Time Relative Creationism?

[FaithfulPilgrim]

Time relative creationism is the view that time could have flowed differently at the beginning than it does now. Usually, it is argued that time flowed slower in the beginning.

The Creation Week are seen as six literal days, but since time flow was slower then, the day's lasted longer, maybe thousands or even millions of years by today's time measurements. The day would still have 24 hours, but an hour could have been a lot longer back then.

I think this is a good reconciliation with Scripture and science, but what verses could be used to defend this view? Are there verses that refute the relativity of time?

What are your thoughts on this view of Creationism?

 

[-57]

Time relative creationism is the view that time could have flowed differently at the beginning than it does now. Usually, it is argued that time flowed slower in the beginning.

The Creation Week are seen as six literal days, but since time flow was slower then, the day's lasted longer, maybe thousands or even millions of years by today's time measurements. The day would still have 24 hours, but an hour could have been a lot longer back then.

I think this is a good reconciliation with Scripture and science, but what verses could be used to defend this view? Are there verses that refute the relativity of time?

What are your thoughts on this view of Creationism?

That would depend where you're standing. On earth or deep space.
Time is effected by gravity....and if at one time gravity was much, much stronger...on day 1-3 then time would appear to have stopped when viewed from deep space. On the forming earth a day would be normal but time in space would be zipping along a lot faster.

 

[SkyWriting]

Time relative creationism is the view that time could have flowed differently at the beginning than it does now. Usually, it is argued that time flowed slower in the beginning.
The Creation Week are seen as six literal days, but since time flow was slower then, the day's lasted longer, maybe thousands or even millions of years by today's time measurements. The day would still have 24 hours, but an hour could have been a lot longer back then.
I think this is a good reconciliation with Scripture and science, but what verses could be used to defend this view? Are there verses that refute the relativity of time?
What are your thoughts on this view of Creationism?

I believe the interest is completely valid. According to scripture there were three days before the stars were formed. Many like to imagine "24 HOUR DAYS!" Days are usually defined by the position of the sun in the "same" position 24 hours after it was first noted. So where was God standing each of these 24 hour periods? It seems kind of comical to picture God spinning around on the globe while creating it. In the dark.

"Time" is that thing which causes death.
Adam brought death into the world when he sinned.
Perhaps that's when time (as-we-know-it) began.

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man,
and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men,
because all sinned.

 

[Ken Behrens]

The simplest is the "one day is as a thousand years" passage (I Pet3:8) Since 1=365000 days, 365,000=1. The original Ps. 90:4 equates it to a watch of the night, which is maybe 3-4 hours, depending on the time of year. So now you have 365,000=1=1/6 to 1/8. That's enough numbers to get any outcome you want.

In Hebrew, Gen. 1 describes the creation of the blueprint of earth in heaven, and Gen. 2 the manifestation. Added to the above, you can make creation be as long or as short as you like.

 

[StevenMerten]

Hello Faithful Pilgrim,
It is not scripture, but science, specifically Time Dilation, you want to quote. Physical time is a variable and not a constant as many think. The faster you go the more time slows down, even to the point of time almost stoping. Earth was created first, then God said, 'Let There Be Light', which is the 'Big Bang'. The Big Bang is God creating light and everything else in the universe, other than the earth. So if God has earth traveling imensly faster than the 'Big Bang', then billions of years of star formation can occure in four days. God only put the earth into our sun's orbit on the fourth day of creation.

Time dilation and space flight
​

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on earth. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home. Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel through the entire known Universe in one human lifetime. The space travelers could return to Earth billions of years in the future. A scenario based on this idea was presented in the novel Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle.

Quoted From: Wikipedia Time Dilation
​

If science believes that rocket ships can travel tens of billions of years into the future, in eighty or one hundred years, (one life time), then why not believe that God can time dilate the earth to allow billions of years of star formation to happen in four days of creation?

This only explains how billions of years of star formation can occure in four days. Dinasours on earth would be a different issue.

Does this make sense to you?

 

[FaithfulPilgrim]

Hello Faithful Pilgrim,
It is not scripture, but science, specifically Time Dilation, you want to quote. Physical time is a variable and not a constant as many think. The faster you go the more time slows down, even to the point of time almost stoping. Earth was created first, then God said, 'Let There Be Light', which is the 'Big Bang'. The Big Bang is God creating light and everything else in the universe, other than the earth. So if God has earth traveling imensly faster than the 'Big Bang', then billions of years of star formation can occure in four days. God only put the earth into our sun's orbit on the fourth day of creation.

Time dilation and space flight
​

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on earth. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home. Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel through the entire known Universe in one human lifetime. The space travelers could return to Earth billions of years in the future. A scenario based on this idea was presented in the novel Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle.

Quoted From: Wikipedia Time Dilation
​

If science believes that rocket ships can travel tens of billions of years into the future, in eighty or one hundred years, (one life time), then why not believe that God can time dilate the earth to allow billions of years of star formation to happen in four days of creation?

This only explains how billions of years of star formation can occure in four days. Dinasours on earth would be a different issue.

Does this make sense to you?

Sort of.

 

[StevenMerten]

Hello Faithful Pilgrim,

It was Albert Einstein who discovered Time Dilation. His 'Theory of Relativity' is about Time Dilation. I see Time Dilation as God's great Creation tool. God's great desire in Creation is focused on, love for God capable, man. Obviously God knew His ‘Let There Be Light’ ‘Big Bang’ was going to need some time to cool and spread out, before He inserted earth into it. God wanted to create Adam in a weeks time. God wanted to Adam to see the stars. Even traveling at the speed of light, light needs time to hit earth from the stars. Even now, thousands of years after Adam, we would only be beginning to see a couple of stars, if it was not for God using Time Dilation at Creation.


Using Time Dilation, we have an earth that was created before everything else in the universe, yet it appears much younger. This is because far less time has elapsed on earth compared to the rest of the Universe, this is Time Dilation. God actually slowed elapsing physical time down to just a couple days on earth, while speeding up the rest of the cosmos which was elapsing time in the billions of years, during the same period; this is Time Dilation. Time Dilation still exists today, our GPS satellites have on board computers to compensate for it. Our astronauts come back to earth younger than their counterparts on earth. Time Dilation certainly is God’s great Creation tool for creating 14 billion years of star formation in four days of Creation.

 

[-57]

Hello Faithful Pilgrim,

It was Albert Einstein who discovered Time Dilation. His 'Theory of Relativity' is about Time Dilation. I see Time Dilation as God's great Creation tool. God's great desire in Creation is focused on, love for God capable, man. Obviously God knew His ‘Let There Be Light’ ‘Big Bang’ was going to need some time to cool and spread out, before He inserted earth into it. God wanted to create Adam in a weeks time. God wanted to Adam to see the stars. Even traveling at the speed of light, light needs time to hit earth from the stars. Even now, thousands of years after Adam, we would only be beginning to see a couple of stars, if it was not for God using Time Dilation at Creation.


Using Time Dilation, we have an earth that was created before everything else in the universe, yet it appears much younger. This is because far less time has elapsed on earth compared to the rest of the Universe, this is Time Dilation. God actually slowed elapsing physical time down to just a couple days on earth, while speeding up the rest of the cosmos which was elapsing time in the billions of years, during the same period; this is Time Dilation. Time Dilation still exists today, our GPS satellites have on board computers to compensate for it. Our astronauts come back to earth younger than their counterparts on earth. Time Dilation certainly is God’s great Creation tool for creating 14 billion years of star formation in four days of Creation.

Here's a video that explains how.

 

[FaithfulPilgrim]

Here's a video that explains how.

Thanks! I'll definitely check this out!

 

[SkyWriting]

Time relative creationism is the view that time could have flowed differently at the beginning than it does now. Usually, it is argued that time flowed slower in the beginning.

The Creation Week are seen as six literal days, but since time flow was slower then, the day's lasted longer, maybe thousands or even millions of years by today's time measurements. The day would still have 24 hours, but an hour could have been a lot longer back then.

I think this is a good reconciliation with Scripture and science, but what verses could be used to defend this view? Are there verses that refute the relativity of time?

What are your thoughts on this view of Creationism?

The original Creation was more like Heaven, with Adam and Eve not dieing and God was walking in The Garden and serpents talking and odd trees growing in the middle that you shouldn't eat from. It wasn't our normal Earth.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Time relative creationism is the view that time could have flowed differently at the beginning than it does now. Usually, it is argued that time flowed slower in the beginning.

The Creation Week are seen as six literal days, but since time flow was slower then, the day's lasted longer, maybe thousands or even millions of years by today's time measurements. The day would still have 24 hours, but an hour could have been a lot longer back then.

I think this is a good reconciliation with Scripture and science, but what verses could be used to defend this view? Are there verses that refute the relativity of time?

What are your thoughts on this view of Creationism?

Actually time slows under acceleration. Science believes the universe began accelerating at the beginning. {God stretched out the heavens}. This would cause time to flow faster at the beginning, as well as decay rates. But since they refuse to follow their own science and account for time dilation due to acceleration, they of course get the wrong answers.

Therefore by using the slower rate of clocks today, they come to an incorrect conclusion as to its age. But it is not merely clocks which ticked faster the further one goes back in time, but by extension decay rates as well. But again, they use the slower decay rate of today to calculate decay rates into the past without taking into account time dilation.

The twin under acceleration does not just have his clock change, but his decay rate as well, he ages less. If he tried to calculate his true age using the rate of his current clocks, he would come to the wrong result. As a matter of fact once acceleration begins, the true rate of time can never be deduced. The twin believed his clocks did not change. That the stationary twins clocks were the ones that changed. His error was made known when he returned to that frame and realized he was younger, not the stationary twin which he believed would be younger. he could not deduce anything correctly, even the changing of his own clocks. Everything he believed was shown to be wrong. Yet understanding we began acceleration an unknown time ago, proponents believe as did the twin that they are correct, even when the twin was never correct about anything concerning time...... and they my friend, are in the same position as was the twin, with the same mindset that he had before returning to the stationary frame.

It all relates to the real reason why c always calculates to c regardless of velocity. But that's a subject for a different, ummm, time ......

 

[lesliedellow]

By definition, time flows at the rate of one second per second.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

By definition, time flows at the rate of one second per second.

But the duration of what you call a second, and the duration of what someone traveling at 1/2 of c calls a second, are not the same duration in length.

Granted, both call their ticks a second, but neither second is of the same length.

So if for every 1 of my seconds 4 pass for you, but I am using my seconds to calculate your age, well you see the problem.

 

[lesliedellow]

But the duration of what you call a second, and the duration of what someone traveling at 1/2 of c calls a second, are not the same duration in length.

Yes it is. You don’t understand Relativity.

If they weren’t the same, the laws of nature would not be the same in all frames of reference, and that is precisely the thing which Gallilean Relativity, and later Einsteinian Relativity, guaranteed.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Yes it is. You don’t understand Relativity.

If they weren’t the same, the laws of nature would not be the same in all frames of reference, and that is precisely the thing which Gallilean Relativity, and later Einsteinian Relativity, guaranteed.

No it’s not, which is precisely why Einstein told you that the laws of physics were only the same in frames of reference moving at the same approximate velocity, and that in frames not moving at the same rate the laws of physics were different.

You fail to understand why the speed of light remains the same in every frame regardless of velocity.

If frames moving at different velocities had the same duration ticks of time, then there would be no need to use Lorentz transformations to transform one frame to the other, since they would already be the same. Now would there? One must use Lorentz transformations precisely because the duration of ticks that make up a second are different in every frame moving at a different velocity.

Also Relativity transforms would not need to be applied to the GPS clocks to adjust them to earth clocks if they already ran at the same duration.

Perhaps I’ll post in a bit why light always remains the same speed in every frame regardless of velocity later when I’m not using my phone. Perhaps then you’ll understand what relativity really is.

 

[lesliedellow]

......the speed of light remains the same in every frame regardless of velocity.

Exactly right. The speed of light is a law of nature, and it remains invariant under a Lorentz Transformation.

If frames moving at different velocities had the same duration ticks of time, then there would be no need to use Lorentz transformations to transform one frame to the other, since they would already be the same.

If a spaceship leaves Earth at c/2 the Lorentz Transformation tells you that for an OBSERVER ON EARTH clocks on the spaceship will appear to be running approximately 13% slower than clocks on Earth, but for an OBSERVER ON THE SPACESHIP his clocks will appear to be running at normal speed, whereas, for him, the clocks on Earth will appear to be running 13% slower.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Exactly right. The speed of light is a law of nature, and it remains invariant under a Lorentz Transformation.

No, it remains invariant “because of” a Lorentz Transformation.

I will repeat again. If the seconds in both frames were if the same duration, there would be no need of transforms of any kind, being they were already the same.

If a spaceship leaves Earth at c/2 the Lorentz Transformation tells you that for an OBSERVER ON EARTH clocks on the spaceship will appear to be running approximately 13% slower than clocks on Earth, but for an OBSERVER ON THE SPACESHIP his clocks will appear to be running at normal speed, whereas, for him, the clocks on Earth will appear to be running 13% slower.

It’s clear you read the surface, but don’t really pay attention to what is said.

The twin in motion thinks his clocks remain the same. He thinks the stationary twins clocks change.

He is wrong. Evident in the fact that when he returns to the stationary frame he finds he is younger, not the stationary twin who he thought had slower clocks.

Hence the very reason Einstein used a stationary twin, to show it was changes in velocity which caused clocks to slow.

The stationary twins clocks do not change at all, he is stationary. The twin in motion is simply unable to perceive correctly that not only did his clocks slow, but the stationary twins clocks didn’t.

Don’t be fooled into thinking like the twin in motion who could not get a single observation correct.

 

[lesliedellow]

No, it remains invariant “because of” a Lorentz Transformation.

That the speed of light in a vacuum has a given value is a law of nature, and a fundamental presupposition of science is that the laws of nature are the same for everybody. The Gallilean Transformation does not preserve a law of nature. Therefore a new transtormation - that of Lorentz - was needed which does leave the laws of nature unchanged.

He is wrong. Evident in the fact that when he returns to the stationary frame he finds he is younger, not the stationary twin who he thought had slower clocks.

The assymetry arises from the fact that one of twins expends energy to accelerate and turn round the other doesn’t. If both twins headed off at c/4, but in opposite directions, and then both expended energy to turn round, when they met again they would be the same age.

Books on my bookshelf:
The Geometry of Spacetime (Callahan)
Spacetime and Geometry (Carroll)
Differential Forms and the Gemetry of General Relativity (Dray)

So what is your reading? - apart from Wikipedia, that is.

 

[Piet Strydom]

I thought you would like to know that I enjoyed these posts immensely.
However, I thought I could also lay an egg.

1. The Bible is very clear that LIFE was created 6000 years ago, and not the universe.
it says, in the beginning God created the earth ...and later goes on to say...and God said let there be light, and it was the first day!
Therefore there was only darkness before the first day, (on Earth) and before the first day, there was ZERO TIME!
the conclusion is as follow, the Bible say the Earth (and Universe) is 6000 years and Zero time old.
If scientists wants to call this billions of years, they are welcome to do so, it is not in contradiction with scripture.
2. this will also answer many a critic on the age of STARLIGHT. the star's light traveled to the earth over a long period when it was still forming before the first day, in ZERO TIME.
3. the light of the first day was the light of the sun as the sun started to fall into its own gravitational field and started to enter into nuclear fusion. Science declares that the Sun originally gave off a dimm red glow, and only later ignited into what we see today.
this is why the stars was only visible on earth on the 4th day. it was the first time that the Sun gave enough light to have it reflected from the Moon and Planets (which was called stars).
this description from Genesis is clarified as "greater and Lesser Lights" or luminaries. It does not say that the Sun and Stars was created on the 4th day, but that it started to shine into the Atmosphere, and the Stars also.
4. The theory of relativity and Special relativity

 

[Piet Strydom]

4. The theory of special relativity and General relativity DOES NOT PROVE THAT TIME DILUTES, LENGTH CONTRACTS AND MATTER INCREASES IN WEIGHT.

It only explains what two different observers will measure when one travels and the other is stationary. The traveller's clock will seem to run slower to the stationary observer's clock, and the stationary observer's clock will seem to run slower than the traveler's clock.
However, both clocks still run at the same speed!
there is no time dilation and only a total misunderstanding of what one observe.