Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8806 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-15-2017 8:13 PM
99 online now:
jar, JonF, kjsimons, NoNukes, Rrhain (5 members, 94 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,287 Year: 28,893/21,208 Month: 959/1,847 Week: 334/475 Day: 99/82 Hour: 2/4

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
16171819
20
21Next
Author Topic:   Physical Laws ....What if they were different before?
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2732
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


(2)
Message 286 of 309 (664927)
06-06-2012 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by foreveryoung
06-06-2012 4:29 PM


Re: ForEverYoung Suspended 1 Month
Dont let the door hit you in the ass.

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by foreveryoung, posted 06-06-2012 4:29 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by Artemis Entreri, posted 06-07-2012 8:10 AM 1.61803 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19309
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 287 of 309 (664930)
06-06-2012 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by foreveryoung
06-05-2012 11:58 PM


Re: SN1987A -- part 2: correlations with the speed of light
Hi foreveryoung,

... I maintain that these energy level distances have changed over time due to the changing nature of the zero point energy. In the beginning, the zero point energy was quite low, and as a result, the speed of light was much faster. ...

This same increase in the zero point energy also causes the distances from the various energy levels of atoms to change. ... If the distances these energy levels are from their respective nucleus' are changed, the energy released when the electrons hop from one energy level to another, will also change.

Why would all these changes be linear? The energy states aren't linear. What is your mechanism to cause this?

... Everytime the speed of light changed, the frequency and wavelength of that light changed as it moved in transit towards us here on earth. ...

The distance between peaks (wavelength) would change, but the frequency (cycles per second) would not. That would take a change in energy mid-flight.

The above shows why your arguments in the post I have responded do not support the conclusions that you want them to.

No, it shows why you don't accept the evidence compared to your hypothetical conjecture.

It doesn't show why the other effects noted would also be changed in just the right amount to fit your fantasy.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by foreveryoung, posted 06-05-2012 11:58 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19309
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 288 of 309 (664931)
06-06-2012 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by godsriddle
06-06-2012 2:16 AM


Re: ... and more questions unanswered ...
Hi godsriddle,

I am dealing with the issue you raised using a different fundamental premise than the one you assume.

One not supported by a single other individual in the whole world as far as I know.

One at odds with evidence in abundance around us.

One that denies reality.

One that believes your god/s plant false evidence in the universe.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by godsriddle, posted 06-06-2012 2:16 AM godsriddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by godsriddle, posted 06-06-2012 9:14 PM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19309
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 289 of 309 (664932)
06-06-2012 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by foreveryoung
06-06-2012 2:47 AM


Re: SN1987A -- part 2: correlations with the speed of light
Hi foreveryoung,

How do you know the value of c? You only know it because it is measured by its current value. To me, the speed of light should be infinite in a true vacuum. ...

So presumably (according to your hypothesis) at the beginning of the universe, 13.75 ± 0.11 billion years ago, the speed of light was ∞ ... and has been slowing down since.

This rules out a linear changing speed of light. It would be a function that would be asymptotic to zero time.

It also does not appear to be changing now (or at least not significantly in the last 50 years), so we have another asymptotic relationship here, where something like 99.9% of the change has already occurred.

By whatever mathematical model you have for this change, most of the change in the speed of light would have occurred by 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years when the earth was formed, and by the time you got to 0.000169 billion years ago (when SN1987A exploded) you would have virtually the same speed as today.

In addition, if there were perfect vacuum at the start but there isn't now, then as the universe is expanding it is also filling up with particles -- how does that happen?

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by foreveryoung, posted 06-06-2012 2:47 AM foreveryoung has not yet responded

  
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 1925 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 290 of 309 (664952)
06-06-2012 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by Taq
06-06-2012 11:54 AM


Re: ... and more questions unanswered ...
Last I checked, orbital speeds are given in distance/time. You are using a time dimension in your claims. You are contradicting yourself.

I believe what I see which agrees perfectly with what the Bible states, especially about the visible creation as it happened long ago in the distant heavens.

Solomon plainly stated that time is in our mind. No one has ever detect any time and you cannot even precisely "measure it" without using the notion the Bible predicts for the mockers of the last days. The early people claimed to see the planets pass close by , describing their features and moons. They described the shattering of a planet, which the Bible also mentions 4 times.,

Taq asked .. how do you measure stars orbits? ... How do you measure volume?

The history of the universe is not something you measure. It is something you observe. It is the only history that is visible as it happened. You can't actually measure the speed of stars, or their volume or their distance without complete dependenc on an assumption of atomic perpetual motion.

When you question the fundamental creed of all scientists, that the properties of matter are fixed, not continually emerging, you can start believing your eyes. The history of galaxies is not about undetectable vacuum forces or invisible matter. No one has ever detected any space time or light being stretched as it transited through a void. These things are ad hoc stories made up to protect the blind creed of all scientists.

We observe in all parts of the spectrum how billions of galaxies VISIBLY grew from tiny naked globs to huge local growth spirals. The visible properties of all matter, not the symbolical undetectable mathematical notions about immutable atoms, continue to change relationally throughout cosmic history..

Not a single galaxy is following the laws of physics, because physics was contrived using the assumption the Bible predicted for the last days. How great will be the triumph of the Bible over western science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by Taq, posted 06-06-2012 11:54 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by Taq, posted 06-07-2012 4:08 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 1925 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 291 of 309 (664964)
06-06-2012 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by ringo
06-05-2012 12:01 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
You assert that but you haven't shown that it's true. (Do you even understand what an "atomic clock" is?)

The only way you could show that your claim is true is by some kind of measurement, which you seem to be claiming is impossible. How can you tell that those clocks have different frequencies if you can't use time to measure the frequencies?

I have worked with cesium beam atomic clocks. They are really two clocks that tune each other. The first clock irradiates cesium with microwaves. The second counts the microwave pulses when the cesium "relaxes." It also sends a signal back to the first clock to adjust its frequency for maximum cesium emissions. If cesium is changing itself relationally, atomic clocks would keep on tuning themselves to the continually changing cesium atoms.

You cannot invent a precision empirical system without assuming that atoms are always clocking the same rates. With these perpetual motion signals, you then go about inventing thousands of other undetected "symbols" that are operationally defined with the allegedly linear seconds.

There is a simple way to test whether clocks really are linear.

1. You can look at the past optically and compare the rate of ancient atomic clocks with local atoms. In hundreds of billions of galaxies, ancient atoms visibly clocked tiny fractions of the frequencies of modern atoms.

2. You can send calibrated clocks out of the solar system so that that we compare their clock signals emitted yesterday with today's clocks. We sent two spin stabilized spacecraft out of the solar system 40 years ago, Pioneer 10 & 11. Spin stabilized craft do not have inertial wheels for orienting the craft so they are unaccelerated. The whole spaceship spins like a gyro about the axis of the main antenna which points back towards the Sun. Anderson from Jet Propulsion noticed that the radio frequencies from both spacecraft kept on deviating from the anticipated Doppler, calculated with the laws of physics. Although the craft were moving in opposite directions, different angles relative to the plane of the ecliptic and different velocities, the observed clock signals kept on changing relative to NASA's hydrogen maser clocks and the differences correlated with distance. The clocks changed at the Hubble ratio (their frequencies changing with distance) just like almost all galaxies. In other words, the clocks from the past are generally clocking slower frequencies than the clocks from the present moment, except for a few local galaxies that are moving towards us (signals shifted by Doppler).

So answer me. Where is the non circular evidence for linear clocks? Don't go begging the question by claiming that clocks measure linear time because the empirical system contrived with the notion of linear clocks authenticate them.

After all, if all clocks are intrinsically changing speed, as we observe, then meter lengths and all the constants of physics would shift with the relationally changing atoms.

The most powerful evidence that the laws of physics are all false is the visible history of how galaxies intrinsically grew from tiny naked globs to huge growth spirals as the atomic clocks, the space matter takes up and its inertial properties all changed together, relationally.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by ringo, posted 06-05-2012 12:01 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by ringo, posted 06-07-2012 12:42 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 298 by NoNukes, posted 06-07-2012 3:00 PM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 1925 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 292 of 309 (664968)
06-06-2012 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by RAZD
06-06-2012 6:27 PM


Re: ... and more questions unanswered ...
One at odds with evidence in abundance around us.

One that denies reality.

One that believes your god/s plant false evidence in the universe.

There are uncountable billions of ancient galaxies which we see as they existed long ago. Not a single one of them clocks the frequencies of modern atoms. So why do you reject simple, non philosophically adjusted evidence? In fact scientists have filled the universe up with black magic to protect an assumption. Oh, you are going with the crowd who believe in perpetual motion atoms. Good luck on that one.

God never deceives. He tells you up front that the creation is enslaved to change. He tells you how he CREATED the galaxies and that the the stars did not begin to form and spread out in the spreading place until later. This is precisely what we see not an undetectable big bang - but tiny naked galaxies hooting out equally spaced strings of star globs that accelerated out to form the great growth spirals we see locally.

He even warns you about the false idea with which the false teachers of the last days will obfuscate the history of the plural heavens - precisely what all modern scientists do - even creation scientists reject visible galactic history because it is not scientific.

No wonder the Biblical Creator says He will make foolish the wisdom of this age.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by RAZD, posted 06-06-2012 6:27 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by RAZD, posted 06-07-2012 7:56 AM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19309
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 293 of 309 (665018)
06-07-2012 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 292 by godsriddle
06-06-2012 9:14 PM


Re: ... and more questions unanswered ...
Hi godsriddle

He even warns you about the false idea with which the false teachers of the last days will obfuscate the history of the plural heavens - precisely what all modern scientists do - even creation scientists reject visible galactic history because it is not scientific.

And he warns about false prophets.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by godsriddle, posted 06-06-2012 9:14 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1843 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


(1)
Message 294 of 309 (665021)
06-07-2012 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by foreveryoung
06-06-2012 4:29 PM


witness man...witness
hey its this guys site, if he wants to ban everyone who has an unpopular opinion and still pretend this place is E vs. C he can. if he wants to ban (effectively what a one month suspension is) someone who posts all the time, and gives these brats someone to rally against, he can. if he wants to make this place boring, he is.

you speak the truth again foreveryoung, i guess the ultimate goal is to not have any opposition here at all so 3 people can post here.

good luck man.

Vaya con Dios.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by foreveryoung, posted 06-06-2012 4:29 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Admin, posted 06-07-2012 8:35 AM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1843 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 295 of 309 (665022)
06-07-2012 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 286 by 1.61803
06-06-2012 5:43 PM



1.61803 writes:

Dont let the door hit you in the ass.

talking shit to people when they cant respond!?! what are you like 12?

is this subbies other account?

Even Theo would never do that.

Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by 1.61803, posted 06-06-2012 5:43 PM 1.61803 has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12536
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.0


(2)
Message 296 of 309 (665024)
06-07-2012 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 294 by Artemis Entreri
06-07-2012 8:07 AM


Artemis Entreri Permanently Suspended
Hi Artemis Entreri,

There seems no way to convince or cajole you into following the Forum Guidelines, so these efforts will now cease and you're permanently suspended.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by Artemis Entreri, posted 06-07-2012 8:07 AM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13982
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 297 of 309 (665043)
06-07-2012 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by godsriddle
06-06-2012 9:03 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
godsriddle writes:

You cannot invent a precision empirical system without assuming that atoms are always clocking the same rates.


We had a precision empirical system for measuring time longbefore we knew anythng about atoms.

godsriddle writes:

There is a simple way to test whether clocks really are linear.


As I understand it, there are a number of proposed explanations for the Pioneer anomaly. Why do you reject all of them and jump to the conclusion of non-linear time? Your motivation seems to be "the Bible sez so", which is meaningless in this forum.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by godsriddle, posted 06-06-2012 9:03 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10124
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 298 of 309 (665063)
06-07-2012 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by godsriddle
06-06-2012 9:03 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
In other words, the clocks from the past are generally clocking slower frequencies than the clocks from the present moment, except for a few local galaxies that are moving towards us (signals shifted by Doppler).

You claim that the spaceship clocks are acting like ancient clocks. But the problem with this is that the space ship clocks are not ancient clocks. Those clocks are essentially contemporary with the atomic clocks still on earth and their atoms are the same age as those on earth having once been on earth. Yet according to you, those atoms are operating differently and follow the Hubble distance law.

How do you escape the obvious conclusion that the difference in atomic frequency cannot be due to "old" atoms? Whether the effect is "stretched" space, velocity or gravitational doppler effect, or some other cause, your own description rules out the possibility that answer is absolutely decrepit atoms.

For that matter, what fixes the age of an atom anyway? Some of the distant stars we see are older than our own sun, but some of them are much younger, and at least the atoms of the metals in young large stars are of more recent vintage than the elements of some old stars. So what then could explain a Hubble law variation in red shift. By the reasoning above, the answer is clearly NOT the age of the atoms.

On earth, we have examples of new and old atoms for any isotope that is relatively long lived and that is also the product of some nuclear process such as decay, fission, neutron capture, etc. If you are correct, we should be able to detect differences between, for example, newly formed Pb 206 atoms and old, nearly 4.5 billion year old Pb 206 atoms.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by godsriddle, posted 06-06-2012 9:03 PM godsriddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by godsriddle, posted 06-07-2012 5:01 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7282
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 299 of 309 (665071)
06-07-2012 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by godsriddle
06-06-2012 8:28 PM


Re: ... and more questions unanswered ...
I believe what I see which agrees perfectly with what the Bible states, especially about the visible creation as it happened long ago in the distant heavens.

You are using modern units for measuring the speed and volume of galaxies while complaining that we are using modern units when measuring SN1987a. It is a clear double standard, one that refutes your core argument.

You can't actually measure the speed of stars, or their volume or their distance without complete dependenc on an assumption of atomic perpetual motion.

You are using those assumptions when you claim that the orbital speed of stars in galaxies does not match predictions.

The history of galaxies is not about undetectable vacuum forces or invisible matter.

The evidence says otherwise. Dark matter is an observation, not an invention.

http://home.slac.stanford.edu/...sreleases/2006/20060821.htm

Dark matter is not undetectable. It is detectable, and scientists are able to map where dark matter is and its density.

No one has ever detected any space time or light being stretched as it transited through a void.

Yes, they have. Gravitational lensing is a very real observation, and yourself are measuring space time when you make claims about orbital speeds.

We observe in all parts of the spectrum how billions of galaxies VISIBLY grew from tiny naked globs to huge local growth spirals.

You have not backed this up with one iota of evidence.

The visible properties of all matter, not the symbolical undetectable mathematical notions about immutable atoms, continue to change relationally throughout cosmic history..

You have not backed this up either.

Not a single galaxy is following the laws of physics, because physics was contrived using the assumption the Bible predicted for the last days. How great will be the triumph of the Bible over western science.

How do you determine if a galaxy is following the laws of physics or not if you throw out time and space at the start?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by godsriddle, posted 06-06-2012 8:28 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

  
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 1925 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 300 of 309 (665078)
06-07-2012 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 298 by NoNukes
06-07-2012 3:00 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
You claim that the spaceship clocks are acting like ancient clocks. But the problem with this is that the space ship clocks are not ancient clocks. Those clocks are essentially contemporary with the atomic clocks still on earth and their atoms are the same age as those on earth having once been on earth. Yet according to you, those atoms are operating differently and follow the Hubble distance law.

The spaceships Pioneer 10 and 11, are examples of how atomic clocks are always changing speed. (Crystals oscillate when stimulated because their atoms are linked together in a lattice). The Pioneers did not use motorized flywheels for orienting the craft. Instead the entire spaceship spins about its axis for gyroscopic stability. Each craft, after leaving the last planet in the grand tour, no longer used thrusters so the craft were internally unaccelerated. NASA beat the received clock-derived radio frequencies against precision hydrogen maser clocks and recorded the differences. According to John D. Anderson from Jet Propulsion Lab, the spaceship clock signals either show an unexpected acceleration towards the solar system or yesterdays clocks are running at a different speed than modern clocks. If the latter is the case, then the Pioneer clocks lost 1.5 Hz over the 7.5 years of intermittent recording. Galileo and Ulysses, two other spin stabilized spacecraft, also showed similar frequency changes that correlated with distance. The recorded frequency differences from the Pioneers increase with increasing distance AT THE HUBBLE RATIO scientists use to estimate the galactic distances using the galaxy’s atomic light clock rates.

The only place where we see the past back to near the beginning is galactic history. The distant sky is wall papered with tiny naked galaxies whose light clocks clock tiny fractions of the frequencies of local clocks. Some of them are found in equally spaced chains with the central galaxy often redder than its neighbors. We also observe that many early galaxies are surrounded by equally spaced star globs that are often bluer than the core. At many ranges we observe how these star globs accelerate outwards, one behind the other as they spread out to form the great, dusty, growth spirals we see locally. Evidently the atomic clocks accelerate along with the inertial clocks.

There is not a shred of visible evidence for atomic perpetual motion upon which scientific empiricism depends. (The empiricism of a few centuries ago was not based on atoms, yet it also depended on the first principle of science, that the properties of matter are not continually emerging.)

Of course scientists, to protect their laws, which only work locally and only when circularly using the definitions contrived with the notion that the properties of matter are not emerging, have filled the universe up with pure unobservable magic. They claim the universe began when a tiny bit of vacuum exploded and created everything out of nothing. They imagine imaginary things like space time, spreading vacuums, vacuums that alter the frequency of passing light and four times as much invisible matter as the natural kind. None of this magic is needed if scientists could just believe the light from long ago showing that all matter has been changing relationally for vast eons. Carefully examine your first principle, the idea the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last days.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by NoNukes, posted 06-07-2012 3:00 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
RewPrev1
...
16171819
20
21Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017