Light years is a time measure

AV1611VET · Jan 15, 2014

sfs said:
Just when do you think this era of zero gravity was?

4004 BC - present.

freezerman2000 · Jan 15, 2014

AV1611VET said:
4004 BC - present.

I've been wondering why I've been floating around in mid air all my life!

Strathos · Jan 16, 2014

Subduction Zone said:
I don't know about that. dad's arguments are so poor that they are more likely to turn Christians away rather than the opposite. Could you think of a more perfect "cover"

I think I'll invoke Hanlon's razor here.

dad · Jan 16, 2014

Old Ned said:
You of "sound mind" also disagree with most brilliant minds on the planet.

Not only those mental twerps, but we disagree with greater minds than that! Satan for example.

The only thing that is proven 100% concrete is mathematics.

Nope. Math is not applicable to eternity or practically anywhere far from earth!

dad · Jan 16, 2014

kevinmaynard said:
I am saying I won't be baited by lies.

Hey, who will? What lies??

Of course I am not speaking of you but in general. Each reader makes up their own mind. I was just making an observation. Only you know if you are sincere. My statement that Satan is the father of lies inky applies to you if you are being dishonest. Only you have that information.

I am honest as the day is long. Relax. I also do not spook easy.

Only you know if you honestly in you heart believe earth exist inside a giant fish bowl.

You think the term fishbowl is used literally? I must ask for honesty now.

Do you believe dishonesty can represent Christ?

Did you beat your mother and wife?

dad · Jan 16, 2014

RealityCheck said:
More of this useless blather. There really is no point in trying to teach dad anything at all.

You would be better to try learning.

One of the things that we've learned (or re-learned) in the past 500 years or so is that we are not able to know something with absolute certainty. This realization has come, not terribly coincidentally, alongside a Reformation that rejected the absolute authority of the Catholic Church and the development of the Scientific Method, both of which also coincided (roughly) with discoveries that showed that our universe was much larger and more complex (and hardly the perfection espoused by the church) than we could imagine.

They were wrong. They ended up with a big bang and all sorts of godless gibberish.

We began to understand what the limits were to our knowledge.

You need to start understanding that! This state for example is not the be all end all.

Philosophers and theologians love to make hay of this, claiming that there must be some source of absolute knowledge that allows us to know anything at all. But that's only if we actually "absolutely" know anything.

Those who are unaware of a greater power and knowledge, are wisdom deficient, and knowledge deprived, and wandering around in a dark fuzzy haze, likely to end up depraved.

The reality is we do not. We do not operate on absolute knowledge, we operate on practical knowledge.

Speak for yourself. Those who look to the Almighty, tap into a boundless source of higher knowledge.

We do not "absolutely" know that the sun is going to rise again tomorrow in the eastern sky and then set in the west. But for all practical purposes, we do know that it will behave exactly like that. And that's because *all* of the evidence we have indicates that this is what will happen, and *no* evidence that the sun will not rise in the east and set in the west. We therefore have good and solid reason to say we "know" that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

We have better reason to know that it will soon go out.

This is how knowledge actually works. We "know" something based on what evidence informs us of that thing, and we reject other possibilities that have no evidence supporting those possibilities. Sure it's possible that there are unicorns in our universe. We can't absolutely know that there are no unicorns anywhere in the universe.

Simple solution, stick to preaching what you do know.

We can't absolutely know that the speed of light is actually constant everywhere in the universe at all times. But we can know this at a practical level because *all* the evidence supports a constant speed and *no* evidence points otherwise.

That is silly. Earth and area is the only place man ever has been, so what light does here is all we know.

The only reason we would have to actually doubt that the speed of light in a vacuum is other than the constant c is evidence to support that position.

Have you reason to claim the universe in in this vacuum? All space is a vacuum? It seems your vacuum is imaginary or at least just a belief beyond earth and area.

Loudmouth · Jan 16, 2014

dad said:
They were wrong. They ended up with a big bang and all sorts of godless gibberish.

In other words, you only care if a conclusion matches up with your beliefs and not with reality.

Thanks for playing. You have been defeated.

dad · Jan 16, 2014

freezerman2000 said:
I venture to say that where there is no gravity,the hourglass will cease to work.Does that mean that time ceases to exist there?

No. However the issue was a man made device for telling time. In fact science doesn't know what time is. It speaks of a spacetime concept, which is a fishbowl concept.

Gravity has nothing to do with time,much less the amount of it(gravity).

If gravity bends space time near earth, that dilates time actually, according to science.

dad · Jan 16, 2014

Loudmouth said:
In other words, you only care if a conclusion matches up with your beliefs and not with reality.

Thanks for playing. You have been defeated.

Ha. Another wannabe obsessed with defeat. Anyhow, the big bang was a conclusion that was reached, and I am not alone in my contempt for the fable.

Hey, prove time exists as we know it here on earth in the far universe!!??

Run along sonny, you tried.

dad · Jan 16, 2014

freezerman2000 said:
-and was far more knowledgeable than you.

In an in the box way, in some things, yes, of course. In the bigger issues and more important ones, he was not even a player. Relativity is relative only to the fishbowl.

Loudmouth · Jan 16, 2014

dad said:
Ha. Another wannabe obsessed with defeat. Anyhow, the big bang was a conclusion that was reached, and I am not alone in my contempt for the fable.

Hey, prove time exists as we know it here on earth in the far universe!!??

Run along sonny, you tried.

Your contempt is not based on reality. Your contempt is due to the fact that reality contradicts your fantasies. You have been defeated.

dad · Jan 16, 2014

Loudmouth said:
Your contempt is not based on reality. Your contempt is due to the fact that reality contradicts your fantasies. You have been defeated.

When you are out of steam and want to vent hot air, maybe try somewhere other than a science forum.

Loudmouth · Jan 16, 2014

dad said:
When you are out of steam and want to vent hot air, maybe try somewhere other than a science forum.

Maybe try referring to reality instead of your fantasies. You have been defeated.

Lost Angel · Jan 16, 2014

Is dad a scientist, or even learned in science?
What experiments has he conducted to support his different state past philosophy?

RealityCheck · Jan 16, 2014

Lost Angel said:
Is dad a scientist, or even learned in science?
What experiments has he conducted to support his different state past philosophy?

Zero. He is not a scientist and clearly not learned in science. This is just another in his long lines of philosophical nonsense.

Mr Strawberry · Jan 16, 2014

RealityCheck said:
Zero. He is not a scientist and clearly not learned in science.

I think of him as more of a cartoon character.

RealityCheck · Jan 16, 2014

In any case, disputing the speed of light is fine as long as you have some evidence to back up a reason to think it would be different. dad, however, holds up the Bible and works backward from that to his conclusions, and then shouts at anyone who dares tell him he's wrong "proveitproveitproveitproveit"

I'm sure he's heard non-believers tell him to prove his own beliefs so many times he figures "I'm rubber and you're glue".

Since dad is not a scientist and doesn't understand (or willfully refuses to acknowledge that he *does* understand) what's implied by a different speed of light:

The speed of light is not an arbitrary constant. It's true that we could define meters and miles and seconds and so on to be different in some way, but regardless of how big a yardstick is, the speed at which light travels simply *is* a certain value and we have devised a system of numbers, units, and mathematics to quantify it. But it is not arbitrary and does not exist on its own. The speed of light is actually tied to two other important constants, usually depicted as Greek letters epsilon and mu, the electric permittivity of free space and the magnetic permeability of free space. This should make sense to anyone who knows that light is (at least in one aspect) a self-propagating electro-magnetic wave. And each of those constants is key to the magnitude of electro-magnetic forces.

The speed of light is inversely proportional to the inverse of the square root of the product of these two constants - that is, multiply them, take the square root of that, and then divide 1 by that amount, and you get c. The electro-static force between charged particles is inversely proportional to the electric constant, and the magnetic force is directly proportional to the magnetic constant.

So let's suppose, as dad desperately wants to believe, that the speed of light could be different somewhere else in the universe. Now generally, young-earthers argue for a young universe - which means, the speed of light has to be much higher in other parts of the universe in order to have reached earth not in 2 million years or 2 billion years, but in just 6000 years. It also, consequently, means that the further away an object is in the universe from us, the speed of light must be much higher. Thus, an object 2 million parsecs away is in an area of space where light travels much faster than an area of space only 20,000 parsecs away. However, at roughly 6000 light years from earth, light can travel at its measured speed c here in our region.

(Already sounds problematic but let's plow ahead.)

What dad just fails to address in any of his blathering is how matter can possibly exist in those other parts of the universe. (In fact, his position is contradictory to all the theist apologists, as will be demonstrated, who argue that God must exist because all the physical constants of the universe are "so perfect and precise," such that stars and planets and life can even exist.) If the speed of light is much higher in some distant part of the universe that we can see, then that means either a) the electric constant is much lower or b) the magnetic constant is much lower or c) both are much lower. Keep in mind that because the speed of light is dependent on the square root of these other constants, a change on the order of 10 in the speed of light requires a change on the order of 100 in one of those constants, and a change on the order of 1000000 in c requires a change on the order of 1000000000000 in one (or both) of the other constants.

Except, if the electrostatic constant goes down by a factor of, say, one million (a change in c of about 1000 times higher), that means the electrostatic force in that area of the universe is also 1000000 times stronger. If the magnetic constant goes down by one million, the magnetic force also goes down by a million. You can balance it between the two, but you're still talking then about an electric force 1000 times stronger than it is here, and a magnetic force 1000 times weaker.

And it just gets worse the further out in the universe you go - electric force must get MUCH higher, magnetic force must get MUCH lower - because of the increasing speeds of light necessary to make light reach earth in just 6000 years from parts of the universe that are a million, a billion, ten billion light years away.

Under such conditions, matter in the form we know it ceases to work. There would be no stars to see, no galaxies for us to observe at such distances. Basic atomic structure would fail. Not even our nearest galactic neighbor, the Andromeda galaxy, could appear as it does - full of stars and other stellar-like objects that look *just* like the stars and objects we observe closer to home here in our galaxy. Who knows what we *would* see under such conditions - but it sure wouldn't be other stars like our own sun.

I'm sure dad can account for this with a simple hand-waving of something along the lines of "god makes it work for blah blah blah reasons." But when you have to keep bringing in that line of argument to make your pet ideas work, you might as well be saying that pink fart fairies hold the universe together. Just as plausible and just as much reason to believe it.

BaconWizard · Jan 16, 2014

Nobody gets to decide, as an individual, what a unit is a measurement of.

Light-year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That is a light-year. There is no room for interpretation or discussion any more than there is for "what is a centimeter"

BaconWizard · Jan 16, 2014

Mike Pote 69 said:
Judging by all of your replies to people, I'd say you're a self confessed genius. How does it smell up your own ass? Good?

Why are you going out of your way to represent both yourself and your faith in an obnoxious way?

This comment makes no argument or point relevant to the thread whatsoever. In which case, what motivated you to post at all. What agenda do you have?

Does this represent what it is to be a Christian of your particular stripe? I wonder how many people will be impressed.

freezerman2000 · Jan 16, 2014

BaconWizard said:
Why are you going out of your way to represent both yourself and your faith in an obnoxious way?

This comment makes no argument or point relevant to the thread whatsoever. In which case, what motivated you to post at all. What agenda do you have?

Does this represent what it is to be a Christian of your particular stripe? I wonder how many people will be impressed.

Some folks are like that..I'd just not respond.If you don't play,they will find someone else to try to antagonize,because you would be no fun.

Light years is a time measure

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Living and dying in 3/4 time

No one important

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Contributor

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Contributor

Undefeated!

Contributor

מָ֫וֶת

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Living and dying in 3/4 time

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency