question

[christanboy1130]

is it possible that when god created the world it came into existance by the big bang theory instead of just "poofing" into existance like many people believe. I believe that that is the creation of the world. Besides, the bible is pretty vague when it comes to how the world came into existance doesn't it?

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Yes it is possible and many accept both science and Christianity. There are many theistic evolutionists on this board that you can talk to about these ideas including myself.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

is it possible that when god created the world it came into existance by the big bang theory instead of just "poofing" into existance like many people believe. I believe that that is the creation of the world. Besides, the bible is pretty vague when it comes to how the world came into existance doesn't it?

God refers to himself as a potter. Job reveals that God rather painstakingly formed the earth. If you've watched a potter at work you have a good idea how God formed the earth (the only object we can study up close). The angels watched and rejoiced when the foundations were laid. This too, indicates a careful, methodical, process.

The finished product would have revealed this as well. You have to visualize the perfection that was the earth before the rebellion. It's orbit would have been perfectly circular, with no tilt in axis. No harsh winter, a tropical climate with abundant plant life. No destructive weather patterns. This is also the restored condition God has promised.

 

[Dannager]

is it possible that when god created the world it came into existance by the big bang theory instead of just "poofing" into existance like many people believe. I believe that that is the creation of the world. Besides, the bible is pretty vague when it comes to how the world came into existance doesn't it?

This is my belief as well, and that held by many Christians. In fact, it is also the official standpoint of the Catholic Church.

 

[KerrMetric]

It's orbit would have been perfectly circular, with no tilt in axis. No harsh winter, a tropical climate with abundant plant life. No destructive weather patterns. This is also the restored condition God has promised.

Even though Aristotle would have been proud of you this is impossible. The Earth could not have a perfectly circular orbit or one with zero obliquity no matter what. You have the climatic effects wrong anyway.

Why do people come on here pretending to know science yet they cannot help but screw it up?

 

[shernren]

No harsh winter, a tropical climate with abundant plant life.

The tilt of the earth produces seasons. The cold climate of the plar regions is not caused by the earth's tilt, but because the same amount of sunlight which would hit a small region of equatorial land perpendicularly hits a large region of polar land at an oblique angle. Intensity is power over area and since the same amount of power hits a larger area in the polar regions the intensity is less. It wouldn't matter how the earth is tilted: the harsh cold of polar regions stems from the fact that the earth is a sphere. For the whole earth to experience tropical temperatures, it would have to be all perpendicular to sunlight i.e. a flat plate facing the sun straight-on.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The tilt of the earth produces seasons. The cold climate of the plar regions is not caused by the earth's tilt, but because the same amount of sunlight which would hit a small region of equatorial land perpendicularly hits a large region of polar land at an oblique angle. Intensity is power over area and since the same amount of power hits a larger area in the polar regions the intensity is less. It wouldn't matter how the earth is tilted: the harsh cold of polar regions stems from the fact that the earth is a sphere. For the whole earth to experience tropical temperatures, it would have to be all perpendicular to sunlight i.e. a flat plate facing the sun straight-on.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that the polar regions would be tropical. I meant that most of the earth, where people live, would have generally warmer and more pleasant weather. I guess I was addressing extremes of weather caused by orbit and angle.

I'm saying that this isn't the original way earth was oriented in its orbit. A powerful force struck the earth, knocking it out of a perfect orbit, and off it's axis, and caused the destruction to earth that is evident in the geologic record, and in siesmic events still happening.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Even though Aristotle would have been proud of you this is impossible. The Earth could not have a perfectly circular orbit or one with zero obliquity no matter what. You have the climatic effects wrong anyway.

Why do people come on here pretending to know science yet they cannot help but screw it up?

What did I propose that science doesn't agree with?

 

[KerrMetric]

I'm saying that this isn't the original way earth was oriented in its orbit. A powerful force struck the earth, knocking it out of a perfect orbit, and off it's axis, and caused the destruction to earth that is evident in the geologic record, and in siesmic events still happening.

Complete hogwash. Think about the physics of this scenario!

 

[random_guy]

The finished product would have revealed this as well. You have to visualize the perfection that was the earth before the rebellion. It's orbit would have been perfectly circular, with no tilt in axis. No harsh winter, a tropical climate with abundant plant life. No destructive weather patterns. This is also the restored condition God has promised.

I'm sorry, but this was the funniest thing I've read in a long time. So the rebellion caused caused F=ma? That's what you're saying. The ellipse of the Earth's orbit is due to how forces work. It has nothing to being "knocked" off course by some mysterious force.

Somewhere Kepler is spinning in his grave (non-circular orbit I presume).

 

[KerrMetric]

What did I propose that science doesn't agree with?

Just about all of it.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Complete hogwash. Think about the physics of this scenario!

You think about it, I already have. 8^)

 

[Febe]

is it possible that when god created the world it came into existance by the big bang theory instead of just "poofing" into existance like many people believe. I believe that that is the creation of the world.

Yes, I find this to be the way He likely did it...
I mean... "Be light"... (my translation from Swedish Bible)... it sounds like it...

 

[random_guy]

What did I propose that science doesn't agree with?

Again, let's start with basic physics. The ellipseness of the Earth's orbit has very little effect on weather seasons. Quick thought example, when it's summer in the Northern hemisphere, what season is it in the Southern? If you guess winter, how is that possible if the Earth is closer to the sun in the summer (as you elluded to)?

Next, in this perfect world, in order for the Earth to have a circular orbit, the two foci that the Earth travels around must be one and the same. Right now, the Sun is one, the other is empty space. Please tell me pre-Fall what the 1 focus was that the Earth travelled around?

This is rapidly falling to dad level theorization.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Just about all of it.

How did you find a scientist to consult with on a Saturday? You're good! And which parts did he/she have a problem with?

 

[KerrMetric]

How did you find a scientist to consult with on a Saturday? You're good! And which parts did he/she have a problem with?

Well since planetary physics is my job I just use my own expertise.

 

[KerrMetric]

You think about it, I already have. 8^)

Thinking about it is useless when you don't have the skill set to do so. Wishful thinking is not physics.

 

[random_guy]

Well since planetary physics is my job I just use my own expertise.

That's really cool. Could you explain something to me? I've been searching for this, but haven't been able to find information about it. I know the first focus of a 2 body system is the center of mass of the system. In the case of the Earth and Sun, the Sun pretty much is the center of mass.

What is the physical meaning of the second focus (the empty space)? I know you can calculate it by observing the Earth's position relative to the Sun, but exactly what does it mean physically? Or does it have no meaning, and it just falls out from the math?

EDIT: to clarify question

 

[Dannager]

Well since planetary physics is my job I just use my own expertise.

I giggled.

 

[KerrMetric]

That's really cool. Could you explain something to me? I've been searching for this, but haven't been able to find information about it. I know the first focus of a 2 body system is the center of mass of the system. In the case of the Earth and Sun, the Sun pretty much is the center of mass.

What is the physical meaning of the second focus (the empty space)? I know you can calculate it by observing the Earth's position relative to the Sun, but exactly what does it mean physically? Or does it have no meaning, and it just falls out from the math?

EDIT: to clarify question

No physical significance.