former speed of light

Arky, as you are making the assertion, the onus is on you to provide a good reason why anyone should consider this fantastic scenario. Perhaps you could start by providing evidence for the existence of a spiritual universe.

eer, Arky, repetition does not make an assertion any more valid.Perhaps, based on your logic, I can simply rebut your assertion about spiritual universes and changing speed of light by simply asserting that I don't believe in such things.

I think this has turned into the silliest thread I have ever seen on this board, even sillier than some of the intended humourous threads. The opening premise was absurd and it has gone downhill from there. Maybe creationists are such a rarity that we have to pamper them by letting them sprout any sort of made-up nonsense so that they don't spit the dummy and leave?I suggest the thread be killed off before it becomes even more embarrassing.

Well Arky, time to put some meat on the bones of your fantasy. When did the physical world and the "spirit world" split? When did the spiritual light suddenly turn into physical light?

How about a bit more precision? 6,000 years ago? 10,000 years ago? 2,000 years ago?

So "physical" light was riding on the coattails of "spiritual" light? So "physical" light was travelling faster than 300,000 km/s at that time? How fast roughly?So, did the separation of "physical" and "spiritual" light occur instantaneously and simultaneously throughout the universe? Can we say that some thousands of years ago one photon was emitted by a star and it travelled to the earth many times faster than c and the next photon from the same star an instant later, after the separation, started on its journey to earth at the current rate of c?Did all the P light travelling on the coattails of S light suddenly slow down to c when the separation occurred?

Perhaps that is material for a new thread. Let's have arky concentrate on answering questions directly related to his spiritual light fantasy.

Arky, any answers to my questions in message #110?

Arky, spell crank.It appears that you have no idea what you are talking about and you are just making it up as you go along. Pity you are so insecure that you have to rely on such fantasies so that you can put inordinate faith in the literal interpretation of a religious text.

Arky, you appear to be too silly or too ignorant to realise that jar has already identified the hole in your scenario in message #123. If you can't understand then I suppose we can continue to lead you towards the outcome step by step.Try answering my question from message #110. Your supposed answers in message #118 did not address the issues.

quote:

---

So "physical" light was travelling faster than 300,000 km/s at that time? How fast roughly?
So, did the separation of "physical" and "spiritual" light occur instantaneously and simultaneously throughout the universe? Can we say that some thousands of years ago one photon was emitted by a star and it travelled to the earth many times faster than c and the next photon from the same star an instant later, after the separation, started on its journey to earth at the current rate of c?

​

Did all the P light travelling on the coattails of S light suddenly slow down to c when the separation occurred?

---

So Arky, with all of this professed ignorance of the properties of "spiritual" light and "merged" light and ignorance of the effect of their supposed separation, how do you know that "merged" light and/or "spiritual" light travels faster than c? If so, how fast?

whatever, we're working on arky's fantasy at this time, not your own. Perhaps you could work on the implications of yor "model" so that it can be tested against reality.

Again Arky, how fast does/did this imaginary spiritual/merged light travel?

Arky's imaginary scenario is that the combined S and P light were travelling at near infinite speed. The implication is that, at the moment of spliting, those physical photons in transit in transit from a distant star to our earth must have been very spread out along the path as. Therefore, from an earthly viewer's perspective, instantly after the split occurred, all the stars dimmed and remained extremely dim until the first post-split photons arrive at which time the star suddenly appeared to become much brighter.Strane that no such pattern has been observed or recorded in the past few thousand years. Cold it be that arky's wild imaginings have no basis in observable reality?Is it through ignorance or intellectual dishonesty that arky refuses to address the issue of the first photon after the imaginary split?