|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,461 Year: 3,718/9,624 Month: 589/974 Week: 202/276 Day: 42/34 Hour: 5/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Doesn't the distance of stars disprove the young earth theory? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
nlerd writes: Since we know how fast light moves and how far away certain stars are from the earth wouldn't any star being more then 6000 light years away disprove the young earth theory, or at least a young universe? This popped into my head a couple of nights ago and I haven't been able to discuss it with anyone. I understand that there is some movement in NASA to send high-quality observational telescopes to solar orbits far outside that of earth's. Such a move would, in it's most mundane objective, clearly establish the distance of stars well beyond any 6k light years through the extremely well established principle of parallax. Now I realize some mathematical concepts may be beyond the understanding of creationists, such as calculus being based upon making the discrete infinitely small in order to create a curve, or indeed even fitting a curve to the data as in fossils or strata or radiometric dating or....well pretty much all of science. However, having to deny trigonometry and indeed surveying, that should prove even more ridiculous. What's next? addition and subtraction are products of the devil? The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes. Salman Rushdie This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4738 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
What's next? addition and subtraction are products of the devil? Wouldn't that be multiplication? You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
lyx2no writes: Wouldn't that be multiplication? I am sure that when any 'Great Leap Forward' occurs, it can easily subtract a few steps in the 'Great March' to the 'Cultural Revolution' some of our evangelicals intend to proscribe. Yeah, heard that one before. Estimates vary between 20-60 million outright murdered along with a similar number staved to death due to the rejection of modern science and even mathematics in favor of a pick-and-choose authoritarian ideology. Except for the Aeronautics and Petroleum industries, which were somehow hypocritically exempt from any denial of fact, due to their 'importance' to the state. May seem OT in the narrow sense, but to deny math in service to the 'great leader,' would there not be an obvious similarity? Edited by anglagard, : No reason given. Edited by anglagard, : clarity, and previously more appropriate subtitle The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes. Salman Rushdie This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4738 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
What's next? addition and subtraction are products of the devil? Product: multiplication. Ha ha! Okay, that's my explanation. What did yours mean? You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
lyx2no writes: Product: multiplication. Ha ha! Okay, that's my explanation. What did yours mean? It means that after three Tom Collins, It's time to go to bed. The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes. Salman Rushdie This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi anglagard, how's things?
However, having to deny trigonometry and indeed surveying, that should prove even more ridiculous. Ah, but you see it is not the math that would be the issue.
... there is some movement in NASA to send high-quality observational telescopes to solar orbits far outside that of earth's. These are the people that faked the lunar landings after all. What's a little added hoax of fake satellite data to that? Probably filled with made up footage of "views" from the purported satellites that show things according to their false "secular materialistic" agenda, such as showing the earth orbiting the sun. http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm 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) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 823 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Probably filled with made up footage of "views" from the purported satellites that show things according to their false "secular materialistic" agenda, such as showing the earth orbiting the sun. Don't get SO started again....... "Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Othersfor example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einsteinconsidered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."-Carl Sagan "On a personal note I think he's the greatest wrestler ever. He's better than Lou Thesz, Gorgeous George -- you name it."-The Hulkster on Nature Boy Ric Flair
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
This is precisely the question I asked myself in my high school physics class that pushed me on a long path from YEC->OEC->ID->Science. This is why you shouldn't ask questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peepul Member (Idle past 5040 days) Posts: 206 Joined: |
I'm hoping that our resident fundamental physicists can help me with a question...
Paul K has proposed that a reduction in the speed of light in recent vs ancient times would result in ancient events appearing to happen more slowly when we observe them from earth. This makes perfect sense if we think classically about this - but I'm wondering whether this conclusion is true if we take into account relativity? thanks!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3665 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
but I'm wondering whether this conclusion is true if we take into account relativity? Distant events already appear to proceed more slowly by virtue of the cosmological expansion/red-shift. If you think about it, that is exactly the cause of red-shift: the peaks of your light wave are arriving further apart than when they were emitted, so you are seeing the light wave "slowed-down".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peepul Member (Idle past 5040 days) Posts: 206 Joined: |
Ok, I understand that. Thanks! So I guess that means that the rotation speeds we measure for distant pulsars are actually higher in reality?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2317 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Peepul writes:
No, I don't think that's correct. For the interval between two "pulses" does not take longer, it's just that the light from both is red shifted. They pulse so fast I think it's negligible. I could be wrong though.
Ok, I understand that. Thanks! So I guess that means that the rotation speeds we measure for distant pulsars are actually higher in reality?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3665 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
So I guess that means that the rotation speeds we measure for distant pulsars are actually higher in reality? Not usually - most pulsars we examine are not sufficently far enough away to have a dominant cosmological red-shift. The local motion of the pulsar will be a more important factor to take into account. But a distant pulsar, say 100MLyr away, would definitely have a noticable cosmological slowing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peepul Member (Idle past 5040 days) Posts: 206 Joined: |
Thanks, Cavediver.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nlerd Member (Idle past 3626 days) Posts: 48 From: Minnesota Joined: |
It doesn't disprove a young earth since the age of the universe has nothing to do with the age of the earth. It does however disprove a young universe. At least, it does without invoking some crazy, completely unevidenced stuff like "God created the light en-route to earth!". But in the bible it says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" Gen 1:1, and he said "Let there be light" Gen 1:2 after creating the earth so earth should appear to be OLDER then we could see the oldest light to be. But then it goes on to say that he created stars "to divide the day from the night" and "to give light upon the earth" on the third DAY so now I'm getting lost. This is just in Gen 1:1-19 in the King James, so I gues if the bible is that confusing trying to add science would muddle it up even more. And sorry for taking so long to reply.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024