Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,467 Year: 3,724/9,624 Month: 595/974 Week: 208/276 Day: 48/34 Hour: 4/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Starlight
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 756 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 3 of 84 (508925)
05-17-2009 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by ScotiaTheOne
05-16-2009 7:45 PM


Hi, Scott, and welcome aboard!
I'm guessing that the "Christian view" here is the same as my view, and of that of science: that light has been travelling about 13.7 billion years to illuminate sensors on the most sensitive telescopes we have. What I think you're asking is "what is the young-earth creationist view" on this. That's a very sizable minority in the US, but not common among educated people of any religion elsewhere.
I've seen two main claims for "the distant starlight problem" in my time following the EvC debates. One is that the light from, say, the galaxy Messier 106, measured by trigonometry to be 25,000,000 light years away from us, was "created in transit" when the Old Testament God created everything a few thousand years ago to give "the appearance of a mature creation." Those that claim this say that Adam, Eve, and the trees of Eden were all created mature, so why not light? The big snag here is that we now see events like supernovae that happened long before Creation....
The other approach is to claim that light speed has slowed down since "Creation Week." A guy named Setterfield spilled lots of ink on proposals for this. Light needs to have moved millions of times faster for this to work, and physics can get to be a problem: Einstien's E=mc2 would indicate that subatomic events like nuclear decay would release a quadrillion times more energy if c, the speed of light, were a million times faster. We don't see this in old stars.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ScotiaTheOne, posted 05-16-2009 7:45 PM ScotiaTheOne has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by NosyNed, posted 05-17-2009 9:16 AM Coragyps has replied
 Message 9 by ohnhai, posted 05-17-2009 1:34 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 756 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 6 of 84 (508934)
05-17-2009 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by NosyNed
05-17-2009 9:16 AM


Re: Trig?
Well, not just trig, I guess, more geometrical: red shift on one side of the disk, blue shift on the other, and actual lateral motion by radiotelescope observation. Herrnstein at al., Nature, 400, 539-541 (1999). The same has been done for the Triangulum Galaxy, Messier 33, with a result of 2.4 million LY. That one is free online: Brunthaler, et al., Science, 307, 1440-1443 (2005).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by NosyNed, posted 05-17-2009 9:16 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 756 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 29 of 84 (509362)
05-20-2009 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by onifre
05-20-2009 7:50 PM


The galaxies within are Local Group are measurable, they show a Blue Shift indicating that they are coming toward us.
Some of the local group galaxies are blueshifted, but some are redshifted. Since the three big ones, the Milky Way, Andromeda, and Triangulum, are in mutual orbits of some complicated sort, and the little ones are in orbits around the big ones, any particular galaxy can be heading toward us or away in any particular megamillenium.
I made that last word up, I think.
Local Group - Wikipedia lists 'em - the Leo Dwarf is one that is redshifted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by onifre, posted 05-20-2009 7:50 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by onifre, posted 05-20-2009 10:16 PM Coragyps 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