Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   former speed of light
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 230 (119347)
06-27-2004 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by NosyNed
06-27-2004 3:46 AM


Re: Calculations
Star a billion light years away we'll call 'F'. Before seperation, it was -time from F to earth=0 After seperation it was time from F to earth=1 billion light years. Before, the stream of light we'll call S (and today's physical light we'll call P) So at seperation, P replaces S in place, still as a stream. Almost like the physical light was part of the combined light and rode on it's coattails at S speed. Now, however, as S was seperated, P was on it's own, and could only manage a slow speed. So any light as the guy said in one post that 'went past us' after the seperation, would only be P speed. Meanwhile I envision an uninterupted flow, with S being gracefully replaced by P.
So far, I see no one with any reason to doubt this. (Unless they don't believe in the Spiritual at all)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by NosyNed, posted 06-27-2004 3:46 AM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by wj, posted 06-28-2004 12:12 AM simple has replied
 Message 123 by jar, posted 06-28-2004 1:50 PM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 107 of 230 (119348)
06-27-2004 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by wj
06-27-2004 7:50 AM


Re: post 88
Several thousand years ago, according to this idea.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by wj, posted 06-27-2004 7:50 AM wj has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by wj, posted 06-27-2004 11:57 PM simple has replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 230 (119349)
06-27-2004 11:57 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by simple
06-27-2004 11:54 PM


Re: post 88
How about a bit more precision? 6,000 years ago? 10,000 years ago? 2,000 years ago?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by simple, posted 06-27-2004 11:54 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by simple, posted 06-28-2004 1:17 AM wj has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 109 of 230 (119350)
06-28-2004 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Parsimonious_Razor
06-27-2004 5:59 PM


Re: How does the sky stay lit?
quote:
You are saying that in the spirit world there was no "space" or "time"
Space? I didn't mention that. God talks about His city and gives us measurements, 1500 miles long high and wide, so this would seem to take space. Time? I said Spirits are not limited by it, yet in a new world coming there is still sunrise sunset. But we'll have light from another source, and heat, and live forever, so no real time like we know it now, at least.
quote:
So there is still a prolonged period of black out.
I answered this in a post just a few minutes ago, about how it was combined.
quote:
there is going to be a time where we run out of "burst" that were traveling in the spritual world and are left with blackness.
Who says spiritual light bursts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 06-27-2004 5:59 PM Parsimonious_Razor has not replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 230 (119353)
06-28-2004 12:12 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by simple
06-27-2004 11:52 PM


Re: Calculations
So "physical" light was riding on the coattails of "spiritual" light? So "physical" light was travelling faster than 300,000 km/s at that time? How fast roughly?
So, did the separation of "physical" and "spiritual" light occur instantaneously and simultaneously throughout the universe? Can we say that some thousands of years ago one photon was emitted by a star and it travelled to the earth many times faster than c and the next photon from the same star an instant later, after the separation, started on its journey to earth at the current rate of c?
Did all the P light travelling on the coattails of S light suddenly slow down to c when the separation occurred?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by simple, posted 06-27-2004 11:52 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by simple, posted 06-28-2004 2:49 AM wj has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 230 (119355)
06-28-2004 12:26 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by Sleeping Dragon
06-27-2004 6:07 AM


quote:
It may seem blasphemous to you, but scientific (or pychological, to be precise) theories have been formulated to explain love as a by-product of environmental stimulus/biological responses associations and biochemical (hormonal) factors.
Hmm, thought so. So animals can't feel love I guess? Tell me, did you hate your father, and want to do your mother? Just lay down on the couch and tell me all about it. I'm listening, really. ha.
quote:
Thoughts? If you define thoughts as changes in neural activities that lead to changes in behaviours, then there is ample evidence to suggest the existence of thoughts.
No I don't define them that way, really, but thanks for asking. At least you acknowledge some form of thoughts.
quote:
so we expect to find physical evidence in support for its existence.
And the 'physical evidence' of my thoughts, and everyone in the world's thoughts, does it all beep the same on your machine?
quote:
Similarly, which of the following is evil: a nuclear warhead, or the politician who exploded it over an enemy city, killing millions?
There are degrees of good and evil. God defines evil pretty good, but most people on earth have an inner basic feeling of good and evil we are equipped with as well, in case we haven't read the bible. Cluster bombs, radiation weapons, nuclear weapons designed to mass murder man and the like are evil in themselves I'd say. The real evil was yeilding to the devil, and hellish inspiration that produced these things. Likewise, in yielding to dark forces to use them, same thing, you just have to know who the enemy of man and our soul is. But this we can't discuss, as we are not of the same belief, so I'll agree to disagee on this.
quote:
Great. So you don't even know what circular reasoning is. *sigh* I rest my case.
God is the center, and when man gets far away, I'd say, from Him, he becomes eccentric, or off center! This is why modern psychciatry is so off center. Is it any wonder so many from that proffesion are plain nuts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 06-27-2004 6:07 AM Sleeping Dragon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-28-2004 12:37 AM simple has replied
 Message 121 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 06-28-2004 4:14 AM simple has replied
 Message 122 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 06-28-2004 5:09 AM simple has replied

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 112 of 230 (119356)
06-28-2004 12:37 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by simple
06-28-2004 12:26 AM


Cluster bombs, radiation weapons, nuclear weapons designed to mass murder man and the like are evil in themselves I'd say. The real evil was yeilding to the devil, and hellish inspiration that produced these things.
So massive destruction of human life with weapons is based on "hellish inspiration" and "yielding to the devil"?
What if God tells you to do so?
Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor."
I Samuel 6:19 " . . . and the people lamented because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."
I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. . . . And Saul smote the Amalekites . . . and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword."
Numbers 15:36 "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
Hosea 13:16 "they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with children shall be ripped up."
Or are those more acts of your "loving" God, that kills every creature he creates, save a few, by drowning?
God defines evil pretty good...
Yes, I'd say so, God may just be the definition of evil.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by simple, posted 06-28-2004 12:26 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by wj, posted 06-28-2004 12:45 AM pink sasquatch has replied
 Message 116 by simple, posted 06-28-2004 1:21 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 230 (119359)
06-28-2004 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by pink sasquatch
06-28-2004 12:37 AM


Off topic
Perhaps that is material for a new thread. Let's have arky concentrate on answering questions directly related to his spiritual light fantasy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-28-2004 12:37 AM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-28-2004 1:15 AM wj has not replied

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 114 of 230 (119364)
06-28-2004 1:15 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by wj
06-28-2004 12:45 AM


Re: Off topic
I apologize.
(Arkathon tends to push my buttons.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by wj, posted 06-28-2004 12:45 AM wj has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 230 (119365)
06-28-2004 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by wj
06-27-2004 11:57 PM


Re: post 88
6000, give or take a few hundred

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by wj, posted 06-27-2004 11:57 PM wj has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 230 (119366)
06-28-2004 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by pink sasquatch
06-28-2004 12:37 AM


caught
"What if God tells you to do so?" He won't, He's not like that, What weapons did Jesus tell us to destroy everyone with? None, He healed and loved. WJ caught us, so I'll have to drop it. (so I won't get into lovafying the old testament, which is finished, over, completed)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-28-2004 12:37 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 230 (119377)
06-28-2004 2:18 AM


Arky, any answers to my questions in message #110?

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 118 of 230 (119386)
06-28-2004 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by wj
06-28-2004 12:12 AM


do tell
quote:
So "physical" light was riding on the coattails of "spiritual" light? So "physical" light was travelling faster than 300,000 km/s at that time? How fast roughly?
By coattails, I think of it as in some way the two were one. Now when they seperated, all we had was the one. Was it in the same form as it was when merged? Thinking about it, it would seem probably not. Because of the limitations of the physical. So the P, while in a merged state must have had different properties, beyond P.
quote:
Can we say that some thousands of years ago one photon was emitted by a star and it travelled to the earth many times faster than c and the next photon from the same star an instant later, after the separation, started on its journey to earth at the current rate of c?
Isn't a photon a property of P? So I don't think P can travel faster than it's limitations. While it was meged with S, somehow, it did not have the same properties. For all I know, maybe P is more or less a leftover that took up the space? (like filled the vacuum) (came to be as the only thing that could exist here instead or in place of)
quote:
light occur instantaneously and simultaneously throughout the universe?
I don't know. If we look back at creation, it took a week, so God doesn't have to do everything presto. If you have a grasp of why it either could not have, or must have, or something, do tell! After all, we're only talking about a model here that isn't gospel.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by wj, posted 06-28-2004 12:12 AM wj has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by wj, posted 06-28-2004 2:57 AM simple has replied
 Message 120 by NosyNed, posted 06-28-2004 3:07 AM simple has not replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 230 (119389)
06-28-2004 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by simple
06-28-2004 2:49 AM


Re: do tell
Arky, spell crank.
It appears that you have no idea what you are talking about and you are just making it up as you go along. Pity you are so insecure that you have to rely on such fantasies so that you can put inordinate faith in the literal interpretation of a religious text.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by simple, posted 06-28-2004 2:49 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by simple, posted 06-30-2004 2:38 AM wj has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 120 of 230 (119392)
06-28-2004 3:07 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by simple
06-28-2004 2:49 AM


Calculations?
In:
Message 100
you say:
arkathon writes:
The idea was that the physical light took over the path, so by my calculations it would not all go past for, in the case mentioned, a billion years.
You were asked for your calculations. It seems you don't actually have any.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by simple, posted 06-28-2004 2:49 AM simple has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024