Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8937 total)
26 online now:
(26 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Happy Birthday: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,822 Year: 16,858/19,786 Month: 983/2,598 Week: 229/251 Day: 58/59 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Physical Laws ....What if they were different before?
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 22 of 309 (662367)
05-15-2012 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Dr Adequate
05-13-2012 12:36 AM


Re: change leaves evidence.
It is important to examine evidence for fixed laws and fixed constants by beginning with the first principle of science, the idea the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last days. What idea? That all things remain the same (2 Peter 3:3 - 6)

Where did this idea come from? The pagan Greeks tried to find a first principle upon which to found a natural science for hundreds of years. They understood that if everything is changing (as all people believed 2000 years ago), they could never invent a valid form of science. After all, if matter is changing itself, what is true today would not be so true for another era. In that era, Greek had no independent words for substance, being, or essence. (Aristotle used the word for wood - but he also called ideas wood (hyle). Another problem was that in Greek , the present tense of the verb to be - einai - is not static. It continues to change because the Greek present tense referred to something that continues to act. These two impediments in the Greek language prevented the Greeks from inventing an empirical form of science. Aristotle understood they could not invent science without assuming that something does not change. He proposed that something under (he called in hypokeimenon) does not change even as the form of everything is growing like a baby in the womb of its mother. People who think like that are not like modern scientists.

1500 years later, Friar Thomas adjusted Aristotle's system by inventing new Latin concepts of being and essence. Eventually the Catholics provided for science a new metaphysic - that the essence of substance is changeless.

With this ASSUMPTION, generations of scientists have built a vast empirical system of operational definitions, measuring units and mathematical constants - almost all of which depend on the notion that atoms are immutable and dither with perpetual motion. The scientific universe is crammed full of magic, invisible matter, an exploding vacuum, stretching vacuums, vacuums that stretch light and all sorts of other speculations to protect their sacred creed that atoms are perpetual motion engines. After all they measured them circularly by defining them as unchanging to begin with.

Only a biblical version of physics is confirmed with the light from long ago. Indeed, only a literal biblical creation is visible exactly as it happened long ago. We observe that every clock (atomic and inertial) is accelerating as galaxies intrinsically grew - the stars coming out from tiny naked galaxies evidently made of tohu bohu matter - exactly as stated in the text of genesis. Billions of galaxies grew into huge local growth spirals as the visible properties of matter continued to change.

The problem is that if you have a sacred creed, and build a whole system of measuring and mathematicating on that baseless assumption, you end up with pure myths. It is baseless because we observe how every atom keeps changing itself throughout cosmic history. Scientists have invented the greatest system of mythology every contrived by man - to support their basic assumption - their first principle. Their universe by their own admission is 99% invisible and undetectable with light.

How great will be the triumph of the Word of God over science, the system built on a single assumption - the very one the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last days.

Victor


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-13-2012 12:36 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-15-2012 4:08 AM godsriddle has responded
 Message 26 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2012 7:16 AM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 24 of 309 (662369)
05-15-2012 4:30 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Dr Adequate
05-15-2012 4:08 AM


Re: change leaves evidence.
I don't think you understand what a first principle is.

1. It is elementary.
2. It is the basis for understanding the physical universe.
3. Its disciples only were trained to think in a box, with their assumption.
4. In a system of mature science, most evidence ciruclarly depends on it.
5. It is historical - as I tried to point out where science got its first principle - metaphysical ideas drilled into westerners by centureis of medieval Catholic schools.

A comparison between biblical principles and the scientific one.

The Bible plainly states that the creation is enslaved to change. It even claims Gold continues to corrupt itself. It claims that light reveals the truth.

We see the creation of the universe. Those ancient galaxies shone at less that 1/10th the frequencies of modern atoms. Scientists, because they think with a single assumption, claim that the vacuum of space time is stretching the light. Yet no one has ever detected any spacetime or vacuums that change passing light frequencies. We see tiny globs packed with stars in equal chains around many of those tiny cores in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field. We observe at closer ranges how the globs rotated OUTWARD, spread out. THe light clocks accelerated as the stars took up more space as galaxies grew into huge growth spirals.

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 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. When we compare galaxies at many ranges, we observe that, in general, ancient atomic clocks ran much slower than modern atoms. Despite this visible evidence by international agreements the second of time is defined by assuming that cesium atoms always clock the same frequencies. Then scientists define the meter with their seconds, the speed of light and thousands of other measuring units and the laws of physics are built upon the notion that clocks are linear. Yet no linear clocks are visible anywhere in the vast universe.

You can test the first principle of science with the light from long ago.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-15-2012 4:08 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-15-2012 5:24 AM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 27 by Admin, posted 05-15-2012 8:04 AM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 28 of 309 (662415)
05-15-2012 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by RAZD
05-15-2012 7:16 AM


Re: change leaves evidence.
What you consider objective evidence depends on your first principle. The objective is the main mirror on a telescope or the first lens in a microscope. I consider light, gathered and recorded by any instrument as objective evidence. Scientists on the other hand view mathematics and symbols (causal explanations based on their laws of physics) as objective. Where did they get their empirical system from? From their first principle, an idea promoted by Catholic scholars centuries ago and cemented into place when Newton claimed that reality is what one measures (such as the notion that clocks measure time).

What would the universe look like if all the laws of physics were false, all of them based on a presumption (that atoms are immutable and dither with perpetual motion) upon which the empirical system depends.

I claim it would
1. Look exactly as we see with light in every part of the spectrum.
2. It looks exactly as the text of the Bible so plainly states (if one accepts the text heremeutically) instead of tailoring it to fit science. There is not a single verse in the Bible that a contemporary of the author could understand scientifically - since western science is recent.

If mass energy and time do not actually have a real existence, if they were contrived mathematically with a false first principle, then we are allowed to believe what is visible. No sacientist can believe the only history that is viisble as it happened, galactic history. THey have filled the universe up with magical things like black holes, invisible matter and vacuum stretching energies - thing never detected anywhere - to protect their fundamental creed that atoms are not changing relationally as they age.

I suggest joining the galaxyzoo project and spending a few hours examining ancient galaxies. What anyone can see is that galaxies started out as compact and dense with packed together tiny stars. In defiance of every law of physics, they spread out, moved out, took up more space as their atomic clocks also kept accelerating, growing into huge local growth spirals.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2012 7:16 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2012 7:32 PM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 29 of 309 (662416)
05-15-2012 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Admin
05-15-2012 8:04 AM


Re: Off-topic Notice
The laws of physics exist only in human minds. My claim is that if the fundamental assumption upon which western science was historically constructed were false, then we would not need to believe in magical things like subduction or redshifts. We could simply accept the visible evidence that the continents only fit together on a tiny globe and the seafloors are much younger than the continents. We could also accept the visible cosmic history instead of filling the whole universe up with magic in order to force them to fit our laws of physics which do not work in any galaxy anywhere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Admin, posted 05-15-2012 8:04 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by frako, posted 05-15-2012 4:31 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 32 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2012 7:51 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 40 of 309 (662446)
05-15-2012 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by frako
05-15-2012 4:31 PM


Re: Off-topic Notice
redshift isnt magical have you ever herd a car driving on the road in front of your house or on a straight road.

There is more than one way to make light change frequency.
(1) Doppler, as you suggested, is an apparent shift in the frequencies of light that correlates with relative motion (not sidewise motion).
(2) Atoms can change their EMITTED frequencies depending on the local environment (gravity and temperature)

Modern scientists do not accept that the frequency differences from distant galaxies is due to Doppler alone. (They used to 70 years ago). If they did today they would need to imagine distant galaxies are moving away at seven times the speed of light. Instead they speculate that the vacuum of space time is stretching itself out - dragging all the light frequencies along.

Nothing scientific relies on magic.

Redshift is an example of scientific magic, an ad hoc story for which there is not a shred of evidence. No one has ever observe light changing frequencies as it passed through a void. In fact, light NEVER is observed to changes frequency. What is transmitted is what we observe is received. Even when light passes through an opaque medium (it seems to change its wavelength) by slowing down, but not its frequency.

This is why a careful test of science's first principle is so important to separate out scientific ad hoc stories like redshift and subduction from the real visible evidence. ,


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by frako, posted 05-15-2012 4:31 PM frako has not yet responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 44 of 309 (662454)
05-15-2012 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by RAZD
05-15-2012 7:32 PM


Re: first assumption
Interestingly, for me the initial assumption is that what we perceive as objective empirical evidence is a measure of reality, thus concepts about reality can be tested against objective empirical evidence to ascertain their validity. What I see as a rock, you would see as a rock, and we would agree that it was a rock when we compare notes.

That is not the historical first principle of western science. Historically, the issue was how to invent a valid science when everything is observed to change. It was the medieval Catholics who invented ideas about unchanging being - that the essence of substance does not change.

Seing rocks is not the same thing as measuring them. In order to measure something with an undetectable entity like time, mass or energy - you must first define it operationally. The basic assumption needed for defining such things is that the essence of substance is changeless. Modern empiricism has forgotten its roots. It blindly goes about5 measuring thing that only have symbolical existence, things no one has ever isolated or detected. This is why empiricism is married to mathematics. Scientists seem mathematics as empiricism, but mathematics does not deal with real things, only symbols that only exist in minds.

Conversely it could look exactly like any fantasy you want to dream up. Once you have discarded the objective empirical evidence as representative of reality, then any concept can be equally valid, and your god/s become master jokesters playing pranks.

On the contrary, the Bible says light reveals the truth and exposes error because everything that is visible is light (phos estin in Greek). Matter and light are relationally connected. We never observe any property of matter apart from light. In fact the Bible states that the Earth had no form until Elohim continued to command light to continue to be. We confirm this in billions of ancient galaxies whose atoms shone at tiny fractions of the frequencies of modern atoms. We observe with light how the properties of all matter keep on changing as galaxies intrinsically grew from tiny globs of formless matter. We never observe any evidence for black holes. We only observe jets emerging from point sources and the jets do not even bend from the alleged intense gravity of the alleged hole. We see Him continuing to command light to continue to be as matter continues to take form.

Even the Earth does what the Bible says, spreads out in unbroken continuity. Even across the Pacific, the continents fit back together without major seas and the theory of subduction is clearly a scientific myth, since the subduction trenches has layered sediment. The scientists might claim, but we measured the earth and it does not change dimensions.s You measured it with an assumption that is visibly false in every galaxy in the universe.
That is why first principles are so important.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2012 7:32 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Coragyps, posted 05-15-2012 10:53 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 47 by NoNukes, posted 05-15-2012 10:56 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 49 by NoNukes, posted 05-15-2012 11:12 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 73 by RAZD, posted 05-18-2012 11:28 PM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 51 of 309 (662464)
05-16-2012 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by RAZD
05-15-2012 7:32 PM


Re: first assumption
Thus you would agree that the light from SN1987A shows that the speed of light was the same when the supernova occurred as it is today, yes? Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that the light having traveled 167,000 light years to get here at that speed means that the universe is at least that old, yes?

I agree that the ANGLE and the DELAY in days from the reflected light from the ring around the star shows how many MODERN DAYS the light was in transit. It says nothing about how long ancient days were or how fast the speed of light is.

(1) The speed of light is DEFINED as a constant. Scientists use the notion that cesium atoms keep on ticking at the same rate to DEFINE the length of a meter and then circle back to claim they measured a constant speed of light. All that they confirmed was their assumption. Even if atoms are changing relationally (their dimensions and their dithering light frequencies together) the speed of light would still seem to be a constant because light is fundamental, and also it is included in the definition for the length of a meter.
(2) We observe how orbits accelerate along with the accelerating atomic clocks as billions of galaxies intrinsically grew - the visible properties of matter always changing. The fastest (normal) atomic clocks are local.

If you want to believe that objective empirical evidence is not a representation of reality then you can believe anything you like, even that your comments about science and scientists are actually valid instead of the purest fantasy.

I have no problem with evidence that is real. Empirical evidence is
(1) based on a dogmatic assumption - that atoms are immutable and dither with perpetual motion with which they defined their measuring units. If atoms are changing relationally - as we observe in the light from billions of galaxies - the measuring units and the mathematical "constants" would shift with the changing atoms as we observe.

The only history that is visible as it happened is galactic history. No scientists, creationist or evolutionist, can accept the visible history of the universe. Scientists have filled the universe up with undetectable magic to protect their basic creed. Even creation scientists claim the earth is young and perhaps the light changes speed, not because of what the Bible states, but because they were trained to believe in immutable matter.

What we see is fundamental change, orbits moving in the opposite direction of the laws of physics, atoms continuing to change throughout cosmic history.

The universe that light reveals is unscientific because it violates the basic creed of all scientists, their historical first principle.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2012 7:32 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by NoNukes, posted 05-16-2012 5:28 AM godsriddle has responded
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 05-18-2012 11:23 PM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 52 of 309 (662468)
05-16-2012 12:40 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Coragyps
05-15-2012 10:53 PM


Re: first assumption
We never observe any property of matter apart from light.

from Coragyps: Really?

Light is fundamental. We detect no particle, no energy, no space, nothing apart from light. Indeed, the properties of all matter are always associated with light. Shatter a "particle" and it turns into a multitude of light like things. At the Sanford's SLAC, two beams of light were collided and it produced electrons. Indeed, there is no way to prove that particles are stuff or light-like, since they seemingly shift depending on the instrument we use.

First Elohim finished creating all the plural heavens and earth. The earth at this stage was without form and empty and darkeness covered the primordial state. Then Elohim continued to command light to continue to be. It was then that the god particles finished on the first day began to have extension in space and matter began to form.

That is what we observe at all ranges, point sources shooting out vast streams of matter. Often the matter has a jumbled up spectrum as it emerges. Later the matter gleams in the far infrared. and even later it often shifts to blue. Quasars that gleam at infrared are even found inside local galaxies at the end of a jet. The visible frequencies of light continue to change throughout cosmic history as galaxies intrinsically grew in defiance of every law of physics. What is visible is such a violent offense to the scientific first principle that scientists have invented a universe that is 99% invisible and magical. They even claim that a tiny bit of vacuum exploded and created everything out of nothing. What nonsensical speculation.

Only a biblical version of creation is supported with light, rather than magical invisible things.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Coragyps, posted 05-15-2012 10:53 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-16-2012 2:07 AM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 55 of 309 (662532)
05-16-2012 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by NoNukes
05-16-2012 5:28 AM


Re: first assumption
It is interesting enough to know that the speed of light in as measured using modern days is a constant. That means that when we measure the distance to objects in modern units, we can know that the distance to those objects is enough to prove that light from those objects could not have reached us in only 6000 years.

The ancients claimed that the earliest people lived in the great time. Jacob stated that the days and years of the children are shorter and worse than than the days and years of the fathers (Genesis 47:9). Job, in chapter 14, listed the geological ages that transpired in the few days of his life. He listed water wearing away rocks and the dried up sea (Hebrew west) as markers for the geological ages people lived a few thousand years ago. Indeed, we find layers of salt, gypsum, and stromatolites (somethings thousands of meters thick) sandwiched between thick layers of marine oozes in the deep Med. Evidently the Med dried and refilled through Gibraltar. A great underwater waterfall and trench hundreds of kilometers long shows how the sea refilled. We find drowned canyons filled with round pebbles running thousands of meters below the modern level of the sea. At Cairo, cores show that the Nile was a canyon more than a mile deep cut into granite. Job ended his poem about the brevity of life by claiming their faces deformed (shanah paniym) before they died. Indeed, the bones of the skull are the only part of our skeleton that keeps growing as we age. If we lived for geological ages, our faces would grow great Neanderthal brows but our grandchildren would not have the thick brows, as the fossil record shows. In some case Neanderthal children with primary teeth with worn enamel evidently from great age. Hesiod wrote - a child played at his mother's knee for a hundred years among the silver race of men. He claimed this degeneration would continue until children were born with grey temples. No one today lives for geological ages which is why the ancients look back with longing to the age of their fathers. Hesiod moaned that he lived in the iron age when people never stopped laboring by day and dying by night.

Lets go back to the SN1987a evidence. The Magellanic clouds are linked back to the Milky Way by a river of neutral hydrogen, the wake of their ejection - that orbits accelerate. In countless early galaxies we observe equally spaced beads around the redder cores. We observe at many ranges how the stars streams accelerated out, spread out as billions of galaxies intrinsically grew into huge growth spirals. The atomic clocks evidently accelerate along with the accelerating orbits as the space matter takes up increases RELATIONALLY.

Indeed, generations of astronomers measured a decreasing solar parallax which has even continued after radar established the distance to the Sun with clocks. There is even a simple, causal reason why all the planet orbits continue to spiral out. Gravity is not a perpetual motion force as Newton and Einstein imagined. It emerges from the visible way atoms keep on changing themselves relationally throughout cosmic history. Since it evidently propagates at light-speed, it MUST accelerate days and years together, because it pulls more on the trailing hemisphere of earth. Maurice Allais' paraconical pendulum shows that the gravitational forces on Earth vary with the position of the Sun, Moon and evidently even the planets. It is gravity that continually accelerates the earth and gravity does not propagate from perpetual motion atoms, but from atoms that are continually changing relationally (the space they take up, their inertial, electrical properties and atomic frequencies change together).

It is important when analyzing scientific stories about beginnings to examine how the scientific first principle allows scientists to speculate about things that violate the visible history of the cosmos and the earth histories of all ancient people.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by NoNukes, posted 05-16-2012 5:28 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by NoNukes, posted 05-16-2012 7:26 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 57 by Panda, posted 05-16-2012 7:44 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 58 of 309 (662573)
05-17-2012 4:57 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by NoNukes
05-16-2012 7:26 PM


Re: first assumption
The atomic clocks evidently accelerate along with the accelerating orbits as the space matter takes up increases RELATIONALLY.

NoNukes: Well no. You are making this stuff up.

Why would I want to make up things that are supported by simple, visible evidence? The light from billions of galaxies shows that atoms are always changing themselves relationally. Not a single ancient galaxies shines with the light frequencies of modern atoms and the differences are often associated with distance (the past).

Lets be brutally frank about Einstein's theory. He imagined that the vacuum of space time is bent by the Sun and the earth follows the local bent rails in the vacuum. No one has ever detected a shred of visible evidence for space time nor has anyone isolated or directly detected any gravity. Both Einstein and Newton believed that static matter does enormous amounts of work bending the path of the Earth without changing anything about itself. This is nothing but a mathematical version of perpetual motion.

It is much simpler to observe that atoms are always changing their light frequencies and the orbits in countless galaxies continue to accelerate out, billions of galaxies intrinsically growing into huge growth spirals, as the properties of all matter visibly change. What causes gravity has never been isolated but the fact that atoms keep on accelerating their light clocks as orbits also accelerate in defiance of every law of physics should tell us at least that gravity is not a perpetual motion effect.

The scientific emperor is naked.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by NoNukes, posted 05-16-2012 7:26 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by NoNukes, posted 05-17-2012 9:21 AM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 05-18-2012 5:44 PM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 69 of 309 (662796)
05-18-2012 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Taq
05-18-2012 5:44 PM


Re: first assumption
Once the frequencies are adjusted for the differences in velocity, they do match 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.

I guess you never heard of gravitational lensing?

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 05-18-2012 5:44 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by ringo, posted 05-18-2012 6:54 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 71 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-18-2012 9:28 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 75 of 309 (662820)
05-19-2012 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by ringo
05-18-2012 6:54 PM


Re: first assumption
Ringo wrote:
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.

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?

Scientists are taught that if something does change, it should be possible to observe signs of that change.

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by ringo, posted 05-18-2012 6:54 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by ringo, posted 05-19-2012 12:24 PM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 76 of 309 (662822)
05-19-2012 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by RAZD
05-18-2012 11:28 PM


Re: first assumption
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.

It is not for us to chose our first principle. It came down to us beginning with the pagan Greek, was modified by the medieval friars and later adjust by landed gentry from Europe. You can easily prove what your first principle is. Try really hard accepting the visible fact that every atom is observed to change. You will have great trouble doing so, not because of the evidence, but because you were trained to think with a creed, that atoms are perpetual motion engines and use this assumption in your physics definitions and empiricism. None are so blind as those who think with a blind creed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by RAZD, posted 05-18-2012 11:28 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by RAZD, posted 05-19-2012 2:58 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 77 of 309 (662823)
05-19-2012 1:45 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by RAZD
05-18-2012 11:23 PM


Re: SN1987A part 1
Did you notice that the Magellanic galaxies (the home of SN1987a) were ejected from the core of the Milky Way? A river of neutral hydrogen links them back to the south end of our galaxy. How can miniature galaxies be ejected without acceleration? If miniature galaxies ejected, what about the arms of the Milky Way? We observe galactic history that little globs packed with stars came out in equally spaced chains, rotated out, accelerated out as countless galaxies intrinsically grew into huge growth spirals. If stars streams continue to accelerate, how about planets? Do they also accelerate?

The Bible plainly states that they do. Elohim continued to form the Sun, Moon and stars and continued to place them in the raqiya. Raqiya is the noun form of the Hebrew verb to spread out.

Indeed generations of astronomers measured with angles a decreasing solar parallax. All ancient people admitted that the earliest people lived in the great time and that the planet used to pass close to earth. The Bible mentions both and also mentions the shattering of a planet at close range to Earth.

What could cause clocks and orbits to both accelerate? The simple answer is the gravitational phenomena. Whatever cause you might ascribe to gravity, you must admit that it does NOT propagate at infinite speed. If that be so it MUST accelerate days and years equally since it would pull on the trailing side of the Earth more than the leading hemisphere. We observe with sight how atomic clocks and orbits continue to accelerate outward in countless galaxies at many ranges. The gravitational phenomena seems to be associated with the visible way matter keeps on changing throughout cosmic history. Gravity clearly is not related to atomic perpetual motion phenomena as Einstein imagined

So where do you find a fixed reference system for determining how long ago SN1987a exploded? All atomic clocks, all orbits, all atoms are all violating the laws of physics. I wonder why? Modern physics has a dogma - the very idea the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last days - that all things remain the same. Only a biblical version of physics is confirmed with sight. We observe that the creation is enslaved to change - exactly like the Scriptures state.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 05-18-2012 11:23 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Coragyps, posted 05-19-2012 12:59 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 87 by RAZD, posted 05-19-2012 3:06 PM godsriddle has responded

    
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2568 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 81 of 309 (662835)
05-19-2012 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by ringo
05-19-2012 12:24 PM


Re: first assumption
godsriddle writes:
On the contrary, scientists are trained to reason, measure and mathematicate with an assumption - that atoms are perpetual motion engines.

Ringo writes:
It sn't an assumption; it's Newton's First Law. It's - once again - based on every observation.

No observation from billions of galaxies supports the notion that atoms do perpetual motion.

Newton did NOT begin his book Principia Mathematica with first principles. He simply assumed his principles and went on to define matter space and time as a measurement OPERATIONALLY. He rejected the common sense notion of time (crowing roosters and twilight) and defined time as a mathematical entity that is unaffected by anything exterior. Yet no one has ever detected any time or measured any of its properties. There is not a shred of evidence that time has an actuality. It exists in our minds, as Solomon explained 3,000 years ago. Yet scientists actually use it as the independent variable in many of their formulas and laws.

The death of modern physics will come about because of the visible history of the cosmos. Not a single ancient galaxy shines with the light of modern atoms. When we compare the morphology of galaxies at many ranges, we observe how clumps packed with stars accelerated out from formerly naked cores. We observe how galaxies intrinsically grew as the properties of all matter kept on changing in defiance of every law of modern physics.

Because scientist were trained to think with a single assumption, a first principle, they have filled the universe with magical things like invisible matter and vacuums that stretch themselves as they stretch all the light passing through the vacuum. No pagan could invent such absurd myths as scientific mythology / cosmology. Why? None of their laws of physics is being followed anywhere in the past. None of their definitions are supported by visible evidence. So they obfuscate - exactly as the Bible predicted they would do - because they think that all things remain the same. Even the Earth follows the simplicity of biblical physics. The continents only fit together on a tiny globe without major seas. The Bible states three times that the Earth spreads out in unbroken continuity and this happens above the waters.

The scientific first principle is visibly false which is why none of their laws of physics, which were contrived with an assumption, work in hundreds of billions of galaxies. But they work locally, says the scientists! They only work in the world of mathematical symbols. The symbols do not represent reality. If clocks are accelerating - as we observe - then the symbolical world of mathematical reality will crumble. Only a biblical cosmic history and biblical creation are supported by the only history that is visible as it happened, galactic history.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by ringo, posted 05-19-2012 12:24 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Coragyps, posted 05-19-2012 1:32 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 83 by ringo, posted 05-19-2012 2:09 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 93 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-19-2012 9:10 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 94 by Panda, posted 05-19-2012 9:36 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019