Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-13-2017 12:05 AM
305 online now:
DrJones*, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Phat (AdminPhat) (3 members, 302 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,060 Year: 28,666/21,208 Month: 732/1,847 Week: 107/475 Day: 0/17 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
Author Topic:   The Sudden Dawn of the Cosmos and the Constancy of Physical Laws
Taq
Member
Posts: 7272
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 31 of 38 (822076)
10-18-2017 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by RAZD
10-17-2017 9:14 PM


Re: Another YAWN topic
RAZD writes:

We also have evidence for constants, such as Uranium Halos and the Okla Natural Reactors producing the same by-products as man-made reactors, and in the observed radioactive decay of isotopes in the light from supernova's like 1987a.

Precisely. We say that these things are constant because everywhere and everywhen we look in the universe it appears to be using those constants. Its not as if we write down laws and the universe snaps into shape to fit those laws.

If the constants were different then we would see things like type Ia supernovae brightening and fading at different rates, stars putting out strange spectra, stars exploding for no apparent reason, stars not exploding when they should, and variances in the speed of light as we speed through space and time. We don't see any of that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by RAZD, posted 10-17-2017 9:14 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by jar, posted 10-18-2017 7:16 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29758
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 32 of 38 (822081)
10-18-2017 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Taq
10-18-2017 5:37 PM


Re: Another YAWN topic
Plus we have the evidence of Science being self correcting and searching for places where it is wrong while the Biblical Christianity is factually wrong and has a history of not ever correcting factual errors and even denying the obvious factual errors exist.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Taq, posted 10-18-2017 5:37 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2730
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


(2)
Message 33 of 38 (822106)
10-19-2017 11:33 AM



"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

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 34 of 38 (822127)
10-19-2017 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Guido Arbia
10-15-2017 11:44 PM


Something caught my attenion Guido Arbia.
quote:

But if there is a Creator who established those Laws, then it makes sense that they should be constant. And it is written of Jesus Christ in the Book of Hebrews in the Bible that He is "upholding all things by the word of his power".

Sounds like you feel the author of the book of Hebrews is saying Jesus was God?

You said this from a later post.

quote:

So far the God of the Bible has a perfect track record of keeping His promises and fulfilling prophecy. Though God does seem to change His mind in response to the actions of men, He changes it according to His word, which tells us the way that He will deal with us. Hebrews says, "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and forever."

Here are the fist 2 chapters of Hebrews.

quote:

Hebrews 1

New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

God Has Spoken by His Son

1 Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds. 3 He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.

The Son Is Superior to Angels

5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,

“You are my Son;
today I have begotten you”?

Or again,

“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son”?

6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says,

“Let all God’s angels worship him.”

7 Of the angels he says,

“He makes his angels winds,
and his servants flames of fire.”

8 But of the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, is[c] forever and ever,
and the righteous scepter is the scepter of your[d] kingdom.

9
You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has anointed you
with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

10
And,

“In the beginning, Lord, you founded the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands;

11
they will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like clothing;

12
like a cloak you will roll them up,
and like clothing[e] they will be changed.
But you are the same,
and your years will never end.”

13 But to which of the angels has he ever said,

“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”?

14 Are not all angels[f] spirits in the divine service, sent to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?

Chapter 2

Therefore we must pay greater attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it. 2 For if the message declared through angels was valid, and every transgression or disobedience received a just penalty, 3 how can we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? It was declared at first through the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, 4 while God added his testimony by signs and wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, distributed according to his will.

Exaltation through Abasement

5 Now God did not subject the coming world, about which we are speaking, to angels.

6 But someone has testified somewhere,

“What are human beings that you are mindful of them,
or mortals, that you care for them?[c]

7
You have made them for a little while lower[d] than the angels;
you have crowned them with glory and honor,[e]

8
subjecting all things under their feet.”

Now in subjecting all things to them, God[f] left nothing outside their control. As it is, we do not yet see everything in subjection to them, 9 but we do see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower[g] than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God[h] he might taste death for everyone.

10 It was fitting that God, for whom and through whom all things exist, in bringing many children to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11 For the one who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one Father.[j] For this reason Jesus[k] is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters,[l] 12 saying,

“I will proclaim your name to my brothers and sisters,[m]
in the midst of the congregation I will praise you.”

13 And again,

“I will put my trust in him.”

And again,

“Here am I and the children whom God has given me.”

14 Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death. 16 For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had to become like his brothers and sisters[n] in every respect, so that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested.


It does seem to be making a point that Jesus is God and not an angel.

The Synoptic Gospels say Jesus did not know the time when the prophecies would be fulfilled (only God knows).

Matthew 24:34-39

quote:

34 Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.

The Necessity for Watchfulness

36 “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son,[h] but only the Father. 37 For as the days of Noah were, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark, 39 and they knew nothing until the flood came and swept them all away, so too will be the coming of the Son of Man.


The eternal son will not know when the father will send him?

Hebrews 13:8 was mentioned by you.

quote:

8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

He did not know the time when prophecies would happen I suppose.

Jesus being ordered by the father to come to earth again isn't so absurd.

The idea of him actually being a split personality/entity of God (which the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke never claimed but Hebrews did) himself and NOT knowing what God will do seems very odd.

Do you think Martin Luther was correct in challenging the Roman Catholic council of Carthage (397 AD) which made Hebrews part of the Bible?

(The Council of Trent, in 1546, affirmed the inspiration of the Bible of Jerome with its 27 New Testament books that Catholics and Protestants, in turn, now consider sacred)

I feel like you might be looking at works of man and attributing them to God.

The Bible is:

The Word ABOUT God.

Not:

The Word OF God.

(edit

https://en.wikipedia.org/...pment_of_the_New_Testament_canon
"The Catholic Church made dogmatic definition upon its Biblical canon in 382 at the Council of Rome [2] as well as at the Council of Trent of 1546, reaffirming the Canons of Florence of 1442 and North African Councils (Hippo and Carthage) of 393–419."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome

https://www.google.com/search?q=hebrews+martin+luther&oq=... )

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Guido Arbia, posted 10-15-2017 11:44 PM Guido Arbia has not yet responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 35 of 38 (822131)
10-19-2017 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Guido Arbia
10-15-2017 11:44 PM


Paul Steinhardt on Dark Energy.
quote:

For if the Laws of Physics were not always what they are now, there is no reason for us to be confident that they will always be. And therefore, there is no reason to believe that the universe will not suddenly vanish or change into an elephant

Paul Steinhardt said that most physicists would bet against Dark Energy tearing the universe apart (though it seems set on doing just that).

He said that the Dark Energy could decay into something else.

That would make it a field and not a force (or constant) since a force that comes through a particle is then a "field".

Alan Guth said that there was a inflaton particle associated with the early rapid expansion and seemed to be saying that the early inflation was perhaps the same Dark Energy force (or "field") but acting on a particle.

The late 1990s discovery of Dark Energy caused the Cosmos book (written by Carl Sagan in 1988 who died in 1996) to have an asterisk note (in a past humus edition) which said that Dark Energy falsifies the idea of a universe that might collapse in on itself.

The DVD series by Sagan didn't know of Dark Energy but he presented the possibility of a universe that keeps on expanding against the other (defunct?) possibility of a universe that stops expanding and then is pulled back to a singularity by the force of gravity.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Guido Arbia, posted 10-15-2017 11:44 PM Guido Arbia has not yet responded

    
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1082
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 7.0


(4)
Message 36 of 38 (822132)
10-19-2017 6:43 PM


Actual Big Bang Theory
quote:
According to the Big Bang Theory, the universe, having never before existed, suddenly appeared at the time of the Big Bang, when something exploded

Expanding on what jar said, the Big Bang Theory states that 13.7 billion years ago the universe was very hot and the size of a pea and mostly composed of particles. It then explains how we got the universe we have today from that pea-sized soup.

What proceeded that is unknown (maybe it was apple sized for five million years prior, then stadium sized for a trillion years, etc.) and the Big Bang Theory makes no statements on the origin of the universe.

quote:
conforming to the Laws of Physics

"Laws of Physics" is a very pre-1800s way of viewing physics. Modern physics postulates that the world is composed of various "objects" (e.g. fields, spacetime) and derives the consequences of these postulates, which match current experiments. Laws tended to be absolute statements about observed behaviour.

Modern Quantum Field Theory for instance couldn't be broken down into "Laws", there'd be infinitely many if you tried.

In this sense Modern Physics is more like biology, i.e. entities and their behaviour.


Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Pressie, posted 10-20-2017 4:45 AM Son Goku has responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1851
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 37 of 38 (822144)
10-20-2017 4:45 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Son Goku
10-19-2017 6:43 PM


Re: Actual Big Bang Theory
Yes, as a layman on physics that's my take on it, too. While the Laws change; the behaviour (workings) of the Universe hasn't at all. We just learn more about how the Universe works. That's why any sane modern scientist would be reluctant to call a discovery a Law.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Son Goku, posted 10-19-2017 6:43 PM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Son Goku, posted 10-20-2017 5:24 AM Pressie has not yet responded

    
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1082
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 7.0


(4)
Message 38 of 38 (822145)
10-20-2017 5:24 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Pressie
10-20-2017 4:45 AM


Re: Actual Big Bang Theory
I was a bit unclear in the previous post.

I meant that we don't use "Laws" as it's an outmoded way of viewing physics, i.e. absolute dictums on observed quantities, e.g. "Momentum is conserved".

In modern physics we simply describe conjectured basic objects and have complex mathematical models describe how they behave. "Laws" like "Momentum is conserved" then fall out as a consequence of their behaviour rather than being the basis of physics.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Pressie, posted 10-20-2017 4:45 AM Pressie has not yet responded

  
Prev12
3
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017