Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
If we think or believe that creation from nothing proves the existence of G-d then....
Okay - I only have a miner in Physics but I have over 25 years experience as a scientist and engineer. I also worked for a year doing research of solar magnetic variations in global navigation on earth in which I got a very fun introduction into practical applications of particle physics.
I think I can handle and analyze you conclusive proof that categorically eliminates all possibilities of a Big Bang - including Brane Collisions of higher dimension parallel universes. I would like to compare you critique of the Big Bang with the accuracy of your proposed Genesis model.
I did the math you suggested and that would mean that the sun was not just a last hour event but actually did not take place until the last ½ hour of a comparable 24 period day. This is hardly spot on. Also I would point you to the age of the earth and sun as scientifically similar in age - but your Genesis model results in a much older earth than sun. I am also concerned about your model of heavy elements (generally a scientific conundrum). Since you are more trained in physics than me - I would like to explorer your model to explain heavy elements in the concentrations on earth from a high energy supernova - yet captured by a planet in near circular orbit. I am also curious about the heavy elements being a giant molecular gas cloud beginning to gather at the sub atomic level to form the earth. That looks like a bit of a stretch to me.
Finely, I am very confused about you insertion that light produces anti-matter in equal amounts to matter. The only experiments I am aware of involving light - the light source is generated by high energy lazars (limited frequency) combined with collisions created in mostly in ELECTRON accelerators at heavy target material. I must be honest because I only checked a few but I did not find any indication of equal amounts of matter and anti-matter resulting from annihilating photons. In fact in my quick review - it appeared that most of the anti-matter resulted from annihilating electrons. Come on - you are the better trained Physicists here - help me out. I need something a little more creditable and tangible.
Son of Zadok
With regards to the Sun, (and the solar system),it was forming for millions of years prior to it's age, and anytime during the 4th day is spot on, wether it's the last second or the first minute.
As I mentioned earlier, the problem is with the 3rd day, and the only way I can resolve this is with the Earth being reformed in the same manner with the fluids gathering together on the 4th.
With regards to the Sun, (and the solar system),it was forming for millions of years prior to it's age, and anytime during the 4th day is spot on, wether it's the last second or the first minute.
As I mentioned earlier, the problem is with the 3rd day, and the only way I can resolve this is with the Earth being reformed in the same manner with the fluids gathering together on the 4th. I imagine the original Earth was consumed in the event that produced the giant molecular gas cloud that our solar system was formed from.
Antimatter is well defined, as particles having opposite charge, and opposite spin to their material counterparts. Electrons have Positrons as their antiparticles, the only way an electron can be annihilated is on collision with a positron. Gamma rays produce electron positron pairs , which annihilate and produce more electromagnetic radiation. The only way for matter to annihilate is by collision with it's antiparticle. It is the high energy electromagnetic radiation that produces the anti particles, the problem with the big bang theory is that particles and antiparticles are always produced in equal number.
There was most definitely a "big bang" or light which expanded, the thing is there must also have been matter. I would rather "the spirit of God moved upon the face of the fluids", to stop people always thinking of H2O, waters contain so much more than just H2O, sodium, chlorine, silicon, iron, etc etc.
I do not understand the facts in the same way as you Cupid Dave, god set them in the firmament on the 4th day also. You do understand that sidereal time is governed by the rotation of the earth ? it's the time taken for the earth to rotate though 360 degrees about it's own axis.
I do not understand the facts in the same way as you Cupid Dave, god set them in the firmament on the 4th day also. You do understand that sidereal time is governed by the rotation of the earth ? it's the time taken for the earth to rotate though 360 degrees about it's own axis.
When you divide the age of the universe into six equal parts how come the Sun is four sixths old?
It's not even necessary to imagine the firmament without the Sun, moon and stars, since we actually know, that the firmament existed before any celestial bodies. It only becomes necessary to imagine that the Sun moon and stars have always existed, since we know they haven't.
the firmament of day 2 can be either the atmosphere or spacetime itself depending on how you want to look at it.
both versions are perfectly legitimate
If you look at the first post in this topic, you will see I accept the word firmament as interchangeable with expansion. Since it says in the footnotes (KJV) the word is from the hebrew for expansion, and we know the universe is expanding, and it follows from our understanding of the order of the big bang, having energy, which then expanded.
Cupid where did you find that E=MC2 picture ? the statement on it is clearly a contradiction of the equation, the mass energy equivalence.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?