Ask a physicist anything. (5)

mzungu said:

Your question is wrongly put. For something to come from the future it has to have a past and thus gravity must exist today if it is to be present in the future!

Click to expand...

What if the object generating the gravity doesn't exist yet, but, when it does exist, its gravity is so strong it breaks the timey-wimey ball of space and pulls on past objects - causing its own creation!

Wiccan_Child said:

What if the object generating the gravity doesn't exist yet, but, when it does exist, its gravity is so strong it breaks the timey-wimey ball of space and pulls on past objects - causing its own creation!

Click to expand...

I hear black holes have some fairly strong gravity...not that I know much about 'em or gravity
Which reminds me of this old movie:

YouTube - The Black Hole - U.S.S. Cygnus

James Redford said:

Astrophysical black holes (i.e., trapped surfaces) exist, but Hawking [1, 2] and Wald [3] have shown that if black holes are allowed to exist for unlimited proper time, then they will completely evaporate, and a fundamental quantum law called "unitarity" will be violated. Unitarity, which roughly says that probability must be conserved, thus requires that the universe must cease to exist after finite proper time, which implies that the universe is closed and has the spatial topology of a 3-sphere.

Click to expand...

Wiccan_Child said:

What if the object generating the gravity doesn't exist yet, but, when it does exist, its gravity is so strong it breaks the timey-wimey ball of space and pulls on past objects - causing its own creation!

Click to expand...

Any chance someone could possibly explain this picture?

Looks a little bit like water falling into a hole to me.

Nah, the water is falling out of a hole.

Steffenfield said:

Any chance someone could possibly explain this picture?

Click to expand...

Looks like a drain hole in a dam.
Fogonazos: The largest drain hole in the world

Thank you pgp!

Speaking of Darwin, i once heard that he claimed in his own writings that women were lower on the scale of evolution then men. Did Darwin actually say this?

I also heard that Darwin himself stated in his own writings that in the future which is now, that we would find fossils in the fossil record that would prove or disprove his theory of evolution. To my knowledge no evidence has been found. Does this mean Darwin's theory of evolution was wrong?

Not exactly physics but it is science

godisreal36 said:

Speaking of Darwin, i once heard that he claimed in his own writings that women were lower on the scale of evolution then men. Is this true?

Click to expand...

Doubtful. Though, if it was, we've advanced by 150 years since Darwin - even if he saw sexism in evolution, that doesn't mean we do.

The lovely thing is, Creationists like to talk of 'Darwinism', as if that encompasses their opposition, yet it only belies their complete lack of understanding of the subject they oppose - there is no such thing as 'Darwinism', any more than there is such a thing as 'Einstein-ism', or 'Hawking-ism'.
Darwin gave us the major ideas, but modern biology has advanced a lot since then. The entire field of genetics, which constititues the biggest source of evidence for the theory, was invented after Darwin's death.

godisreal36 said:

I also heard that Darwin himself stated in his own writings that in the future which is now, that we would find fossils in the fossil record that would prove or disprove his theory of evolution. To my knowledge no evidence has been found. Does this mean Darwin's theory of evolution was wrong?

Click to expand...

No, for two reasons:
First, it may simply be we haven't found the fossils yet.
Second, as it happens, we have found the fossils: we have literally millions of fossils, all of which fit perfectly into the twin-nested hierarchy. If a single fossil contradicts this hierarchy, evolution would be disproven.

But every fossil that supports evolution's rather strict standards of prediction, are supporting said theory.

And we have millions of those fossils

The brilliant thing is, shortly after the first edition publication of Darwin's seminal book, 11 Archaeopteryx fossils were unearthed in German - a fantastic example of the kind of fossil Darwin predicted. Darwin was alive for many more such examples being found (e.g., he personally predicted the existence of a type of moth, based on purely evolutionary principles - and, lo and behold, it was found).

godisreal36 said:

Not exactly physics but it is science

Click to expand...

The thread does say ask a physicist anything As it's my thread (courtesy of Maxwell511!), I'm more than happy to talk about evolution, if you have any questions or queries. We can talk via PM too, if you prefer.



Tiktaalik roseae. What a beaut.

God had no beginning, how can this be? And yet how can it not be? Something had to be first without a beginning, right? What could have no beginning except God?

Ive also heard that the genetic code causes real problems to Darwin's theory of evolution. The genetic code does not allow for evolution to occur except in dogs, fish and plants and only by mixing them through breeding, and even then it's limited to the genetic code and what it allows. How can Evolution occur if the Genetic code shows no evidence of it ever happening or evidence of it even being possible? why do we still cling to an outdated theory? The only thing evolving is the theory itself, for lack of evidence it seems.

Some would use evolution to disprove Gods existence and yet it's false. Just like the "man made" Global warming theory...false. Global warming was a scam like evolution is. Global warming now believed to be caused by solar flares from the sun. Reminds me of the prophecy of Luke 21:25. I'm sorry I'm so opinionated. Atheists have beaten God over the head with that ridiculous theory far to long. I mean no harm to anyone, only the theory.

godisreal36 said:

Speaking of Darwin, i once heard that he claimed in his own writings that women were lower on the scale of evolution then men. Did Darwin actually say this?

Click to expand...

He definitely said that women were biologically inferior to men. I think he went on about it a bit in his second book The Descent of Man. He says stuff in there like the child, the female, the senile white and the grown up Negro all have the same intellectual level by nature.

godisreal36 said:

Some would use evolution to disprove Gods existence and yet it's false.

Click to expand...

Well, evolution doesn't disprove God's existence. At most, evolution shows that the present diversity of life can be accounted for without recourse to imagining a deity who simply "poofs" things into existence.

You know, re-reading that I am not clear in my mind about what you are claiming is false: That some would use evolution to disprove God's existence, or that evolution is false, or that God's existence is false.

Just like the "man made" Global warming theory...false. Global warming was a scam like evolution is. Global warming now believed to be caused by solar flares from the sun.

Click to expand...

Your house is on fire. You find a man pouring gasoline on the fire. He says he didn't start it. He only poured gasoline around the pilot light of the water heater. So, you say, "Oh! OK! That's all right, then."

In any case: Greenhouse gasses have been implicated in very severe global climate change in the past. And because of positive feedback cycles in the system, a minor rise in temperature can trigger a very severe runaway rise in temperature leading to widespread species die-off and extinction.

Reminds me of the prophecy of Luke 21:25.

Click to expand...

Let's see that in context:

"20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." --- KJV Luke Chapt. 21

Hmm! That seems to be about the fall of Jerusalem! Nothing in there about evolution or global climate change, whether anthropogenic or not. Maybe you cited the wrong verse, or the wrong chapter, or the wrong book, or the wrong Bible? I mean, the Jews haven't been led out of Jerusalem as captives to all nations? Or maybe it was in yesterday's news and I missed it?

I'm sorry I'm so opinionated.

Click to expand...

It is fine to have opinions. It is not so fine to have opinions that are poorly reasoned from ridiculous assumptions.

Atheists have beaten God over the head with that ridiculous theory far to long.

Click to expand...

Which theory is that? Many theists accept the Theory of Evolution, in fact more theists than atheists. The same is true of anthropogenic climate change. And certainly, atheists wouldn't be trying to beat over the head a God they don't believe in. (Perhaps they are trying to communicate to those who reason badly from ridiculous premises just how foolish they look to reasonable people.

But I understand. Anyone who disagrees with you gets a label: atheist, liberal, or even "COMMUNIST". (Only in extreme cases to be sure!)

I mean no harm to anyone, only the theory.

Click to expand...

Well, you probably haven't harmed anyone but yourself and your children, unless you are a member of a school board. You certainly haven't done any damage to the theory of evolution.

I always have that affect on people. Silence... crickets chirping

If i did something wrong I'm sorry. Like i said i mean no offense.

Don't feel bad if my questions leave you speechless, the reason i ask them is because no one can answer them, if they could i wouldn't need to ask. You're not alone friend, billions of people are with you. It takes more faith not to believe in God then is does to believe in him i think. Later people, nice talking to you while it lasted

I stand corrected someone replied, thank you. What does Luke 21: 24 describe? It sounds as if Jesus was talking of the destruction of Israel at the hands of the romans 2000 years ago and also the rebirth of Israel which just happened only 60 years ago. Am i wrong?

godisreal36 said:

I stand corrected someone replied, thank you. What does Luke 21: 24 describe? It sounds as if Jesus was talking of the destruction of Israel at the hands of the romans 2000 years ago and also the rebirth of Israel which just happened only 60 years ago. Am i wrong?

Click to expand...

It does seem to be about the destruction of Judea by the Romans, but I don't see anything there about the "rebirth of Israel". And the original Israel was destroyed by the Assyrians.

You might want to check your facts before you post. Otherwise, people might mistake you for a ... Well, never mind!

This isn't the place to discuss evolution guys.

The Jews were spread among the nations and are now being called back into there own land. Hitler tried killing all the Jews because they were in his country and every other country because they had none of their own to call home until after Hitler.