How Old is the Earth?

[dlamberth]

Didn't you say this?



If they "got our money," it's because we voluntarily bought something from them.

I don't know if you're bragging, complaining, or jealous.

And for the record, how much of YOUR MONEY do they have?

They have none of my money. But I have in-laws who have given AiG a fair amount.

Are you against capitalism or something?

I'm a business owner.
In my mind selling access to God for money is very wrong. There is no truth in that.

 

[dlamberth]

And however old it is, it has only been in existence since 4004 BC.

I understand that you have "belief" of that age. But nowhere in the Bible does God give it's actual age.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The cosmic microwave background is everywhere there's nothing about it that indicates a time frame.

We know the temperature at which a hot, ionized, diffuse cloud of hydrogen of near infinite depth (perhaps actually infinite, we don't know) becomes transparent to light. The CMB is the black body of that cloud at recombination (de-ionization). The difference between the observed CMB temperature at Earth and the recombination temperature gives the redshift to the epoch of recombination. The measured redshift of the CMB is 1100. That value *does* (combinded with other cosmological measurements) give you the time of recombination.

The hypothesis is that it formed because of a theory that there was a big bang and that hasn't been proven.

Demonstrated, not proven, but yes it has been.

It's one of a few theories of the beginning of the universe.

The Big Bang is actually a theory of what happens just *after* the beginning of the Universe. It does not explain *why* or *how* the Universe began or why it started expanding.

Man has not gazed that far back yet.

We have, to the CMB.

 

[Pommer]

Yup.

That's my point.

Yet the “laws of physics” are only analogs that human beings use to describe the way things appear to function.
There would be no (nor indeed, the universe would need no) “laws” to guide it; they’re only there because we have sussed them out.

 

[AV1611VET]

In my mind selling access to God for money is very wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

I understand that you have "belief" of that age.

4004 BC is not an AGE.

It is a YEAR.

 

[Hans Blaster]

That's voluntary.

College science book is mandatory.



Okay.

Here's yesterday's information.

View attachment 336266

And here's today's information:

arXiv.org e-Print archive

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet the “laws of physics” are only analogs that human beings use to describe the way things appear to function.
There would be no (nor indeed, the universe would need no) “laws” to guide it; they’re only there because we have sussed them out.

Re Genesis 1, the laws of physics can take a hike.

Even the First Law of Thermodynamics didn't apply during the Creation Week.

It says energy can't be created.

God says differently.

 

[dlamberth]

4004 BC is not an AGE.

It is a YEAR.

OK...God never gave a year either.

 

[AV1611VET]

OK...God never gave a year either.

Correctamundo.

 

[dlamberth]

Correctamundo.

I lost track of what I was originally responding to. Sorry about that.
What got me going on this tangent was what @BurningBush84 wrote in post 367...

Let's say the earth is less than 11,000 years old,, what would you say to God on Judgement Day if he asked you why you doubted his Word ???

Nowhere in the Bible does God give any time stamp of the Creation event which a person would be judged on. Human Beings figured it out, and only God knows if they are correct or not.

 

[sjastro]

I apologize I haven’t seen this question and I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t recall seeing this question in your previous posts. Can you put this into laymen’s terms because I don’t understand it. I’m a truck driver not a chemist or an astrophysics.

Let’s look at the terminology using the helium (He) as an example.
The most common isotope of He can be written as ⁴He or ₂⁴He as in the example.

An isotope is where the atom has the same number of protons but a different number of neutrons.
He has 9 known isotopes ²He, ³He,⁴ He, ⁵He,⁶ He, ⁷He, ⁸He, ⁹He and ¹⁰He.
Each isotope of helium has 2 protons and number of neutrons varies for 0 to 8.

There are 92 naturally occurring elements ending in uranium where the most stable isotope is ²³⁸U mentioned in my previous post.
²³⁸U has 92 protons hence 238-92 = 146 neutrons.

Technically Np (neptunium) and Pu (plutonium) the two elements which follow U in the periodic table are also naturally occurring but only in trace amounts, their amounts have increased due to nuclear bomb testing last century.

Protons and neutrons are held together in the nucleus by the strong nuclear force but as more protons are in the nucleus the electrostatic repulsion between protons becomes significant and for manmade elements well beyond U in the periodic table the nucleus can undergo spontaneous fission and have extremely short half lives.

Another cause for instability is when a nucleus can absorb a neutron.
The most stable nuclei are when there are an even number of protons and neutrons, the least stable is when there are an odd number of protons and neutrons.

From my previous post ²³⁸U +n → ²³⁹U → ²³⁹Np + β⁻ → ²³⁹Pu → U²³⁵+ α.

²³⁸U is quite stable as it has an even number of protons and neutrons and has a half life of 4.5 billion years, when it absorbs a neutron ²³⁹U is produced but there is now an even odd number of protons and neutrons respectively.
As a result a neutron is converted into a proton creating ²³⁹Np and β⁻ radiation composed of electrons and anti-neutrinos are emitted.
²³⁹Np is also unstable which leads to the final equation and my question to you.

²³⁹Pu → U²³⁵+ α

²³⁹Pu has 94 protons in the nucleus and electrostatic repulsion of the protons has become significant resulting in α radiation where the ²³⁹Pu nucleus ejects an α particle composed of 2 protons and 2 neutrons and forms a ²³⁵U nucleus.
This has a half life of 24,110 years and a 4.5 billion year old earth explains why naturally occurring ²³⁹Pu occurs only in trace amounts.

My question is how can a 6000 year old earth result in these trace amounts when there has not been enough time to reduce ²³⁹Pu to trace amounts?

 

[BeyondET]

We know the temperature at which a hot, ionized, diffuse cloud of hydrogen of near infinite depth (perhaps actually infinite, we don't know) becomes transparent to light. The CMB is the black body of that cloud at recombination (de-ionization). The difference between the observed CMB temperature at Earth and the recombination temperature gives the redshift to the epoch of recombination. The measured redshift of the CMB is 1100. That value *does* (combinded with other cosmological measurements) give you the time of recombination.

Demonstrated, not proven, but yes it has been.

The Big Bang is actually a theory of what happens just *after* the beginning of the Universe. It does not explain *why* or *how* the Universe began or why it started expanding.

We have, to the CMB.

I agree the CMBR is the oldest observed. Since nothing has been observed beyond the CMB wouldn't 13.7 billion be a theory. Unless there's something I haven't read on that proves the BB was around 380 million years before the recombination and the beginning of the surface of the last scattering i assume.

 

[Astrid]

Well ya know the Bible was written to long ago it's probably changed so much , we can't trust what if says , I'm sure it's mostly mis/disinformation. And we surely can't trust Genesis 1

Got that right.

What's come over ya ?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Human Beings did that calculation, not God. Regardless, it's not a question that would be asked by God.

So which makes more sense? Every person counted the days they lived and wrote them down beginning with Adam then passed that information on thru Noah all the way to Moses, or God told Moses? The book of Genesis has way too much information and detail to be handed down from generation to generation. Not to mention it has information from before man existed when no one was there to record events. The times listed in the genealogies can’t be calculated they have to be recorded. How could anyone “calculate” how long Adam lived? Furthermore the genealogies didn’t have to mention how old each person was when they had a child and many of them don’t, except for the line between Adam & Jesus. This information was given intentionally so we could know how long ago Adam lived and how old the earth is.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Let’s look at the terminology using the helium (He) as an example.
The most common isotope of He can be written as ⁴He or ₂⁴He as in the example.

View attachment 336272​

An isotope is where the atom has the same number of protons but a different number of neutrons.
He has 9 known isotopes ²He, ³He,⁴ He, ⁵He,⁶ He, ⁷He, ⁸He, ⁹He and ¹⁰He.
Each isotope of helium has 2 protons and number of neutrons varies for 0 to 8.

There are 92 naturally occurring elements ending in uranium where the most stable isotope is ²³⁸U mentioned in my previous post.
²³⁸U has 92 protons hence 238-92 = 146 neutrons.

View attachment 336273​

Technically Np (neptunium) and Pu (plutonium) the two elements which follow U in the periodic table are also naturally occurring but only in trace amounts, their amounts have increased due to nuclear bomb testing last century.

Protons and neutrons are held together in the nucleus by the strong nuclear force but as more protons are in the nucleus the electrostatic repulsion between protons becomes significant and for manmade elements well beyond U in the periodic table the nucleus can undergo spontaneous fission and have extremely short half lives.

Another cause for instability is when a nucleus can absorb a neutron.
The most stable nuclei are when there are an even number of protons and neutrons, the least stable is when there are an odd number of protons and neutrons.

From my previous post ²³⁸U +n → ²³⁹U → ²³⁹Np + β⁻ → ²³⁹Pu → U²³⁵+ α.

²³⁸U is quite stable as it has an even number of protons and neutrons and has a half life of 4.5 billion years, when it absorbs a neutron ²³⁹U is produced but there is now an even odd number of protons and neutrons respectively.
As a result a neutron is converted into a proton creating ²³⁹Np and β⁻ radiation composed of electrons and anti-neutrinos are emitted.
²³⁹Np is also unstable which leads to the final equation and my question to you.

²³⁹Pu → U²³⁵+ α

²³⁹Pu has 94 protons in the nucleus and electrostatic repulsion of the protons has become significant resulting in α radiation where the ²³⁹Pu nucleus ejects an α particle composed of 2 protons and 2 neutrons and forms a ²³⁵U nucleus.
This has a half life of 24,110 years and a 4.5 billion year old earth explains why naturally occurring ²³⁹Pu occurs only in trace amounts.

My question is how can a 6000 year old earth result in these trace amounts when there has not been enough time to reduce ²³⁹Pu to trace amounts?

Perhaps they were created with trace amounts.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I understand that you have "belief" of that age. But nowhere in the Bible does God give it's actual age.

You do realize that giving the age that each person had a child is unnecessary in order to establish a family tree right? So what was the purpose of providing that information? And not only that but that information was provided all the way from Adam to Jesus whom we just so happen to base our calendar on.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I lost track of what I was originally responding to. Sorry about that.
What got me going on this tangent was what @BurningBush84 wrote in post 367...

Nowhere in the Bible does God give any time stamp of the Creation event which a person would be judged on. Human Beings figured it out, and only God knows if they are correct or not.

How could human beings possibly figure out how old Adam was and how old he was when he had his first child? How could they possibly calculate that?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

How could human beings possibly figure out how old Adam was and how old he was when he had his first child? How could they possibly calculate that?

And why would anyone care. Can we not entertain the concept that Adam is a literary character rather than a historical person?

 

[AV1611VET]

Can we not entertain the concept that Adam is a literary character rather than a historical person?

That's for allegorists, and is not an option available for literalists.