• 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.

How old is the universe...? And, How big is the universe...? Discussion...?

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
It is claimed that "Divine help" is required to understand things like this, I asked what form it will take. And you pontificate about how cosmology is 95% unknown and imply that I indicated I understand it all.

Looks more like some projection on your part - for I am not the one that pretends expertise on cosmology, physics, biology, genetics, etc., despite being some kind of computer tech.

I know, you just keep ignoring what 99.9% of the universe is composed of and what forces dominate in every single laboratory experiment for the last 200+ years and then propose Fairie Dust because you keep using the wrong physics as the dominating force.......


So, you cannot provide any sort of answer, no evidence for this phony 'Divine help'.

What "divine Help"

Once creation was complete no Divine Help has been needed to sustain it..... In fact it is decaying and increasing in entropy because there currently is no Divine Help.

Don't misinterpret the need during creation and what we now see as the same thing......
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
I know, you just keep ignoring what 99.9% of the universe is composed of

Oh quite right, there was not an astrophysicist in the whole wide world who failed to notice that those few parts of the universe which weren’t a vacuum were mostly filled up with ionised gas, until clever old Professor Justatruthseeker, KBE PhD DSc FRS came along to point it out. Fancy them not noticing that. I don’t know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy D
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Oh quite right, there was not an astrophysicist in the whole wide world who failed to notice that those few parts of the universe which weren’t a vacuum were mostly filled up with ionised gas, until clever old Professor Justatruthseeker, KBE PhD DSc FRS came along to point it out. Fancy them not noticing that. I don’t know.
Oh they know it's there, but then why don't they use the correct physics for that state of matter????

That's why they keep getting surprised....

Heliosphere - Wikipedia

"Initial interpretations suggest that "the interstellar environment has far more influence on structuring the heliosphere than anyone previously believed"

"No one knows what is creating the ENA (energetic neutral atoms) ribbon, ... "The IBEX results are truly remarkable! What we are seeing in these maps does not match with any of the previous theoretical models of this region."

Oh we know, but most ignore it....

https://phys.org/news/2009-10-galactic-magnetic-fields-boundaries-solar.html


"The first all-sky maps developed by NASA's Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) spacecraft, the initial mission to examine the global interactions occurring at the edge of the solar system, suggest that the galactic magnetic fields had a far greater impact on Earth's history than previously conceived, and the future of our planet and others may depend, in part, on how the galactic magnetic fields change with time."


"The IBEX results are truly remarkable, with emissions not resembling any of the current theories or models of this never-before-seen region,""

But none of your theories predicted anything correctly, because they ignored the effects of plasma physics......

But you just keep right on believing in a cosmology that couldn't even predict things correctly right next door...... while ignoring the real physics that dominates the universe.....

And you'll keep having your models falsified one after another.......

So much for those PhD's since they couldn't even get one single model correct.... Lot of good it did them, right??????

Lol, your belief in your high priests infallibility is misplaced.....
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Oh they know it's there, but then why don't they use the correct physics for that state of matter????

Oh, I am sure they would be all ears if Professor Justa KBE PhD DSc FRS published his paper explaining how everybody had been getting it so wrong for the past hundred years.

Or maybe they think it was just another crank email, which any half famous scientist will receive every day of the week; explaining how Einstein, or somebody else, got it all wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Oh, I am sure they would be all ears if Professor Justa KBE PhD DSc FRS published his paper explaining how everybody had been getting it so wrong for the past hundred years.

Or maybe they think it was just another crank email, which any half famous scientist will receive every day of the week; explaining how Einstein, or somebody else, got it all wrong.

Says those who are surprised every time they look into a telescope....

Let me repeat that EVERY SINGLE TIME..... And these are the people you have put faith in...... whatever floats your boat.....
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,753
4,689
✟348,671.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Oh they know it's there, but then why don't they use the correct physics for that state of matter????

That's why they keep getting surprised....

Heliosphere - Wikipedia

"Initial interpretations suggest that "the interstellar environment has far more influence on structuring the heliosphere than anyone previously believed"

"No one knows what is creating the ENA (energetic neutral atoms) ribbon, ... "The IBEX results are truly remarkable! What we are seeing in these maps does not match with any of the previous theoretical models of this region."

Oh we know, but most ignore it....

https://phys.org/news/2009-10-galactic-magnetic-fields-boundaries-solar.html


"The first all-sky maps developed by NASA's Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) spacecraft, the initial mission to examine the global interactions occurring at the edge of the solar system, suggest that the galactic magnetic fields had a far greater impact on Earth's history than previously conceived, and the future of our planet and others may depend, in part, on how the galactic magnetic fields change with time."


"The IBEX results are truly remarkable, with emissions not resembling any of the current theories or models of this never-before-seen region,""

But none of your theories predicted anything correctly, because they ignored the effects of plasma physics......

But you just keep right on believing in a cosmology that couldn't even predict things correctly right next door...... while ignoring the real physics that dominates the universe.....

And you'll keep having your models falsified one after another.......

So much for those PhD's since they couldn't even get one single model correct.... Lot of good it did them, right??????

Lol, your belief in your high priests infallibility is misplaced.....
Yet another example of your low intelligence.
You keep on telling us that magic plasma plays no role in the solar system now you contradict yourself by suggesting otherwise.
Is this another example of magic plasma's phenomenological effect; horses for courses.

We are still waiting for your Nobel Prize winning paper on how magic plasma actually works.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Yet another example of your low intelligence.
You keep on telling us that magic plasma plays no role in the solar system now you contradict yourself by suggesting otherwise.
Is this another example of magic plasma's phenomenological effect; horses for courses.

We are still waiting for your Nobel Prize winning paper on how magic plasma actually works.

It plays a role at the boundary of the solar system where the matter turns into 99.9% plasma.

Didn't you get that? It played a role in the shaping of the heliosphere, which all of your models failed to predict.

Get the facts correct and quit with the deliberate strawmen that are so easily shown for what they are......

It could affect the planet because it could affect the sun itself if the galactic magnetic field changes, but it was their gravity only models as the dominating force that failed. As it fails again and again and again when applied to plasma.....

But that's why you need 95% Fairie Dust in your models, isn't it.....

And the [people here see your tirades for what they are, being ad hominem attacks are included in every post, being you have no actual science to post with..... probably why you haven't cited any to defend your view, you don't have any that doesn't require 95% Fairie Dust.....
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,753
4,689
✟348,671.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It plays a role at the boundary of the solar system where the matter turns into 99.9% plasma.

Didn't you get that? It played a role in the shaping of the heliosphere, which all of your models failed to predict.

Get the facts correct and quit with the deliberate strawmen that are so easily shown for what they are......

It could affect the planet because it could affect the sun itself if the galactic magnetic field changes, but it was their gravity only models as the dominating force that failed. As it fails again and again and again when applied to plasma.....

But that's why you need 95% Fairie Dust in your models, isn't it.....

And the [people here see your tirades for what they are, being ad hominem attacks are included in every post, being you have no actual science to post with..... probably why you haven't cited any to defend your view, you don't have any that doesn't require 95% Fairie Dust.....
What a totally idiotic response.
The boundary is where the heliosphere can no longer expand as its outwards pressure is cancelled by the pressure exerted on it by the interstellar medium.
It has nothing to do with matter being being turned into plasma at the boundary, where do come up such ridiculous nonsense which only serves to illustrate your level of intelligence.

The heliosphere being a bubble of expanding plasma which contains the Sun and planets leads to the question about magic plasma.
The fact you cannot answer it despite many requests illustrates your dishonesty by continuing to pedal the nonsense that plasma is the answer to everything while ignoring the inconsistencies in your pet theory.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
What a totally idiotic response.
The boundary is where the heliosphere can no longer expand as its outwards pressure is cancelled by the pressure exerted on it by the interstellar medium.
It has nothing to do with matter being being turned plasma at the boundary, where do come up such ridiculous nonsense which only serves to illustrate your level of intelligence.

The heliosphere being a bubble of expanding plasma which contains the Sun and planets leads to the question about magic plasma.
The fact you cannot answer it despite many requests illustrates your dishonesty by continuing to pedal the nonsense that plasma is the answer to everything while ignoring the inconsistencies in your pet theory.

Oh please, every single theoretical model they had of the heliosphere was falsified, and here you are repeating flasified models as if nothing had happened.....

IBEX Explores Galactic Frontier, Releases First-Ever All-Sky Map

""The IBEX results are truly remarkable, with a narrow ribbon of bright details or emissions not resembling any of the current theoretical models of this region.""

Your bow shock models were one and all falsified, yet here you are going on as if nothing has happened......

Surprise! IBEX Finds No Bow 'Shock' Outside our Solar System - Universe Today

"For years, scientists have thought a bow “shock” formed ahead of our solar system’s heliosphere as it moved through interstellar space – similar to the sonic boom made by a jet breaking the sound barrier. But new data from NASA’s Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) shows that our system and its heliosphere move through space too slowly to form a bow shock, and therefore does not exist."

I mean please, stop regurgitating falsified theories already......

There is no outward pressure, it is the plasma double layer that is decelerating the solar wind, not any imaginary pressure from an imaginary bow shock......

Predicted in 1979 by plasma physicists, but they just didn't listen so they had to wait a couple decades to have their theories falsified.

https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/10/489/10489393.pdf

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19870005703.pdf

Hence my picture avatar which has been giving you the answer.....

So which falsified model are you relying on for your absurd claims??????
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,753
4,689
✟348,671.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Oh please, every single theoretical model they had of the heliosphere was falsified, and here you are repeating flasified models as if nothing had happened.....

IBEX Explores Galactic Frontier, Releases First-Ever All-Sky Map

""The IBEX results are truly remarkable, with a narrow ribbon of bright details or emissions not resembling any of the current theoretical models of this region.""

Your bow shock models were one and all falsified, yet here you are going on as if nothing has happened......

Surprise! IBEX Finds No Bow 'Shock' Outside our Solar System - Universe Today

"For years, scientists have thought a bow “shock” formed ahead of our solar system’s heliosphere as it moved through interstellar space – similar to the sonic boom made by a jet breaking the sound barrier. But new data from NASA’s Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) shows that our system and its heliosphere move through space too slowly to form a bow shock, and therefore does not exist."

I mean please, stop regurgitating falsified theories already......

There is no outward pressure, it is the plasma double layer that is decelerating the solar wind, not any imaginary pressure from an imaginary bow shock......

Predicted in 1979 by plasma physicists, but they just didn't listen so they had to wait a couple decades to have their theories falsified.

https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/10/489/10489393.pdf

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19870005703.pdf

Hence my picture avatar which has been giving you the answer.....

So which falsified model are you relying on for your absurd claims??????

Another idiotic response.
I notice how "matter turns into 99.9% plasma" at the the boundary nonsense has disappeared without a trace to be replaced with a plasma double layer.
Remember magic plasma ----> horses for courses.
This about face is equally ridiculous because you obviously don't know there is a potential difference across a plasma double layer and if like charges are decelerated across the layer then opposite charges will accelerate and vice versa.
The fact the solar wind which is composed of both positive ions and electrons is decelerating makes the presence of a double layer a nonsense argument.

It is pure comedy how you continue to ignore the magic plasma issue as if it has never existed while you continue to perpetrate your nonsense.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: SelfSim
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Another idiotic response.
I notice how "matter turns into 99.9% plasma" at the the boundary nonsense has disappeared without a trace to be replaced with a plasma double layer.
Ummm, do you even know what a double layer is???? Apparently not. You might try actually studying plasma since it does make up 99.9% of the universe.....

This about face is equally ridiculous because you obviously don't know there is a potential difference across a plasma double layer and if like charges are decelerated across the layer then opposite charges will accelerate and vice versa.
The fact the solar wind which is composed of both positive ions and electrons is decelerating makes the presence of a double layer a nonsense argument.

It is pure comedy how you continue to ignore the magic plasma issue as if it has never existed while you continue to perpetrate your nonsense.

You apparently don't understand plasma.....

Or Coulombs Law or you would understand that negative and positive charges like to move together........ Nor do you seem to understand the concept of two equally but oppositely charged layers lying in parallel......

Double layer (plasma physics) - Wikipedia

"A double layer is a structure in a plasma consisting of two parallel layers of opposite electrical charge. The sheets of charge, which are not necessarily planar, produce localised excursions of electric potential, resulting in a relatively strong electric field between the layers and weaker but more extensive compensating fields outside, which restore the global potential.[1] Ions and electrons within the double layer are accelerated, decelerated, or deflected by the electric field, depending on their direction of motion."

Notice it depends on their direction of motion, not the charge of the particles..... since two oppositely charged fields are combining effects....

"Electrostatic double layers are especially common in current-carrying plasmas,"

A current carrying plasma is a plasma consisting of both positive and negative particles....

Also do we actually have to inform you that both positive and negative particles in a plasma are confined by magnetic fields in fusion research devices???

And you apparently do not understand electric current at all.....

Electric current - Wikipedia

"An electric current is a flow of electric charge.:2 In electric circuits this charge is often carried by moving electrons in a wire. It can also be carried by ions in an electrolyte, or by both ions and electrons such as in an ionised gas (plasma)."

"Due to their lower mass, the electrons in a plasma accelerate more quickly in response to an electric field than the heavier positive ions, and hence carry the bulk of the current."

And hence the fast and slow solar wind........

Solar wind - Wikipedia

You got no science at all to defend your delusions which constantly ignore 99.9% of the universe because you simply do not understand it.....

But go ahead, keeping making uninformed claims and I'll just keep presenting more actual science and proving you wrong time after time..... but then again, that's why you actually use no scientific references, you got no science but Fairie Dust.....
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,753
4,689
✟348,671.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Ummm, do you even know what a double layer is???? Apparently not. You might try actually studying plasma since it does make up 99.9% of the universe.....



You apparently don't understand plasma.....

Or Coulombs Law or you would understand that negative and positive charges like to move together........ Nor do you seem to understand the concept of two equally but oppositely charged layers lying in parallel......

Double layer (plasma physics) - Wikipedia

"A double layer is a structure in a plasma consisting of two parallel layers of opposite electrical charge. The sheets of charge, which are not necessarily planar, produce localised excursions of electric potential, resulting in a relatively strong electric field between the layers and weaker but more extensive compensating fields outside, which restore the global potential.[1] Ions and electrons within the double layer are accelerated, decelerated, or deflected by the electric field, depending on their direction of motion."

Notice it depends on their direction of motion, not the charge of the particles..... since two oppositely charged fields are combining effects....

"Electrostatic double layers are especially common in current-carrying plasmas,"

A current carrying plasma is a plasma consisting of both positive and negative particles....

Also do we actually have to inform you that both positive and negative particles in a plasma are confined by magnetic fields in fusion research devices???

And you apparently do not understand electric current at all.....

Electric current - Wikipedia

"An electric current is a flow of electric charge.:2 In electric circuits this charge is often carried by moving electrons in a wire. It can also be carried by ions in an electrolyte, or by both ions and electrons such as in an ionised gas (plasma)."

"Due to their lower mass, the electrons in a plasma accelerate more quickly in response to an electric field than the heavier positive ions, and hence carry the bulk of the current."

And hence the fast and slow solar wind........

Solar wind - Wikipedia

You got no science at all to defend your delusions which constantly ignore 99.9% of the universe because you simply do not understand it.....

But go ahead, keeping making uninformed claims and I'll just keep presenting more actual science and proving you wrong time after time..... but then again, that's why you actually use no scientific references, you got no science but Fairie Dust.....
Your post is a great example of mindless quote mining.

Let me explain the problem at a simplistic level that is commensurate with your level of intelligence.
Using your own example of a positive and negative particle held together by a Coulomb force, what do you think happens when the negative and positive particles approach say the positive layer of the double layer?
If the double layer is strong enough the positive particle will undergo deceleration due Coulomb repulsion and negative particle undergo acceleration due to Coulomb attraction.
Furthermore if the direction of motion is progressively more perpendicular to the direction of the electric field of the double layer, the more the particles will deflect in opposite directions according to their charge.

The facts are whether you like or not the ions and electrons in the solar wind are both being decelerated which is not a current for the simple reason the potential difference from your non existent double layer cannot drive positive and negative charges in the same direction.
For you to think otherwise is idiocy at its finest.

Since your post is dedicated to quote mining here is one from Plasma Universe.com.
Plasma Universe.com said:
Particle acceleration: The potential drop across the double layer will accelerate electrons and positive ions in opposite directions. The magnitude of the potential drop determines the acceleration of the charged particles. In strong double layers, this will result in beams or jets of charged particles.
The sheer stupidity of your argument is that you are being contradicted by the very pseudoscience site Plasma Universe.com which your nonsense is based on. The irony is this excerpt from Plasma Universe.com is in fact based on “actual science” which makes you look like the complete fool with your own boasting of presenting “actual science”.

All you have “presented” is magic plasma which you dropped like a hot cake because you know very well it is totally illogical.
Despite this you continue to perpetrate the lie that plasma solves all the problems in the Universe without demonstrating how.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,717
5,558
46
Oregon
✟1,101,386.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
K, if you were to see a big "picture" of the universe, with all it's clusters and strings, and dark areas pushing out on everything (that stuff, us) equally, and it's expansion, a moving picture of the (known) universe and it's expansion, I would have to make the picture so that, or in a way that, wherever you looked at in it or focused on in it, that it (the universe) would appear to moving or expanding away from, wherever your focus point was or shifted (to) in it (this living picture of the universe)...

And that the stuff closer to wherever you were, or point you were focusing on looking at a picture of it, would be moving slower away from you or that focus point... and the stuff farther away, moving away from you or that point (you) faster, the further away you, or it was or were, the faster it would be appearing to be moving away from you or your focus point in the picture... and then when your focus point in the picture would change so would the picture, so to speak, So that in the end, to all of them appearing to be this way, no matter where you are at or "look" in it, is what I am trying to describe with words...

You are always the center no matter where you are, and either you or me or everything and nothing is actually even moving or is maybe even really actually in motion, who knows...

But, is anyone getting what I am saying about this...?

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

Thee Librarian

Active Member
Jan 25, 2018
94
18
65
Chicago
✟23,806.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Scru
Simple question(s):

How old is the universe...? And, How big is the universe...?

Discussion...?

God Bless!
Scripture says the earth is ancient and that seems reasonable to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neogaia777
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,717
5,558
46
Oregon
✟1,101,386.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
K, if you were to see a big "picture" of the universe, with all it's clusters and strings, and dark areas pushing out on everything (that stuff, us) equally, and it's expansion, a moving picture of the (known) universe and it's expansion, I would have to make the picture so that, or in a way that, wherever you looked at in it or focused on in it, that it (the universe) would appear to moving or expanding away from, wherever your focus point was or shifted (to) in it (this living picture of the universe)...

And that the stuff closer to wherever you were, or point you were focusing on looking at a picture of it, would be moving slower away from you or that focus point... and the stuff farther away, moving away from you or that point (you) faster, the further away you, or it was or were, the faster it would be appearing to be moving away from you or your focus point in the picture... and then when your focus point in the picture would change so would the picture, so to speak, So that in the end, to all of them appearing to be this way, no matter where you are at or "look" in it, is what I am trying to describe with words...

You are always the center no matter where you are, and either you or me or everything and nothing is actually even moving or is maybe even really actually in motion, who knows...

But, is anyone getting what I am saying about this...?

God Bless!
This focus point is also what I was prior referring to as any vantage point in the universe... Universally, you do appear to be at the center, but it's that way everywhere, and yet they say it was a big bang, like a star going supernova I guess, it is not like that... How do they explain us appearing to be the exact center...? When they say we were thrown out from another center point, and how may I ask did they come to know or determine that...? With the way things appear to be universally...?

And the force causing expansion is from all the dark areas in the "picture" of the universe, not from a single center point, not that we can determine anyway...

The Big Bang "theory", is clearly theory, and a very far fetched one in light of what we know now...

And the age of the "entire universe" being only 13.8 billion years young, is clearly wrong and is way to little time for what we are seeing now...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,717
5,558
46
Oregon
✟1,101,386.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
K, if you were to see a big "picture" of the universe, with all it's clusters and strings, and dark areas pushing out on everything (that stuff, us) equally, and it's expansion, a moving picture of the (known) universe and it's expansion, I would have to make the picture so that, or in a way that, wherever you looked at in it or focused on in it, that it (the universe) would appear to moving or expanding away from, wherever your focus point was or shifted (to) in it (this living picture of the universe)...

And that the stuff closer to wherever you were, or point you were focusing on looking at a picture of it, would be moving slower away from you or that focus point... and the stuff farther away, moving away from you or that point (you) faster, the further away you, or it was or were, the faster it would be appearing to be moving away from you or your focus point in the picture... and then when your focus point in the picture would change so would the picture, so to speak, So that in the end, to all of them appearing to be this way, no matter where you are at or "look" in it, is what I am trying to describe with words...

You are always the center no matter where you are, and either you or me or everything and nothing is actually even moving or is maybe even really actually in motion, who knows...

But, is anyone getting what I am saying about this...?

God Bless!

This focus point is also what I was prior referring to as any vantage point in the universe... Universally, you do appear to be at the center, but it's that way everywhere, and yet they say it was a big bang, like a star going supernova I guess, it is not like that... How do they explain us appearing to be the exact center...? When they say we were thrown out from another center point, and how may I ask did they come to know or determine that...? With the way things appear to be universally...?

And the force causing expansion is from all the dark areas in the "picture" of the universe, not from a single center point, not that we can determine anyway...

The Big Bang "theory", is clearly theory, and a very far fetched one in light of what we know now...

And the age of the "entire universe" being only 13.8 billion years young, is clearly wrong and is way to little time for what we are seeing now...

God Bless!

If you were to move through the universe, as you traveled, objects ahead of you and further away from you that were moving faster away from you, will slow down as you approach... And objects you leave behind you and that you travel further away from, will now be appearing to be moving faster away from you, again with you as the center, even as you travel... Same with objects and places around you as well, as you traveled, but I didn't want to make this more complicated than it needed to be...

God Bless!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,714
52,525
Guam
✟5,132,644.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm guessing by the lack of responses no one has anything to say...?
According to Google:
  1. The universe is 13.8 billion years old.
  2. The universe is 91 billion light years in diameter.
And according to the Bible, the universe has only been in existence for some 6000 years.
 
Upvote 0

Thee Librarian

Active Member
Jan 25, 2018
94
18
65
Chicago
✟23,806.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
According to Google:
  1. The universe is 13.8 billion years old.
  2. The universe is 91 billion light years in diameter.
And according to the Bible, the universe has only been in existence for some 6000 years.

Or has always existed.

Genesis 49:26
The blessings of your father have surpassed the blessings of the ancient mountains and the bounty of the everlasting hills.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,717
5,558
46
Oregon
✟1,101,386.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
According to Google:
  1. The universe is 13.8 billion years old.
  2. The universe is 91 billion light years in diameter.
And according to the Bible, the universe has only been in existence for some 6000 years.
1. it's much older than that, has to be at this point...

2. The "observable universe" or what we can see of it right now is 93 billion light years in diameter... (46.5 billion light year radius), and we cannot see any evidence yet of a big bang yet, (or the big bang just isn't simply true) unless were seeing very much of it (the universe) we should be able to by now, unless were just not seeing very much of it, which would mean it's very big and very old, much more so than what is currently thought of...

God Bless!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0