Summations Only

You have got a bit over-zealous here. We cannot "see" this far back using any known means.

We can get pretty close. Just how close to the singularity is the CMBR?

Time wise, I'd suggest that the CMBR dates from several hundred thousand years after the period of huge expansion from whatever was present initially. Prior to that time the universe would have been opaque.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

And IIRC we recently got some Hubble images of actual galaxies from about 13 billion years ago, so we can see pretty far back even today.Is that correct?

Your claim was that we can see the singularity. Even 13 billion years ago is hundreds of millions of years after the big bang.I'm not even willing to commit to there ever having been a singularity. The universe was once hotter and littler, but who knows what existed at T=0? I surely don't.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I am using the term singularity as that point where the current laws simply don't work, a universe quite unlike what we see today.And yup, it is hundreds of millions of years after the initial expansion and was a universe unlike what we see currently.I did not claim we could see any singularity, or at least certainly never intended to imply that we have.What I said was: As we look back in time to the early universe, what we can see is always a universe that is following the same laws that we see today.

Uh, say what?? Can we, in fact, look back to find something devoid of matter? Does a plasma of ionized particles not count as matter? Because we cannot look back past the point when matter became largely un-ionized and transparent to light.That would have been well after any singularity, as the term might be understood by anyone who was not reading the face saving redefinition of the term you are using, would have existed.

Once the frequencies are adjusted for the differences in velocity, they do match up. I guess you never heard of gravitational lensing? Page not found | Department of Astronomy They aren't changing their light frequencies. You are making this up.

Of course they match. You deliberately adjusted them to match. Yet in order to do so you had to believe in magic. You invented the notion that the vacuum of empty space is stretching itself, something never observed which is by definition unobservable. That is like believing in angels dancing on the head of a pin. Gravitational lensing is another example of scientific mythology at work. Allegedly galaxy clusters have 20 times as much invisible matter as visible matter, in order to discount what is visible, that small spiral galaxies were ejected from large elliptical galaxies as they changed their quantum frequencies and left treams of gas in their wake.We observe hundreds of billions of ancient galaxies crammed with stars and none of them (near or far) shine with the clock rates of lab atoms. The farthest galaxies we have analyzed to date shone at less than 1/10th the frequencies of modern atoms. Even locally calibrated clocks, when they transmitted their clocks signals yesterday, do not track with today's clocks. The radio signals from Pioneer 10 and 11 changed frequencies in a manner that correlated with distance (that is the past) relative to NASA's hydrogen maser clocks of the moment. The ratio of distance to clock differences from the Pioneers approximated the Hubble ratio that scientists use to estimate the distance to galaxies using their observed light frequencies.
Scientists are trained to reason using a first principle, a fundamental assumption that is the basis for their empirical definitions, measuring units, mathematical methods and "constants". What assumption is this? The one the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last days - that all things remain the same. Indeed the Bible predicted they would obfuscate the age and history of the plural heavens with this idea, the very thing modern scientists do. No wonder we observe a biblical creation exactly as the Bible states - happening long ago in the distant sky. Scientists, to protect their basic creed, have filled the whole universe up with magical things like vacuums that stretch and drag the frequencies of passing light with them. The whole structure was built on a single assumption.

You're misusing 2 Peter.

quote:

---

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

​

4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

---

The emphasis is that there is no sign of his coming. Everything has been the same since the beginning. There's no suggestion that there can be no change, only that none has been observed.Scientists are taught that if something does change, it should be possible to observe signs of that change.

A phrase which gets zero google hits, and is therefore probably not exactly what anyone believes. Nah, that's more like believing in gravity, something which is unobservable, but the effects of which have been observed. Again, you're making a very, very strange use of the word visible. It is not visible "that small spiral galaxies were ejected from large elliptical galaxies as they changed their quantum frequencies and left treams of gas in their wake." That doesn't mean anything. And apparently it's this "first principle" and "fundamental assumption" that allows them to heal lepers, make the blind see, and make the lame walk. Which makes me think that there might be something to it. Meanwhile your first principle allows you to write meaningless crap on the internet.

Hi godriddle, We are going to play a little board game:

    START   B   B   B   B   RING
​
      A                      B
​
      A                     B
​
      A                    B
​
      A                   B
​
      A                  B
​
      A                 B
​
      A                B
​
      A               B
​
      A              B
​
      A             B
​
      A            B
​
      A           B
​
      A          B
​
      A         B
​
      A        B
​
      A       B
​
      A      B
​
      A     B
​
      A    B
​
      A   B
​
      A  B
​
      A B
​
      AB
​
     EARTH

Now you throw a di and move one marker along the A path by the number shown AND you move a second marker along the B path by the number shown.The number on the di represents an hypothetically changing speed of light.The B marker will always be 5 places behind the A marker, and it will be 5 places away from earth when the A marker reaches the earth. Feel free to play this as many times as you like, the results will always be the same.Now the difference in time measured between the arrival of light from the nova star and from the ring is measured in days, and we know the speed of light has not varied by any measurable amount in that time.Thus we knowwhen the light reaches the earth from the nova star and the ring, the time delay at the current known speed of light gives you the actual physical distance from the nova star to the ring.This now known distance and the actual measured angle of the star to the ring can then be used to measure the actual distance to the star through basic elementary trigonometry.This distance is calculated at 168,000 light-years.Do you agree thus far?Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : formating of 'game'Edited by RAZD, : distance added

Hi again godsriddle, Curiously, it does not matter a noticeable fraction of the amount of ant frass on antarctica what you consider to be "historical first principle of western science" as science is not based on dogma nor tied to ancient beliefs.Enjoy.

You didn't encounter Mr. riiddle's crank page? This tripe is all over it.

You stopped the quotation a early. What do they do with this idea of their's (panta houtos diamenei - that all things remain the same)? The Greek uses the word lantahno - they diliberately ignore the evidence that the plural heavens (oranoi esan ekpalai). Ekpalai is a compound word. Ek means to come out, the point of origin, that something came out from somewhere. Palai is a word related to vibration, wrestling. It is related to the word pale. Homer spoke of Pale Athena - the planet goddess. Scientist ignore the evidence that galaxies spread out from point sources, tiny globs of primordial matter as the stars came out and accelerated out as the light vibrations also increased. The orbits and teh ato9mic vibrations both accelerate. Galaxies intrinsically grew into huge local growth spirals in defiance of every law of physics. I wonder why they ignore that the heavens are ekapali? On the contrary, scientists are trained to reason, measure and mathematicate with an assumption - that atoms are perpetual motion engines.Thomas Kuhn wrote: "No natural history can be interpreted in the absence of at least some implicit body of intertwined theoretical and methodological BELIEF that permits selection, evaluation, and criticism." The scientific paradigm informs scientists about what it means to do science; what is a problem; what constitutes evidence; how to gather evidence and how to solve the problem using the techniques and definitions supplied by the paradigm. "The man who is striving to solve a problem defined by existing knowledge and technique is not just looking around. He knows what he wants to achieve, and he designs his instruments and directs his thoughts accordingly."The first paradigm has resulted in a magical universe because cosmic history violates every law and method of science - except for observation. They obfuscate cosmic history just like Peter predicted because they believe that all things remain the same - that the essence of substance is changeless and this notion is the foundational assumption for their physics.Only the simplicity of biblical physics (which is non mathematical) is supported by cosmic history from creation to the present.