Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8929 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-24-2019 9:08 PM
21 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, JonF, Theodoric (4 members, 17 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,376 Year: 15,412/19,786 Month: 2,135/3,058 Week: 509/404 Day: 24/89 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   How do creationists explain stars?
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 6 of 297 (289518)
02-22-2006 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by carini
02-19-2006 1:47 AM


Not only do objects appear to be that far away, they've been measured to be. A month or two ago a measurement to a star-forming region of about 6000 light years was reported that was based ONLY on geometry: we know the size of our Earth's orbit, and they measured the angular deflection of a maser in the next spiral arm of our galaxy over six months' time.

Similarly, the distance to the galaxy Messier 106 has been measured using only geometry along with the same sort of redshift that the police use to give you a speeding ticket. That distance is 25,000,000 light years. No amount of hand-waving about "changing speed of light" can explain what we see out there in any "young universe" scenario.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by carini, posted 02-19-2006 1:47 AM carini has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 9 of 297 (289546)
02-22-2006 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by iano
02-22-2006 11:26 AM


Iano - start with Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by iano, posted 02-22-2006 11:26 AM iano has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by kinetic2080, posted 03-02-2007 4:52 AM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 11 of 297 (289553)
02-22-2006 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by iano
02-22-2006 11:26 AM


How do we tell the distance to anything when it is not there in the first place?

By this I presume you mean "when it's no longer in the place it was when it emitted that ray of light?" We can measure pretty accurately how fast many objects in our galaxy are moving, and only a very few are going at even a noticeable fraction of the speed of light. Past (or future) positions of lots of nearby stars have been calculated, and it's no more difficult than "A train leaves Topeka eastbound at 47 mph....."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by iano, posted 02-22-2006 11:26 AM iano has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 23 of 297 (292642)
03-06-2006 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Joman
03-06-2006 8:54 AM


Re: Distance to stars and the speed of light.
For example "you can't show me a picture of clouds in space and say "here is were stars are being formed" and think I'm dumb enough to believe it.

Are you being serious? Pictures, along with dozens of observations of baby stars, toddler stars, adolescent stars....., all gobbling up their protostellar disks and igniting to full starhood, and you'll refuse to believe it??


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Joman, posted 03-06-2006 8:54 AM Joman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Joman, posted 03-06-2006 9:58 AM Coragyps has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 26 of 297 (292670)
03-06-2006 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Joman
03-06-2006 9:58 AM


Re: Distance to stars and the speed of light.
Even though we see it happening.... That's very interesting, Joman. Do you think mankind will ever be able to build a heavier-than-air flying machine?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Joman, posted 03-06-2006 9:58 AM Joman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Joman, posted 03-06-2006 10:55 AM Coragyps has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 30 of 297 (292699)
03-06-2006 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Joman
03-06-2006 10:55 AM


Re: Distance to stars and the speed of light.
I explained why such condensing action isn't possible. Gravity cannot overcome the energy of the individual atoms and molecules.

And you're mistaken. Your opinion fails to trump observation.

Where's the repulsive force to resist gravity in a collapsing gas cloud?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Joman, posted 03-06-2006 10:55 AM Joman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Joman, posted 03-06-2006 11:11 AM Coragyps has not yet responded
 Message 275 by Reserve, posted 04-05-2007 8:59 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 41 of 297 (292800)
03-06-2006 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Bubs
03-06-2006 3:14 PM


Re: Observed light vs calculated light
Hi, Bubs! Welcome!

That first link is such bizarre logic that it made my brain bleed partway through, and I had to quit reading. Really....light goes 150,000 km/sec westbound down the hall, but infinitely fast back? What happens when your transmitter and receiver are at the west end? Or if your hall runs NE to SW? Does it then go infinitely fast and return at 0.5c? How 'bout if you set up the experiment in a Hindu country like India instead of Jesusland? Does that change things?

Ad hoc seems a bit too kind....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Bubs, posted 03-06-2006 3:14 PM Bubs has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 61 of 297 (321080)
06-13-2006 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Rob
06-13-2006 10:46 AM


Re: RE Age of Stars
NKJ Isaiah 40:22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth..." It was people who said the earth was flat, Not the word of God.

ROFL.
When did you last see a three-dimensional circle, Rob?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 10:46 AM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 11:24 AM Coragyps has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 63 of 297 (321087)
06-13-2006 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Rob
06-13-2006 11:24 AM


Re: RE Age of Stars
I suspect he would relate in the simplest manner possible to us.

And "circle" is simpler and less ambiguous than "ball."

Right.....

Matthew 4:8 - “Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in their glory.”

On a spherical Earth?

[/OT digression]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 11:24 AM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 12:23 PM Coragyps has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 68 of 297 (321118)
06-13-2006 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Rob
06-13-2006 12:23 PM


Re: RE Age of Stars
Back to topic, Rob:

There is a galaxy, M33, that has been measured, by trigonometric methods, to be nearly eight hundred thousand parsecs away from us. That means that light from that galaxy takes about two million years to get here. "Exploding stars," novae, have been seen in M33. They must have gone nova about 2,000,000 years ago, or we couldn't see them yet. Their light wouldn't have reached us.

Did the creator fella create light from an event that didn't happen - because it would have happened 1,994,000 years before the "fourth day" in Genesis - just to fool us? Or what's going on? Can you explain that to me?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 12:23 PM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 3:23 PM Coragyps has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 71 of 297 (321187)
06-13-2006 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Rob
06-13-2006 3:23 PM


Re: RE Age of Stars
But I think the concept of a fully formed universe is self explanatory.

The concept of a fully-formed universe appearing that way a few thousands of years ago is utterly absurd, though. We have libraries full of data that show that all those galaxies out there are VERY OLD. All those stars that you can see at night are VERY OLD - half a million up to twelve billion years old. And the fact that we can see events whose light took millions or billions of years to reach us just eliminates the chance of an "appearance of age" universe unless Loki or Coyote is the God in Charge.

Surely the Christian God isn't the Author of Lies, eh?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 3:23 PM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 6:00 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 72 of 297 (321188)
06-13-2006 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Rob
06-13-2006 3:23 PM


Re: RE Age of Stars
We're not God, so why don't you ask Him some of these things?

He never picks up, and never calls back when I leave messages on His machine. You ask, and tell us what He says.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 3:23 PM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 6:05 PM Coragyps has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 80 of 297 (321238)
06-13-2006 7:38 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Rob
06-13-2006 6:05 PM


Re: RE Age of Stars
You have to talk to Him by His rules.

Like I said - report back to us with what he tells you. Just be sure it isn't Loki who gives you the answers.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Rob, posted 06-13-2006 6:05 PM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Rob, posted 06-15-2006 1:03 AM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 82 of 297 (321256)
06-13-2006 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by kuresu
06-13-2006 8:06 PM


Re: RE Age of Stars
High school texts still, with a respectable fraction of our electric power directly from fission, say things like "under ordinary circumstances, energy is conserved." Like a power reactor or the Sun was unordinary, I guess...

This pre-1915 mentality is a little odd, indeed. Just because Kelvin and J. Willard Gibbs did their work before Einstein doesn't mean that textbook publishers shouldn't try to catch up a bit. The classic Laws Of Thermo are, as usually phrased, for non-nuclear phenomena. And that works a lot of the time in fossil-fuel sorts of isolated cases, but not at all in general. After all, those fossil fuels, and wind energy, and wood to burn all are dependant of the Sun "destroying" mass to make light and heat. It's like Cavediver says, though: we're not destroying but converting less-familiar to more-familiar forms of energy.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by kuresu, posted 06-13-2006 8:06 PM kuresu has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 109 of 297 (322195)
06-16-2006 10:41 AM


Rob: The distance to the Large Magellanic Cloud is about 170,000 light years, as determined by several methods including plain old trigonometry. This means that the light we saw here on Earth from Supernova 1987A came from an explosion that occurred about 170,000 years before 1987.

If the Earth is about 6000 years old, and the stars were created four days after the Earth, how does this work? Did the star in the LMC explode 164,000 years before it was created? Did light from an explosion that never really happened get "created in transit" 6000 years ago so astronomers could watch events that didn't happen unfold for these last 19 years?

How does that work?


  
1
2Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019