Galaxy Rotation Problem and YEC

[AnswersInHovind]

I just watched a BBC documentary on Dark Matter and Energy called, "Most of our universe is missing" (2006)

As the scientists all talked about the problems that arose which required the development of this theory of invisible energy and matter, I couldn't help but think, "none of these are a problem if the universe is only thousands of years old, rather than billions"


examples:

Without dark matter, galaxies would fall apart within one rotation, yet in thousands of years they wouldn't even get close to one rotation. There just isn't time for them to fall apart.

It was assumed under the big bang model, that matter further away would be slowing down in its expansion, yet its not; it is moving at the same speed. No problem if God simply made the universe as is with things in motion.

Are we looking for answers that don't exist in science? If we believe God made the universe, why couldn't it already have been in motion? If God created a ball that was already rolling down a hill, the scientific method would come to the conclusion that the ball came from the top of the hill, yet be confused as to why it didn't have enough "wear" on its surface, creating dark wear to solve the problem, when really, it was just made already in motion.

 

[Assyrian]

God created galaxies that were falling apart?

 

[Deleteriousnonsense]

It was assumed under the big bang model, that matter further away would be slowing down in its expansion, yet its not; it is moving at the same speed. No problem if God simply made the universe as is with things in motion.

Well to put it very simply we can use brightness measurements to estimate the distances of celestial objects, comparing their dimness to their actual brightness as determined by their spectrum, and we find that most are more than a few thousands years distant given the finite speed of light. In other words, the objects are too far away for their light to have reached us in just a short time. Also, the universe may be accelerating in it's expansion, and it's geometry is relatively flat. These characteristics are best explained by a cosmological model that describes a universe composed mostly of dark energy and dark matter.

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Gravitational lensing happens when an object with mass causes light coming from another object to bend in an observable way by altering its path. I think scientists are able to use formulas to determine the mass of something that causes gravitational lensing, and most galaxies are actually much more massive than their normal matter components make them appear to be.

Here is my favorite image of gravitational lensing. The 4 outer lights are only the light from one object that is behing the middle fuzzy object:




Same object here:

 

[ActuallyThinking]

I just watched a BBC documentary on Dark Matter and Energy called, "Most of our universe is missing" (2006)

As the scientists all talked about the problems that arose which required the development of this theory of invisible energy and matter, I couldn't help but think, "none of these are a problem if the universe is only thousands of years old, rather than billions"


examples:

Without dark matter, galaxies would fall apart within one rotation, yet in thousands of years they wouldn't even get close to one rotation. There just isn't time for them to fall apart.

It was assumed under the big bang model, that matter further away would be slowing down in its expansion, yet its not; it is moving at the same speed. No problem if God simply made the universe as is with things in motion.

Are we looking for answers that don't exist in science? If we believe God made the universe, why couldn't it already have been in motion? If God created a ball that was already rolling down a hill, the scientific method would come to the conclusion that the ball came from the top of the hill, yet be confused as to why it didn't have enough "wear" on its surface, creating dark wear to solve the problem, when really, it was just made already in motion.

Brilliant!! I love how science always ends up showing the truth of God's word. I love you for posting this!!!

God created galaxies that were falling apart?

"Falling apart" is a subjective opinion on how they "ought" to be. I think God made things the way He wanted to, diversity is good.

Well to put it very simply we can use brightness measurements to estimate the distances of celestial objects, comparing their dimness to their actual brightness as determined by their spectrum, and we find that most are more than a few thousands years distant given the finite speed of light. In other words, the objects are too far away for their light to have reached us in just a short time. Also, the universe may be accelerating in it's expansion, and it's geometry is relatively flat. These characteristics are best explained by a cosmological model that describes a universe composed mostly of dark energy and dark matter.

That's very fancy, but it can't be tested. We don't have galaxy size labs where we can run different experiments with and without dark matter to see what's happening. It's just an assumption based on some math that someone did, like string theory.

I'm not really trying to get into the YEC/OEC debate, but there is actually some pretty decent evidence for Dark Matter, whichever side of the aisle you fall on. Gravitational lensing is probably the closest we can come to directly observing it, and from what I can gather (which, since I'm not a physics expert, probably isn't very much), it points squarely in the direction of a type of matter we can't really see.

Gravitational lensing happens when an object with mass causes light coming from another object to bend in an observable way by altering its path. I think scientists are able to use formulas to determine the mass of something that causes gravitational lensing, and most galaxies are actually much more massive than their normal matter components make them appear to be.

There are other reasons that scientists suspect dark matter exists. Most of them either go way over my head or are directly tied to the Big Bang Theory, but gravitational lensing is probably the closest we can come to definitely observing it directly.

But as pointed out in the OP, it's all based on the assumption of a universe that's billions of years old.

Here is my favorite image of gravitational lensing. These lights are only the light from one object:

The fuzzy object in the middle is the object. Gravitational lensing has produced the effect of seeing 4 other lights.

So what?

 

[Yekcidmij]

So what?

I guess you don't have to just appreciate the coolness of the pictures. It's a pretty neat visible demonstration of the consequences of General Relativity.

 

[Yekcidmij]

But as pointed out in the OP, it's all based on the assumption of a universe that's billions of years old.

It's not an assumption, it's a conclusion made from data.

 

[Mallon]

Creation science rules. If ever there's a perceived problem with the YEC model, just say "God made it that way" and the problem goes away! Starlight apparently millions of light years away? God made it that way! Transitional fossils? God made 'em that way!

 

[Assyrian]

"Falling apart" is a subjective opinion on how they "ought" to be. I think God made things the way He wanted to, diversity is good.

Presumably he wanted it to be spiral patterns because that is the way he created them, he just didn't create them with enough mass to hold together. Which is odd, if you think Adam was supposed to live forever in the perfect universe God created.

 

[AnswersInHovind]

Creation science rules. If ever there's a perceived problem with the YEC model, just say "God made it that way" and the problem goes away! Starlight apparently millions of light years away? God made it that way! Transitional fossils? God made 'em that way!

Because Dark Matter and Energy are so much better.

"Hmmm... if the universe is billions of years old, then it should have fallen apart by now. I know! Lets make up a type of mass that is invisible and undetecatable! Its gravity will affect large things like stars and galaxies, but have no impact on small things like planets and people!" Then lets take billions of dollars in research money that could be used for medical research or helping people, and try instead to find a particle that we can't detect to begin with.

Can't argue with the objective nature of science!

 

[ActuallyThinking]

Creation science rules. If ever there's a perceived problem with the YEC model, just say "God made it that way" and the problem goes away! Starlight apparently millions of light years away? God made it that way! Transitional fossils? God made 'em that way!

Theistic darwinism science rules!!! We may believe in God, but we don't actually use Him to explain anything we observe.

I think the new term to use may be DD (Deistic Darwinist)

 

[Assyrian]

I thought DD was Doctor of Divinity?

 

[ActuallyThinking]

I thought DD was Doctor of Divinity?

Could be...I'll just stick with using TD. You guys just need to stop talking like deists.

 

[Assyrian]

Because Dark Matter and Energy are so much better.

"Hmmm... if the universe is billions of years old, then it should have fallen apart by now. I know! Lets make up a type of mass that is invisible and undetecatable! Its gravity will affect large things like stars and galaxies, but have no impact on small things like planets and people!"

Do you actually have any evidence galaxies are falling apart? Because apart form the fact we can tell how old they are, they look pretty stable when we study them. You are assuming, on the basis of no information whatsoever, that there isn't any dark matter, modified gravitation, or any other force holding them together, simply because you want to think they are unstable and would not last more than a few thousand years. Scientists realise space is pretty dark itself and that there is a lot we don't see out there, they prefer to have a good look for dark matter before concluding it does not exist.

Then lets take billions of dollars in research money that could be used for medical research or helping people, and try instead to find a particle that we can't detect to begin with.

Can't argue with the objective nature of science!

The universe is our biggest lab for studying physics, it seems silly to spend money on particle accelerators but ignore evidence of possible exotic matter we see with our telescopes. What makes you think we won't be able to find important applications for new discoveries and understandings of the fundamental nature of matter and the universe? Hospitals are already using the anti matter version of electrons, positrons, in PET scanners. And we are just beginning to discover what matter is made of.

 

[Assyrian]

Could be...I'll just stick with using TD. You guys just need to stop talking like deists.

Actually, if you read the conversations going on here, it is creationists who come out pretty deistic. TEs believe God operate not only through miracles, but also through natural processes. These creationists seem to have rejected the historical understanding of God working through providence as well as through miracle, and see God operating purely deistically almost all the time, apart from the occasional supernatural intervention. But I think you would be better off discussing these ideas with the people you disagree with, rather than making up names to call them. Incidentally, where I come from TD is an Irish Member of Parliment.

 

[ActuallyThinking]

Scientists realise space is pretty dark itself

LOL ROFL therefore dark matter may exist...ya right

they prefer to have a good look for dark matter before concluding it does not exist.

And I think we should have a good look for invisible purple energy (not light) before we make any hasty decisions about whether or not it exists. In fact, the government should give me a grant with your tax money to allow me to look for it (like how they're wasting time looking for dark matter).

 

[ActuallyThinking]

These creationists seem to have rejected the historical understanding of God working through providence as well as through miracle, and see God operating purely deistically almost all the time, apart from the occasional supernatural intervention.

Huh? TDs who believe God kick started everything then let things work themselves out are more theistic than those who think that God personally hand crafted the things in the universe and directly intervened to create things such as the diversity of language? We must have a different understanding of the words "deist" and "theist".

 

[AnswersInHovind]

Do you actually have any evidence galaxies are falling apart? Because apart form the fact we can tell how old they are, they look pretty stable when we study them. You are assuming, on the basis of no information whatsoever, that there isn't any dark matter, modified gravitation, or any other force holding them together, simply because you want to think they are unstable and would not last more than a few thousand years. Scientists realise space is pretty dark itself and that there is a lot we don't see out there, they prefer to have a good look for dark matter before concluding it does not exist.

I'm confused. I never said galaxies were unstable, or even appear unstable.

The scientists seem to be the ones saying that without modified gravitation or dark matter, they would have fallen apart by now. In a few years of observance we would not be able to detect any sort of instability in them. This is all based on assumptions of the laws of physic + billions year old universe.

Remove billions of years old universe and there suddenly isn't a problem. But the religious doctrine of an old universe demands science to ignore what it knows and make up completely unprovable theories.

Its no different from a God of the gaps argument. With the super colider, they are really hoping to find a graviton (I think thats what its called), but also admit that if they don't find it, they will still believe their string theories. Lack of evidence and ability to test is just as pervasive in main stream science as they claim it is in creationism.

The universe is our biggest lab for studying physics, it seems silly to spend money on particle accelerators but ignore evidence of possible exotic matter we see with our telescopes. What makes you think we won't be able to find important applications for new discoveries and understandings of the fundamental nature of matter and the universe? Hospitals are already using the anti matter version of electrons, positrons, in PET scanners. And we are just beginning to discover what matter is made of.

indeed. Science has made some amazing achievements for the medical world. At the same time, these experiments have no value apart from trying to detect something that has no relevance to our immediate world anyway. They exist to satisfy a theory that is relevant to celestial movement.

 

[Assyrian]

LOL ROFL therefore dark matter may exist...ya right

May exist. The rotation rate of astronomical systems is the standard method they use to work our the mass of other astronomical bodies, planets with rings or satellites, stars with planets orbiting them, star clusters. The problem with galaxies is that the rotation rate suggests much more mass than is detectable as stars or interstellar dust. It is not a major leap to suggest there is matter we cannot see, and to look for it.

And I think we should have a good look for invisible purple energy (not light) before we make any hasty decisions about whether or not it exists. In fact, the government should give me a grant with your tax money to allow me to look for it (like how they're wasting time looking for dark matter).

You mean Ultra Violet? They found it already.

Huh? TDs who believe God kick started everything then let things work themselves out are more theistic than those who think that God personally hand crafted the things in the universe and directly intervened to create things such as the diversity of language? We must have a different understanding of the words "deist" and "theist".

Like I said, read the threads, see what TEs actually believe about how God is active in his universe providing our daily bread and forming us in our mother's womb, look at you fellow creationists like Juvenison who cannot handle that concept, and think God only pops in for the occasional miracle and otherwise leaves the universe to get along by itself.