Jump to content


Photo

How Fast Did God Expand His Universe?


  • Please log in to reply
164 replies to this topic

#1 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 02 December 2014 - 12:04 PM

Just how fast did God expand His created world?

 

tumblr_n5shbpP54T1qaoifyo1_500_zpsiureyu

 

Perhaps this fast; but we don't know. What God Almighty did in this matter is a mystery but we do know what He is capable of, and that He is capable of suspending the known laws of nature in order to accomplish His divine purpose. He did this for Israel (Joshua 10) and he did it in John 6:17-21 in which the disciples, having rowed over 3 miles out on the Sea of Galille and received Him into their ship suddenly found themselves ashore. What happened to the time it should have taken them to row over three miles? It was eclipsed from history. Did anyone else in the world notice this? No, not that we know of.

 

Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; Isaiah 44:24

 

¶ The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him. Zechariah 21:1

 

The God we serve has no limitations as far as creation, space, time, and matter, but though He created all physical laws He Himself is not subject to those laws. If He were subject to them then He would not be God.



#2 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 02 December 2014 - 06:11 PM

Just how fast did God expand His created world?

 

tumblr_n5shbpP54T1qaoifyo1_500_zpsiureyu

 

Perhaps this fast; but we don't know. What God Almighty did in this matter is a mystery but we do know what He is capable of, and that He is capable of suspending the known laws of nature in order to accomplish His divine purpose. He did this for Israel (Joshua 10) and he did it in John 6:17-21 in which the disciples, having rowed over 3 miles out on the Sea of Galille and received Him into their ship suddenly found themselves ashore. What happened to the time it should have taken them to row over three miles? It was eclipsed from history. Did anyone else in the world notice this? No, not that we know of.

 

Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; Isaiah 44:24

 

¶ The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him. Zechariah 21:1

 

The God we serve has no limitations as far as creation, space, time, and matter, but though He created all physical laws He Himself is not subject to those laws. If He were subject to them then He would not be God.

 

Sorry about the double topic posts. I only discovered the mistake after it was too late to eliminate one of them.



#3 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,770 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 02 December 2014 - 10:29 PM

Just how fast did God expand His created world?

Good question.
 
Would this expansion leave evidence it took place?  If so, what form would that evidence take?
 

What God Almighty did in this matter is a mystery

Not entirely.
 

... we do know what He is capable of, and that He is capable of suspending the known laws of nature in order to accomplish His divine purpose.

Of course He is.


  • Goku likes this

#4 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 03 December 2014 - 11:20 AM

With the afore-posted conception of "God" anything and everything is possible.

Taking this as a possible reality, then what is the purpose in discussing anything? When everything and anything is possible, the meaning that could be ascribed to anything is empty.

#5 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 04 December 2014 - 08:10 AM

Let me guess: the skeptics I have put on ignore are trying to give the readers 'fact's' that prove that the time frame of light distance to the stars is justified and covers the period of time from the present all the way back to millions and/or billions of light years ago and therefore God's Word the Bible is wrong.

 

BUT........what I can say with confidence is: they left the supernatural power of God out of the equation. That is the downfall of every skeptic who trusts in the creation rather than the Creator: that is trusting in the 'word' (facts as they interepret them) of creation rather than what the Creator Himself told us about His creation.

 

I have never denied that what has been observed through the telescope actually occurred...but the time frame in which those occurrences observed happened did not occur in the time frame they demand. Their dissing of the supernatural element amounts to a lack of faith that the Creator God can do such things. How deeply embarrassing and shameful it will be for them to stand before the Lord in the day of judgment only to face the reality that He can...and did.

 

That alone will probably cost them their eternal souls.



#6 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 04 December 2014 - 09:56 AM

There are such huge problems for a 'big bang' (I like to call it the 'big fizzle')universe and the supposed 13.7 (or was that 13.8...or was it 14 billion light yrs age, or...?) most of all being that it is pure guesswork on the part of those who promote it. But let's examine one of the biggest of the problems as described by those who teach it: 

 

Quote: "The horizon problem is a problem with the standard cosmological model of the Big Bang which was identified in the late 1960s, primarily by Charles MisnerIt points out that different regions of the universe have not "contacted" each other because of the great distances between them, but nevertheless they have the same temperature and other physical properties. *This should not be possible, given that the transfer of information (or energy, heat, etc.) can occur, at most, at the speed of light.

 

One solution to the horizon problem is the theory of cosmic inflation. (I don't agree with their interpretation on this either but we will discuss it later)

 

Basic concept[edit]

"When one looks out into the night sky, distances also correspond to time into the past. A galaxy measured at ten billion light years in distance appears to us as it was ten billion years ago, because the light has taken that long to travel to the viewer. If one were to look at a galaxy ten billion light years away in one direction, say "west", and another in the opposite direction, "east", the total distance between them is twenty billion light years. This means that the light from the first has not yet reached the second, because the 13.8 billion (really?) years that the universe has existed simply is not a long enough time to allow it to occur. In a more general sense, there are portions of the universe that are visible to us, but invisible to each other, outside each other's respective particle horizons.

 

"In standard physical theories, no information can travel faster than the speed of light.  (Oh? Then how does the event horizon (i.e. 'edge) travel faster than the stars/galaxies in the first place? And, that being so...how do they derive information about a huge expanse of what must be totally empty space by now to even know it exists?) In this context, "information" means "any sort of physical interaction". For instance, heat will naturally flow from a hotter area to a cooler one, and in physics terms this is one example of information exchange. Given the example above, the two galaxies in question cannot have shared any sort of information; they are not in "causal contact". One would expect, then, that their physical properties would be different, and more generally, that the universe as a whole would have varying properties in different areas.

"Contrary to this expectation, the universe is in fact extremely isotropic, which also implies homogeneity. The cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), which fills the universe, is almost precisely the same temperature everywhere in the sky, about 2.728 +/- 0.004  K. The differences in temperature are so slight that it has only recently become possible to develop instruments capable of making the required measurements.This presents a serious problem; if the universe had started with even slightly different temperatures in different areas, then there would simply be no way it could have evened itself out to a common temperature by this point in time."

 

This point alone is devasting to the present theory of cosmic evolution and the 'big bang'/long age idea of the universe, but you won't find many who believe in it who are willing to admit it.

 

I should point out here that if the universe is a mere 6,000 yrs old then this problem does not exist. Uniformity of temperature would be the same throughout as we measure it now...approx. 2.7 K. But understand that 6,000 yrs by our clock and 13.7 billion yrs from God's perspective are probably the same thing. It just depends on who made the yardstick and how it was calibrated.

 

"According to the Big Bang model, as the density of the universe dropped (while it expanded) it eventually reached a point where photons in the "mix" of particles were no longer immediately impacting matter; they "decoupled" from the plasma and spread out into the universe as a burst of light. This is thought to have occurred about 300,000 years after the Big Bang(Do you see the assumptions they make? They don't know this but they want you to THINK that they know.)The volume of any possible information exchange at that time was 900,000 light years across, using the speed of light and the rate of expansion of space in the early universe. Instead, the entire sky has the same temperature, a volume 1088 times larger.

 

So they describe the theory and the problems with the theory; Do they have a solution to this problem? No, but again they want you to THINK they have a solution...because, they must save the theory of longevity (a very old universe) at all cost.

 

Quote: "The theory of cosmic inflation provides one solution to the problem (along with several others such as the flatness problem) by postulating a short 10−32 second period of exponential expansion (dubbed "inflation") in the first seconds of the history of the universe. During inflation, the universe would have increased in size by an enormous factor. Prior to the inflation the entire universe was small and causally connected; it was during this period that the physical properties evened out. Inflation then expanded the universe rapidly, "locking in" the uniformity at large distances.

 

One consequence of cosmic inflation is that the anisotropies in the Big Bang are reduced but not entirely eliminated. Differences in the temperature of the cosmic background are smoothed by cosmic inflation, but they still exist." (All quotes from Wikipedia)

 

10−32 second??? By what experiment can they deduce that the universe was projected into a much larger space at the aforesaid time frame? None. The 10−32 second idea is arbirtrary and  so are any numerical values that are given to help them 'solve' their dilemma. But of course those geniuses who expect us to believe their nonsense don't have a clue why the 'big bang' even occurred in the first place nor where all the matter and energy originated...in the first placethink.gif

 

(P.S. most of their sources on this come from Scientific American).



#7 Goku

Goku

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • USA

Posted 04 December 2014 - 09:57 AM

 

Let me guess: the skeptics I have put on ignore are trying to give the readers 'fact's' that prove that the time frame of light distance to the stars is justified and covers the period of time from the present all the way back to millions and/or billions of light years ago and therefore God's Word the Bible is wrong.

 

BUT........what I can say with confidence is: they left the supernatural power of God out of the equation. That is the downfall of every skeptic who trusts in the creation rather than the Creator: that is trusting in the 'word' (facts as they interepret them) of creation rather than what the Creator Himself told us about His creation.

 

I have never denied that what has been observed through the telescope actually occurred...but the time frame in which those occurrences observed happened did not occur in the time frame they demand. Their dissing of the supernatural element amounts to a lack of faith that the Creator God can do such things. How deeply embarrassing and shameful it will be for them to stand before the Lord in the day of judgment only to face the reality that He can...and did.

 

That alone will probably cost them their eternal souls.

 

I was hoping I could just sit back and watch the thread unfold with a bag of popcorn, but you should really stop being smug, take people off ignore, and address what they are saying instead replying to what you think people are saying. Otherwise you look like, well, someone disconnected from reality to put it lightly and nicely.

 

For all I know I'm on ignore too lol. Must be boring to be surrounded by a bunch of yes-men all the time. 



#8 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 04 December 2014 - 10:27 AM

 

I was hoping I could just sit back and watch the thread unfold with a bag of popcorn,

 

 

This keeps you from enjoying your popcorn? Poor thing. Add a little salt of truth to your bag and maybe that will help.

 

 

but you should really stop being smug,

 

 

Not smug: discretionary. I have a reason why those hard-heads are on ignore. I also have a reason why you are not on ignore......at least not yet.

 

 

Goku, on 04 Dec 2014-11:57 AM, said:

take people off ignore,

 

No.

 

I will not afford respect to those who do not merit it. To continue to communicate with those who continually treat the truth like it's a rubber band to be played with becomes redundant.

 

Goku, on 04 Dec 2014-11:57 AM, said:

Otherwise you look like, well, someone disconnected from reality to put it lightly and nicely.

 

In whose eyes? Not my brethren here on EFF. Most of them are tired of their nonsense also. 

 

 

For all I know I'm on ignore too lol. Must be boring to be surrounded by a bunch of yes-men all the time. 

You just found out that you aren't.  Nobody here is a 'yes-man' to me nor anyone else. When we disagree with each other we say so but we get along pretty well.
 
Now, why don't you stop your complaining and state your position on things that are said on this thread?

  • Giovanni likes this

#9 Enoch 2021

Enoch 2021

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,412 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:The WORD of GOD. Biochemistry, Microbiology, Physics, Genetics

    Military(ret.)
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 04 December 2014 - 05:59 PM

 

One consequence of cosmic inflation is that the anisotropies in the Big Bang are reduced but not entirely eliminated. Differences in the temperature of the cosmic background are smoothed by cosmic inflation, but they still exist." (All quotes from Wikipedia)

 

 

 

Hey Cal,

 

The Pioneer of "Inflation Theory" Professor Paul Steinhardt, considers it bunk now....

 

"Since 1983, it has become clear that inflation is very flexible (parameters can be adjusted to give any result) and generically leads to a multiverse consisting of patches in which any outcome is possible.  Imagine a scientific theory that was designed to explain and predict but ends up allowing literally any conceivable possibility without any rule about what is more likely.  What good is it?  It rules out nothing and can never be put to a real test."
Horgan, J (Interview):  Paul Steinhardt ( Pioneer of Inflation Theory, Albert Einstein Professor in Science and Director of the Center for Theoretical Science at Princeton); Scientific American, 1 December 2014.
 
What other "theory/theories" does this remind you of  think.gif 

  • Calypsis4 and Giovanni like this

#10 Goku

Goku

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • USA

Posted 04 December 2014 - 07:32 PM

Just how fast did God expand His created world?

 

What's your evidence that the universe is expanding or did expand in the past? 



#11 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 05 December 2014 - 03:13 AM

[color=#0000ff]Let me guess: the skeptics I have put on ignore are trying to ....

This is the most silly thing that you can do. It's so silly that I can't elaborate.

#12 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 05 December 2014 - 07:41 AM

 

What's your evidence that the universe is expanding or did expand in the past? 

 

Well, since you want to see what piasan has to say, then ask him.

 

Actually I am not certain that the universe is still expanding but I'm not critical of that position. But for it's expansion in the past we have God's Word on it. There really is no data for it....we only have hints from what we now observe. I've learned however that appearances can be deceiving.



#13 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 05 December 2014 - 07:50 AM

 

 

 

Hey Cal,

 

The Pioneer of "Inflation Theory" Professor Paul Steinhardt, considers it bunk now....

 

"Since 1983, it has become clear that inflation is very flexible (parameters can be adjusted to give any result) and generically leads to a multiverse consisting of patches in which any outcome is possible.  Imagine a scientific theory that was designed to explain and predict but ends up allowing literally any conceivable possibility without any rule about what is more likely.  What good is it?  It rules out nothing and can never be put to a real test."
Horgan, J (Interview):  Paul Steinhardt ( Pioneer of Inflation Theory, Albert Einstein Professor in Science and Director of the Center for Theoretical Science at Princeton); Scientific American, 1 December 2014.
 
What other "theory/theories" does this remind you of  think.gif 

 

 

Yeah, thanks, Enoch. No surprise at all on this one.

 

It's another problem for them but I think the Horizon problem I mentioned above is, by itself, another huge problem for them. It's about as devastating to cosmic evolution theory as is the spiral galaxy problem but I'm telling you, almost all evolutionists (cosmic, biological, or otherwise) are thoroughly Orwellianized and their minds won't even let them gravitate towards the real truth of the matter: A God created universe that is actually quite young.



#14 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,770 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 05 December 2014 - 10:47 AM

Let me guess: the skeptics I have put on ignore are trying to give the readers 'fact's' that prove that the time frame of light distance to the stars is justified and covers the period of time from the present all the way back to millions and/or billions of light years ago and therefore God's Word the Bible is wrong.

Well, Calypsis belw that one.  Since there were only two responses and only one of those was from someone he chooses to ignore, it would have been easy enough for him to check it out.....

 

That is the downfall of every skeptic who trusts in the creation rather than the Creator: that is trusting in the 'word' (facts as they interepret them) of creation rather than what the Creator Himself told us about His creation.

As if the Bible isn't interpreted... even after the linguistic interpretation has taken place.  To me that's one of the amusing things about YEC.  They like to go on about how we are "interpreting" the facts while they totally ignore that they are interpreting the Bible which has, itself, been interpreted during multiple translations.

 

 I have a reason why those hard-heads are on ignore.

Yeah... Calypsis, the 26 year physics teacher with 45 years of physics research, doesn't want to discuss physics.  As a result, he leaves every analysis offered in rebuttal to his insignificant claims unanswered.

 

 To continue to communicate with those who continually treat the truth like it's a rubber band to be played with becomes redundant.

The truth is that I've been here for over a year and have presented probably dozens of detailed analyses of Calypsis claims as well as claims presented by others.  All of these are based on well established LAWS of physics.  To date, Calypsis (despite his extensive experience) has not shown an error in even one of these evaluations.  That was true even before he decided to ignore them. 

 

Just how fast did God expand His created world?

Now, why don't you stop your complaining and state your position on things that are said on this thread?

What's your evidence that the universe is expanding or did expand in the past? 

Well, since you want to see what piasan has to say, then ask him.

How utterly pathetic.

 

Calypsis opens the topic with a claim that God expanded the world.  Goku asks Calypsis for HIS evidence.  Calypsis deflects the question to what I have to say.

 

It should be obvious to the most casual observer that if Goku wanted to know what I have to say, he would have asked me.  Goku did not ask me... he asked Calypsis about a claim Calypsis made in the OP. 

 

It should also be obvious to the most casual observer, Calypsis has no interest at all in a real discussion of claims he has presented.  It's hardly surprising, however.... he has done that many times with me.

 

Trying to have a discussion with Calypsis is like playing chess with a pigeon.



#15 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 05 December 2014 - 12:33 PM

Well, Calypsis belw that one. ... ... It's hardly surprising, however... ...Trying to have a discussion with Calypsis is like playing chess with a pigeon.


Accuracy of the highest order. What am I trying to "say"? I would have accepted "blue that one"; "belw" works just fine for me!

#16 Goku

Goku

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • USA

Posted 05 December 2014 - 03:35 PM

Well, since you want to see what piasan has to say, then ask him.

 

Actually I am not certain that the universe is still expanding but I'm not critical of that position. But for it's expansion in the past we have God's Word on it. There really is no data for it....we only have hints from what we now observe. I've learned however that appearances can be deceiving.

 

I actually think a dialogue between you and Piasan would be most productive. You seem to make a grave error that the big bang is necessarily an atheistic belief, as you should already know believers have an answer for where the big bang ultimately came from: God. 

 

So you have no evidence outside Bible verses that the universe has ever expanded? Can you think of any way to test whether or not the universe expanded or is expanding? 



#17 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 05 December 2014 - 04:11 PM

 

I actually think a dialogue between you and Piasan would be most productive.

 

 

Don't even go there again, please. It serves no purpose to try to communicate with a know-it-all who absolutely refuses to be corrected even by those of his own persuasion. He yields on nothing no matter how clear-cut his ideas are destroyed with (1)scientific fact, (2) logic/common sense, nor (3) & most importantly, God's Word.

 

Goku, on 5 Dec 2014 5:35 PM, said:

You seem to make a grave error that the big bang is necessarily an atheistic belief, as you should already know believers have an answer for where the big bang ultimately came from: God.

 

I never said that. But the world of science is dominated by atheistic influence in such matters. That isn't hard to prove for this day and age.  I know that believers in God believe in the 'big bang'. So? Their belief in that fairytale and their attempt to combine it with the biblical creation doesn't change the truth. The creation by God was orderly and planned (Einstein: God did not throw dice)...while the 'big bang' was disorderly and unplanned. It takes a spiritual blindness to not see the contradiction.

 

Goku, on 5 Dec 2014 5:35 PM, said:

So you have no evidence outside Bible verses that the universe has ever expanded? Can you think of any way to test whether or not the universe expanded or is expanding? 

 

You're talking about the Word of God. It's supernatural content is no longer in question for those of us who have experienced it's power. But in answer to your question: if the red shift is truly legitimate in measuring distance then there seems to be a case for it, along with the type  1a supernova (SN) evidence. Unfortunately there is about as much evidence against the aforementioned evidence. I'll be posting that shortly after I organize things. For one thing I don't buy the argument that empty space is moving outward faster than the speed of light...when in fact we are told that c is a constant and has never changed. What pushes empty space into .....???(What?) If the 'big bang' was not, after all an explosion....then what powers that empty space to expand into .....whatever is out there beyond the edge  of empty space?



#18 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 05 December 2014 - 04:53 PM

There are other huge problems with the big bang/13.7 billion yr age that is attached to our universe by cosmic evolution theory. One of the latest came to a head in 2010 as it concerns Quasars, the strongest illuminated objects which are supposed to be among the earliest developed systems viewed by astronomers.

 

(PhysOrg.com) -- The phenomenon of time dilation is a strange yet experimentally confirmed effect of relativity theory. One of its implications is that events occurring in distant parts of the universe should appear to occur more slowly than events located closer to us. For example, when observing supernovae, scientists have found that distant explosions seem to fade more slowly than the quickly-fading nearby supernovae.


  http:/  

The effect can be explained because (1) the speed of light is a constant (independent of how fast a light source is moving toward or away from an observer) and (2) the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, which causes light from distant objects to redshift (i.e. the wavelengths to become longer) in relation to how far away the objects are from observers on Earth. In other words, as space expands, the interval between light pulses also lengthens. Since expansion occurs throughout the universe, it seems that time dilation should be a property of the universe that holds true everywhere, regardless of the specific object or event being observed. However, a new study has found that this doesn’t seem to be the case - quasars, it seems, give off light pulses at the same rate no matter their distance from the Earth, without a hint of time dilation.

 

Astronomer Mike Hawkins from the Royal Observatory in Edinburgh came to this conclusion after looking at nearly 900 quasars over periods of up to 28 years. When comparing the light patterns of quasars located about 6 billion light years from us and those located 10 billion light years away, he was surprised to find that the light signatures of the two samples were exactly the same. If these quasars were like the previously observed supernovae, an observer would expect to see longer, “stretched” timescales for the distant, “stretched” high-redshift quasars. But even though the distant quasars were more strongly redshifted than the closer quasars, there was no difference in the time it took the light to reach Earth

 

phys.org/news190027752.htm

 

Enough to give a dedicated big banger a nightmare. The red shift and time dilation factor are supposed to match each other; but not so for the quasars. How can that be? Were explanations offered? Of course, there always are 'explanations' offered but just like the problem with cold dark matter/dark energy' they can't come up with one. What is supposed to work out (the physics) on paper just isn't the reality they are observing.



#19 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 05 December 2014 - 10:48 PM

...

phys.org/news190027752.htm

...


Linky dinky no clinky.

#20 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,770 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 05 December 2014 - 10:57 PM

http:/  
......
phys.org/news190027752.htm



Linky dinky no clinky.

 

The link was broken up by text, as indicated above.  When I tried it, it didn't work either, but googling "190027752.htm" produced a link to the page.  The paper itself can be found here: http://mnras.oxfordj...405/3/1940.full

 

I've just scanned the paper at this point so I'm reserving comment for a bit...

 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users