11 Aug 11
2 edits
Originally posted by UllrI'm no scientist but as I understand it the speed of light (in a vacuum) is a constant, however time itself is not. Time is affected by mass i.e. time travels slower in proximity to large celestial bodies such as the earth; this has been proven in experiments I believe.
3. The assumption I am making is that light travels at a certain speed and that the distance to various galaxies is known. Are you arguing that these calculations are suspect?
The point is that time is not a constant, and in the"early" universe the proximity of matter and also the speed at which that matter moves relative to other mass in the universe, will have had enormous effect on time. Therefore it is my contention that the "age" of the universe cannot be defined using methods we understand.
11 Aug 11
1 edit
Originally posted by UllrNo. All the answers are not in the Holy Bible. It is only a guide. Everything
So we must not believe that it is possible that the universe is billions of years old?
Should the study of Astronomy simply discontinue? I mean if all the answers are already in the bible then what can we gain by research?
else requires us to study and learn the wonders of God's creations. Then we
can better appreciate and praise the Creator.
11 Aug 11
Originally posted by divegeesterBut speed is a function of space and time. So the distance covered by light, over a given time remains constant.
I'm no scientist but as I understand it the speed of light (in a vacuum) is a constant, however time itself is not. Time is affected by mass i.e. time travels slower in proximity to large celestial bodies such as the earth; this has been proven in experiments I believe.
The point is that time is not a constant, and in the"early" universe the proximity of matter and also the speed at which that matter moves relative to other mass in the universe, will have had enormous effect on time. Therefore it is my contention that the "age" of the universe cannot be defined using methods we understand.
Well that depends on what you mean by the 'early' universe. We are talking here about galaxies, that would probably have taken millions of years to form.
11 Aug 11
Originally posted by RJHindsAs space stretches (which is how stars move away from us so fast), the light wave also stretches. This is called redshift and can be measured exactly, so no, the calculation are not messed up.
P.S. Some scientist say the stars are moving away from us faster
than the speed of life. If this is true, then that would mess up the
calculations.
11 Aug 11
Originally posted by UllrNot according to Einstein.
That could be, then again some stars could be moving towards us faster than the speed of light as well.
The only reason stars can move away from us faster than the speed of light is because space itself is expanding. Unless some parts of space are contracting (which we have not detected within the visible universe), nothing can move towards us faster than the speed of light.
11 Aug 11
Originally posted by twhiteheadI've already said that space is not pliable or stretchable like putty. Space
Not according to Einstein.
The only reason stars can move away from us faster than the speed of light is because space itself is expanding. Unless some parts of space are contracting (which we have not detected within the visible universe), nothing can move towards us faster than the speed of light.
does not expand and contract on its on, either. Get this out of your head.
Galaxies may have not taken millions of years to form because God made
them. Nobody knows how quickly He made them.
12 Aug 11
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHinds...
ASSUME makes an "ASS" out of "U" and "ME". Seriously, the Holy Bible
says God stretched out the heavens. So we have no way of knowing how
close the stars were together before God stretched out the heavens. Just
as man being created as an adult would appear older than a few hours
the heavens would also appear older than a few hours, if you get the log ...[text shortened]... ster
than the speed of life. If this is true, then that would mess up the
calculations.
12 Aug 11
Originally posted by RJHindsIt seems like you already make an ass out of yourself with all this hyper-literal Bible talk. So probably about half of ASSUME's work is already done.
ASSUME makes an "ASS" out of "U" and "ME". Seriously, the Holy Bible
says God stretched out the heavens. So we have no way of knowing how
close the stars were together before God stretched out the heavens. Just
as man being created as an adult would appear older than a few hours
the heavens would also appear older than a few hours, if you get the log ...[text shortened]... ster
than the speed of life. If this is true, then that would mess up the
calculations.
12 Aug 11
Originally posted by LemonJelloI am not assuming. It is written in the Holy Bible. You should read it
It seems like you already make an ass out of yourself with all this hyper-literal Bible talk. So probably about half of ASSUME's work is already done.
sometime. Then you might be as smart as I am.
12 Aug 11
Originally posted by UllrIf there is a creator he, yes he could make the light from starts 13 billion years away be seen in an instant.
I have a question for those here that believe that the Earth is only a few thousand years old. Do you also believe that the entire universe is thus only a few thousand years old?
Here's what I think. I think the universe is at least 13.2 billion years old. Why? Because the most distant observed galaxy is 13.2 billion light years away. If the universe w ...[text shortened]... of galaxies and their distances from Earth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_galaxies
12 Aug 11
Originally posted by UllrThe Light travel time problem. 🙂 No creation scientist have sound theories because they seem to break down for the young earth / universe folks. If light traveled faster in the past then it would have a direct effect on output of stars ect. I'm a Christian but it just seems deceptive if what we see out in this vast universe never actually happened. If the universe is only 10.000 years old then a super nova seen beyond that point never actually happened.
1. I was being facetious of course with my comment about using logic in this forum. Although quite often I see it ignored in favor of dogma.
2. I was making no assumption as to how the universe was created because quite honestly I don't know how it was created. At least I can admit it.
3. The assumption I am making is that light travels at a certain ...[text shortened]... he distance to various galaxies is known. Are you arguing that these calculations are suspect?
Manny
12 Aug 11
Originally posted by menace71
The Light travel time problem. 🙂 No creation scientist have sound theories because they seem to break down for the young earth / universe folks. If light traveled faster in the past then it would have a direct effect on output of stars ect. I'm a Christian but it just seems deceptive if what we see out in this vast universe never actually happened. If the ...[text shortened]... nly 10.000 years old then a super nova seen beyond that point never actually happened.
Manny