former speed of light

Still no answer to a very simple question.How long did it take the first photon after your alleged seperation event to get from the star that is one billion light years away to the Earth?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't think there is any point in you asking that question, because his idea is that the first photon after the split wasn't created at the star, but in fact in open space just next to earth.His idea is that the spiritual light isn't made out of photons/waves but in fact acts more like a band of light which has abilities which can't possibly exist in our physical reality. That is, it has the paradoxial ability to both send light instantly between places while still having the light travel through all points between them at a given time.You can argue that this isn't making any sense however much you want, but you have to realize that his very idea is that the spiritual universe is specificaly made up in a way which isn't ment to make sense so that any paradoxes can just be waved away.

When Paul saw the light on the road to damascus, which was Jesus, in this case, he was thrown from his horse, I guess the horse saw something! And, it sure must have been a powerful hallucanation, because he was physically blinded by it! He had to be led by the hand. "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me" (Ac 22:9) So I guess the people with him all were nuts too? Also, there was light before the sun was made, that denoted day and night, where is this now? What happened to it?
Col 1:16 "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,.. " So He made things we can not see.
Job 38:24 "By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth.." So light can be parted by God, in this case to make a wind. Hey, I even have a hard time seeing wind! But I know it's there!
Re 21:23 -"And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." So sunlight not needed here! What kind of light are we talking about here anyway?
Yes there is a light beyond men's present vision, no doubt.

Well said! You articulate much better than I. Thank you.

quote:

---

spiritual universe is specificaly made up in a way which isn't ment to make sense so that any paradoxes can just be waved away.

---

Well I must give credit where credit is due. I did not make up the spititual world, God did. I didn't make ghosts, angels, heaven, or all that. I just try to bring it down to earth, as much as one can. One reason I try to do it is to 'wave away' granny, and mama speck.

You are certainly right that he makes no sense.But even under his definition of funny light of wonderous properties, there is still the next, post split, normal photon. And that is the one that I'm concerned with. Since all we can see or sense are the normal photons, since there is neither any evidence or way to test for his spiritual light, since we now see normal photons, it is, IMHO, a reasonable question to ask.If he imagines this band of light, and a split when it changes from his imaginary thing to normal photons, the at some point this imaginary spititual light becomes a photon. That photon creeps along just like all the other photons, at the speed of light. Once it is no longer his imaginary light, how long does it take to get to us?How about the next photon?If he cannot answer that or show some method of testing his asserted light, then he has nothing.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Pre-split: The universe is filled with a sort of glow from the stars, which is everywhere that light would be able to travel. (Vague explanation, sorry).During split: Photons are created litterally in mid-space at all points in space where this glow could reach. These photons take on the specific properties required to let us see them as if they were sent from the stars in the first place. Note that despite that the photons were created at the same time, they have different properties depending on how far from the star (or other visible object) their point of creation is. The only mechanism is that God did it that way because he wanted to.Post-split: The photons created during the split will travel at light speed towards Earth, and occupy the space in which 'normal' light hasn't yet had the time to travel. Stars now also produce normal photons which seamlessly follow those already on their way.

But that's the point. I don't think you are going to get anything worthwhile out of him because he doesn't WANT his idea to be testable with normal means.

Hey, don't blame me that science is so unable to measure the spirit world! It isn't that I want them so lame, I actually would kinda like to prove God, and angels in your own minds. As it is, for now, science is kept enough in the dark, that we do need still some faith to believe what He says. To take Him at His word. Why, if God did all the puzzle for us, that would take most of the fun out of solving it.

quote:

---

These photons take on the specific properties required to let us see them as if they were sent from the stars in the first place.

---

Interesting. But didn't the light really come from the stars, after all? So why be surprised they look like they came from there? As far as a glow from the stars, do we actually know this? Why would it not looked a lot like it does now? Then in the "way" of light (or path, or course)there was left, our light, in the only form that would allow it to continue shining light in our universe. Job 38:19 "Where is the way where light dwelleth".[dwelleth] That the light we ended up with was perhaps different at parts of it's 'way' as you got closer to the star, after the S was parted, seems reasonable. Especially since it was split with the idea of making sure man still had starlight to begin with!

Arky's imaginary scenario is that the combined S and P light were travelling at near infinite speed. The implication is that, at the moment of spliting, those physical photons in transit in transit from a distant star to our earth must have been very spread out along the path as. Therefore, from an earthly viewer's perspective, instantly after the split occurred, all the stars dimmed and remained extremely dim until the first post-split photons arrive at which time the star suddenly appeared to become much brighter.Strane that no such pattern has been observed or recorded in the past few thousand years. Cold it be that arky's wild imaginings have no basis in observable reality?Is it through ignorance or intellectual dishonesty that arky refuses to address the issue of the first photon after the imaginary split?

quote:

---

The implication is that, at the moment of spliting, those physical photons in transit in transit from a distant star to our earth must have been very spread out along the path..

---

Why is this? Also, I understand I was fuzzy as the idea first came, so I did say they would have been merged I think. Now, it more and more seems that (as far as light goes), what we have now was not so much in it's present state merged with S, as something that was left in it's 'way'. I apologize for the fuzziness. ( Was it back in the 'bulletproof' thread?
I think that was kind of cleared up as we went along, though.

This gets as close as it's likely to be possible to making sense out of Arkathon's ramblings. But it still leaves a very odd thing on A's plate, which needs to be addressed: supernovae more that 6000 light-years distant. If we see one in modern, non-spiritual light, it must, of necessity, happened more than 6000 years ago - physical light only can travel so fast. But that puts the explosion before creation: the star blew up and died before it was born.
All supernovae seen within the last 400 years or so have been further than 6000 LY - most many thousands of times more distant than that. Their explosions are thus fictions - God is deceiving those poor benighted astronomers with the spiritual-replaced-by-physical light from His creation. Why would He do that, Arkathon? Or are supernovae just Satan's little light shows, and only appear to be exploding suns in every minute detail?

Supernova more than 6k light years away must by his idea happen sometime between the creation of the universe and the sepparation. Yes, spiritual stars blew up too, it seems.Of course, this implies that what most people consider creation, that is when the universe came to be as we see it, isn't the real deal but more of an event similar to the flood.So no, their explosions did happen, but they happened in a completely different way and what we see is just the closest physical image.And Coragyps, you do realize that most of what I type is exactly the same as what he says, but without actually taking sides? It's not that it doesn't make sense. You can often figure out what he means if you just calm down a bit.He is, after all, only after making an idea which is so far removed from science that it can't, by definition, be proven wrong. He even made a thread pointing that out.

To Coragyps:Well, I can see the reason why hallucinogenic plants might work. I've heard that sensory deprivation and meditation works too. ^_^.Thanks for your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

Actually an excellent point. Exactly the kind of thing I was trying to get.

quote:

---

supernovae more that 6000 light-years distant. If we see one in modern, non-spiritual light, it must, of necessity, happened more than 6000 years ago - physical light only can travel so fast. But that puts the explosion before creation: the star blew up and died before it was born.

---

Lets slow this down a bit, for a peek. Lets start with a concrete example. We can change this if we like. OK, so let's say a supernova was, in distance, around 180,000 light years away. Let's say we started to see it in 1987. So, according to the split idea, what would we be seeing? Well, since we don't have an exact year for the split, we would need a ballpark number to work with. Let's say the split happened somewhere between 1 month after creation, to 2500 years ater (around time of flood, which is not what I think, but to allow a little wiggle room).
OK, so let's use the number 6000 years ago (not a rigid absolute number, but within the ballpark, and my guess, somewhere around 200 years after Adam was created, enough time for him to have some kids, and enjoy the garden). So, 6000 years ago, the light coming in would be more or less our present light. Creation then, in this example, would have been about 200 years before this. Now in 1987, in this case, we see a 'supernova' event. How long would the light have been traveling? If we, in 2004, are about 6000 years from the time when the alleged split occured, then in 1987, it would have been about 5983 years. So the light would have been in transit 5983 years. When would the acual event have happened? We could not use the distance as a measurement of time, as it happened before the split. OK so we have here a window of opportunity, it seems to me, of about 200 whole years after creation for a lot of cosmic events to have happened. Were they after affects of creation? Who knows? Certainly they could not have happened before creation, as this would be madness. So then what we see in this example, according to the split model in question, is that this particular event happened somewhere a few hundred years after creation, and the light took 5983 years to get here. If it had happened any other year, 1452, for example, you would do the same math. So, nowhere, I can at least now see, in our several thousand year history would this be a problem!?
See, it would not matter if we called them billions of light years away, since the light got here right away! Our delay, then is only since the split.
finally, what are these things we are seeing? How much of what we think we see, if any is colored by assumptions? The birth of a star, etc. I have no problem with, any more than the birth of a baby. And, I suppose, in our present physical universe, even the death of some things, if that is what it is would be expected? So where lies the difference? Only in time, it seems so far!