How science knows your gold ring came from stars

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
If you are suggesting gold came from space and the bible is wrong, well, we wait for some intelligent support.

If you're suggesting that the scientific model of how elements form in stars is wrong, well, we wait for some evidence from reality.

Once again all you can do to provide evidence for your position is to say, "Well, you can't prove it." Despite the fact that scientists can and you just dismiss it.
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
4,854
3,888
✟273,735.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Here is more science to this thread.

As shown previously Fe is the heaviest element that can be produced in the core of stars.
Nuclei heavier than Fe require more energy through supernovae to overcome the Coulomb barrier due to the protons in the nuclei.
Fusion becomes progressively more difficult for heavier nuclei as the Coulomb barrier increases.

One way around this problem is to consider neutron capture (n-capture) as a way of producing heavier nuclei.
Since a neutron has a neutral charge, the Coulomb barrier is overcome.
Nuclei produced in this process have an overabundance of neutrons, are unstable and undergo β-decay to more stable nuclei.

The n-capture process can be broken down into two separate mechanisms an s-process or an r-process.
The s-process or slow process is where the neutron capture time scale τₙ is much longer than the mean time for β-decay τβ.

The r-process or rapid process is where τₙ is much shorter than τβ.
Whereas τβ depends solely on the nuclei, τₙ depends strongly on the environment in particular on the strength of the neutron flux.
Gold is formed via the r-process.

Since the r-process occurs in a shorter time frame an environment of very high neutron flux is required.
The two candidates proposed for such an environment are.

(1) Neutron star mergers.
(2) Type II core type collapse supernovae.

It would appear that option (1) is the main mechanism.
Nature said:
The ejected mass and a merger rate inferred from GW170817 imply that such mergers are a dominant mode of r-process production in the Universe.
Origin of the heavy elements in binary neutron-star mergers from a gravitational-wave event
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
Perhaps you could show us then how origin claims of science about how man and the world and stars got here are NOT in opposition to Genesis and the rest of the bible? Ha.
Since we have discovered that man and the world and the stars got here long before someone wrote Genesis and the rest of the bible, it seems that the burden of proof is on the writer(s) of Genesis and the rest of the bible to explain why they got it so wrong. I can think of two plausible reasons: 1. it was meant as an allegory; 2. they were ignorant of the facts. I suspect both were true.

p.s. reason 2 includes mistakenly thinking they were relaying the words of some divinity.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
32,824
36,122
Los Angeles Area
✟820,574.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
The origins so called sciences demonstrate a clear rabid opposition to what God said about where it all came from. That inspiration is not from God then, obviously, so what is left?

Centuries of scientists have been inspired by their gods.

For that reason it appears that nothing physical which sense-experience sets before our eyes, or which necessary demonstrations prove to us, ought to be called in question (much less condemned) upon the testimony of biblical passages which may have some different meaning beneath their words. For the Bible is not chained in every expression to conditions as strict as those which govern all physical effects; nor is God any less excellently revealed in Nature's actions than in the sacred statements of the Bible.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Since we have discovered that man and the world and the stars got here long before someone wrote Genesis and the rest of the bible,
That belief is not a discovery. Nor is it supportable or even rational.
it seems that the burden of proof is on the writer(s) of Genesis and the rest of the bible to explain why they got it so wrong.
God wrote stuff first so the Johnny come lately demon science fable mongers need to explain their claims/beliefs.
I can think of two plausible reasons: 1. it was meant as an allegory;
The rest of the bible and Genesis itself preclude that.
2. they were ignorant of the facts. I suspect both were true.
There is no they, it was God using people that gave the word to man. They do not matter. Nor can 'they' be used as some excuse Scripture must be wrong.
p.s. reason 2 includes mistakenly thinking they were relaying the words of some divinity.
Scholars familiar with the tapestry of the bible realize that no single writer could have possibly known that their little thread was part of a well planned and synchronized harmonious orchestrated masterpiece.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Centuries of scientists have been inspired by their gods.
Got that right!

For that reason it appears that nothing physical which sense-experience sets before our eyes, or which necessary demonstrations prove to us, ought to be called in question (much less condemned) upon the testimony of biblical passages which may have some different meaning beneath their words. For the Bible is not chained in every expression to conditions as strict as those which govern all physical effects; nor is God any less excellently revealed in Nature's actions than in the sacred statements of the Bible.
Creation and the pre flood world and the future also are not chained to this nature! Science has it wrong.
 
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,953
✟174,600.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
That is the same excuse flat earthers use - they think a round earth contradicts the Bible, so it must be false.
So its actually the intensity of beliefs which overrules the natural ability to follow counter-intuitive reasoning then?
Almost a self-induced fight response, then(?)
 
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟151,950.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The current description we have of natural phenomena is more accurate than the one we had 50 years ago . And the one 50 years from now is going to be more accurate that the one we have today . Scientists push back the curtain on ignorance it’s not that they know all there is to know
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
4,854
3,888
✟273,735.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I haven't seen blackboard humour for along time.
Originally developed to mock mathematicians.^_^
Blackboard.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟151,950.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I loved how movie directors used to get some mathematician to put a Hamiltonian operator on the blackboard.... in a movie about geology and taking a trip to the earth’s core to restart it spinning.... with hydrogen bombs Laughed all during the movie . If you understand middle school science these movies are hilarious
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
4,854
3,888
✟273,735.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I loved how movie directors used to get some mathematician to put a Hamiltonian operator on the blackboard.... in a movie about geology and taking a trip to the earth’s core to restart it spinning.... with hydrogen bombs Laughed all during the movie . If you understand middle school science these movies are hilarious
I must admit I am frequently distracted by the equations on Sheldon's whiteboard and butcher's paper to check if the science advisers are on the job.
dFXMk.jpg


Hollywood seems to have a bizarre attraction to the Bra-Ket notation of Quantum Mechanics which crops up frequently and is invariably totally irrelevant to the story as you have pointed out.
 
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟151,950.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Well we found tiktaalik which we didn’t have 50 years ago ; it cleared up some things we didn’t know about how fish became amphibians. 50 years ago we didn’t have as many bird fossils as we do now . We didn’t know what color their feathers were 50 years ago and we figured out how to do that . We’re able to study proteins from dinosaurs and other fossil organisms because Mary Schweitzer figured out that some fossils have mineralized soft tissue that can be studied . 50 years ago we couldn’t do that. 50 years ago we had humans and the other apes in separate families. Now Pongidae is a retired name because we now understand that humans are apes . Etc etc etc
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,953
✟174,600.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Well we found tiktaalik which we didn’t have 50 years ago ; it cleared up some things we didn’t know about how fish became amphibians.
So, Evolution's prediction was that fish may become amphibians .. and we then found tiktaalik, which provided the evidence supporting that prediction(?)

Brightmoon said:
50 years ago we didn’t have as many bird fossils as we do now . We didn’t know what color their feathers were 50 years ago and we figured out how to do that.
So Evolution's prediction was that with sufficient evidence we may be able to determine the colors of bird fossil's feathers .. and then we accumulated that sufficient evidence, thus supporting that prediction(?)

Brightmoon said:
We’re able to study proteins from dinosaurs and other fossil organisms because Mary Schweitzer figured out that some fossils have mineralized soft tissue that can be studied. 50 years ago we couldn’t do that.
So Evolution's prediction was that, with sufficient evidence, we may be able to study proteins from dinosaurs and other fossil organisms and then Mary Schweitzer found sufficient evidence supporting that prediction(?)

Brightmoon said:
we had humans and the other apes in separate families. Now Pongidae is a retired name because we now understand that humans are apes.
So Evolution's prediction was that we'd find sufficient evidence with sufficiently close similarities of human and ape families, which may enable things such as the retirement of the Pongidae name, and then we found the evidence for doing that(?)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.