 (726109)
05-06-2014 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by PaulK
05-06-2014 1:15 AM


Re: Creation of light
Blue writes:

Genesis 1:1 is creation of the universe, which includes all matter/energy, space and time. This can be described in gravitation theories like bb, or any theories revolving creation of all material, space and time.

Paulk writes:

That's an assumption, rather it seems to be summing up the following verses - which certainly do not describe the creation of the universe as we know it.

It is not an assumption that Genesis 1:1 is describing creation of the universe and earth which includes all matter energy, space and time. If the verse is true, then that is where all things root. It makes a prediction that we will not find a origin of the universe that is contradictory. Science is still yet to prove it wrong. Science can't prove God didn't create the universe. I also find it interesting that this is the only creation story in history that mentions creation of space and time, all others explain creation within space and time.


Sincerely

Blue


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by PaulK, posted 05-06-2014 1:15 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by PaulK, posted 05-06-2014 3:22 PM Blue has responded
 Message 217 by Coragyps, posted 05-06-2014 5:22 PM Blue has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
111213
14
1516Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017