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.
Nice try to attempt to associate yourself with something in the real world and present time, but I won't allow that. You see, the present state and the laws and nature that work now have no relation to the future or far past that you can or have shown. None whatsoever. If one must debate, I would suggest honesty would be called for.Please switch off that computer. You must be in a dream state if you think it is working. After all, "science so called" is all nonsense, so it can't be working, can it?
Nice try to attempt to associate yourself with something in the real world and present time, but I won't allow that. You see, the present state and the laws and nature that work now have no relation to the future or far past that you can or have shown. None whatsoever. If one must debate, I would suggest honesty would be called for.
Googling that I see this..In 2005 astronomers pointed a telescope at a galaxy 6 billion light years away, and used it to measure the ratio of the mass of the proton to the mass of the electron, and to measure the fine structure constant, as they were 6 billion years ago. The values they got were identical to the value those constants have today.
Googling that I see this..
"The astronomers determined this by effectively looking back in time (in their mind and religion only, because we need time to exist there for this to apply) at a distant quasar, labelled B0218+367. The quasar's light, which took 7.5 billion years to reach us, (in their mind and religion only, because we need time to exist there for this to apply) was partially absorbed by ammonia gas in an intervening galaxy.( show us the way you know this exactly) Not only is ammonia useful in most bathroom cleaning products, it is also an ideal molecule to test our understanding of physics in the distant Universe. (why, the universe is like your bathroom??)Spectroscopic observations of the ammonia molecule were performed (here on earth..ha) with the Effelsberg 100m radio telescope at 2 cm wavelength (red-shifted from the original wavelength of 1.3 cm). The wavelengths at which ammonia absorbs radio energy from the quasar are sensitive (here ..now prove that if we observed from a distant star we would observe the same thing?..or are you peddling fishbowl philosophy here!? Let's see what you got.) to this special nuclear physics number, the proton-electron mass ratio.
"By comparing the ammonia absorption with that of other molecules, we were able to determine the value of the proton-electron mass ratio in this galaxy, ( you compare here, observe here, remember? You also have no way to know how far away the cloud or whatnot is. ) and confirm that it is the same as it is on Earth," (so explain how observing it here equals it being the same as at source? Remember that an ratio we see here and that exists here depends on our time and space and etc HERE) says Christian Henkel from MPIfR, an expert for molecular spectroscopy and co-author of the study."
http://www.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de/pressreleases/2008/5
Hoo ha.
Important measurements using Cepheid variables were done by Edwin Hubble.A Cepheid variable (/ˈsɛfiːɪd/ or /ˈsiːfiːɪd/) is a type of star that pulsates radially, varying in both diameter and temperature and producing changes in brightness with a well-defined stable period and amplitude.
A strong direct relationship between a Cepheid variable's luminosity and pulsation period[1][2] established Cepheids as important indicators of cosmic benchmarks for scaling galactic and extragalactic distances.[3][4][5][6] This robust characteristic of classical Cepheids was discovered in 1908 by Henrietta Swan Leavitt after studying thousands of variable stars in the Magellanic Clouds.[7]
The term Cepheid originates from Delta Cephei in the constellation Cepheus, identified by John Goodricke in 1784, the first of its type to be so identified.
False. I pointed out some facts about the claims in the article dealing with the issue you raised.Yet more ad hoc hypotheses. Otherwise known as special pleading.
Prove that the sites moved more than any other areas on earth, and were dunked miles under and resurfaced conveniently millions of years later.No actual science from dad in reply to the science I have cited so we are left with a long list of science, questions for him, etc. Which I will record here before going onto more science.
21 July 2016 dad: Stars demonstrate laws of physics that have not changed measurably over changes of billons of years.
21 July 2016 dad: What changes in/replacement of the laws of physics will make ice cores not be natural calendars extending back 420,000 years?
22 July 2016 dad: An assertion that we do not know how the Sun works.
22 July 2016 dad: The assertion that "Stars may be small for all we know" when we have measured their sizes!
22 July 2016 dad: What changes to the laws of physics will change the carbon dating that goes back ~50,000 years to different dates?
25 July 2016 dad: Show that Oko natural fission reactor worked with the different laws of physics that you are proposing.
25 July 2016 dad: Olbers' paradox is that the night sky should be bright in an infinite and eternal static universe.
25 July 2016 dad: Your replies are still empty of science (as in Physical Sciences).
26 July 2016 dad: Thinks that the geometry of parallax is dogma!+ please show that parallax does not work
26 July 2016: Frequently Asked Questions in Cosmology: What is the evidence for the Big Bang?
26 July 2016 dad: Thinks that the geometry of parallax is dogma!+ please show that parallax does not work without fact less tirades
27 July 2016 dad: Exactly what is "vague" about this clear description of physics in Here and There?
27 July 2016 dad: Exactly where is the "circular argument" in Here and There?
27 July 2016 dad: Where was the Burden of Proof vacuum and what effect did it have on the tests?
27 July 2016 dad: An assertion that parallax is invalidated by fantasies about spacetime is not evidence that parallax does not work.
27 July 2016 dad: Your opinion about the simple concept of dimensionless constants is not evidence against using them.
28 July 2018 dad: "Prove" your unsupported assertion that there is no time in the far universe.
28 July 2018 dad: How do you measure the distance to stars and galaxies in the " far universe"!
28 July 2016 dad: The size of the gas clouds containing the methanol undergoing rotational transitions does not affect the transitions.
29 July 2016 dad: What looks like an insult about scientists faking data with "seek to make the universe conform to what is under your nose".
29 July 2016 dad: What looks like a lot of ignorance about geology!
29 July 2016 dad: Does not know what time is even when its definition is cited!
29 July 2016 dad: If there is no way to measure actual distances then the laws of physics changing in the far universe is a delusion.
29 July 2016 dad: The movement of the reactors by geographical shifts does not change the fact that the Oklo natural fission reactors existed.
One can put ones hand in front of one's face on earth...yes. If we align with a 'distant' lightpole, or mountain...fine. Since we all are in time and spacetime here, we can translate THAT into distances IN space time here. However, the same is not true of stars in deep space, that exist where there may not be time as we know it.We have covered the first step in the cosmic distance ladder - parallax - which children can understand (hold your hand outstretched, close an eye and align it with a distant feature, swap eyes and see your hand move), high school students know about the geometry involved and astronomy students are taught the details of its use in measuring distance in astronomy.
From the link on inverse square law..There are a number of steps on the ladder that are used to estimate distances in our galaxy. However we will skip to the standard candles. If we can work out the intrinsic brightness (absolute magnitude) of an object then measuring its brightness as seen on Earth (apparent magnitude) tells us the distance of the object via the inverse square law.
If you honestly believed honesty is called for these threads would not exist.Nice try to attempt to associate yourself with something in the real world and present time, but I won't allow that. You see, the present state and the laws and nature that work now have no relation to the future or far past that you can or have shown. None whatsoever. If one must debate, I would suggest honesty would be called for.
Prove that you can read and understand English, dad:Prove that the sites moved more than any other areas on earth...
Yes parallax is the concept which children can understand, dad. A fantasy about time not existing at stars such as Alpha Centauri (4.3. light years away with a measured parallax (π) 754.81 ± 4.11[1] mas :eek!) is delusional because we see the light from these stars. We see light from stars billions of light years awayOne can put ones hand in front of one's face on earth...yes.
Wrong, dad. There are three variables:Distance has to be known then...correct?
Prove that you can read and understand English, dad:
29 July 2016 dad: What looks like a lot of ignorance about geology!
29 July 2016 dad: The movement of the reactors by geographical shifts does not change the fact that the Oklo natural fission reactors existed.
And that you understand the concept of supplying evidence for unsupported assertions:
8 August 2016 dad: Supply evidence for your assertion that the Oklo natural fission reactors "moved more than any other areas on earth".
Not cute is repeated argument by insult and ignorance, dad.Cute, ....
So is the concept of repeating oneself like a little parrot, while saying nothing!Yes parallax is the concept which children can understand, dad.
In your head only is that time of any value. The base line for your measure is where!?
False. There is also the variable of whether space and time as we know it here exist there! Unless they do, then the apparent...anything from earth has no transferable meaning! No distance and no sizes can be known, they depend on time existing.Wrong, dad. There are three variables:
- absolute magnitude
- apparent magnitude
- distance.
Foolish non truth. The third happens to be way out in the unknown, and all you are doing is exercising 'fishbowl' godless logic.If we measure any 2 of these we can calculate the third.
No. You project earth spacetime based thinking to the unknown. We see only here. It is apparent to us only here, we have only ONE point and frame of reference.A standard candle is an object where we estimate absolute magnitude, we use a telecope to measure apparent magnitude and thus we can calculate the third variable distance.
One would not feel insulted by defeat if one learned from it. Not sure how illuminating facts about geology and stellar distance basics could be insulting..but that's not my problem.Not cute is repeated argument by insult and ignorance, dad.
Bingo. If you claim a magic elevator ride and back up again miles under, you better prove it or at least offer some sort of support. I have to tell you this????8 August 2016 dad: Supply evidence for your assertion that the Oklo natural fission reactors "moved more than any other areas on earth".
The black hole of evo dream time modelling has no relation to real time that you can show, eh? I might point out that no one else can either. At least you are defeated and honest enough to not even try to debate intelligently any more.You've turned that into an art form.
More projection.
Of course I can, but it's not worth the time or effort when dealing with the HI Theory. The HI Theory is just making stuff up, so let's keep with the spirit and leave reality out of it.The black hole of evo dream time modelling has no relation to real time that you can show, eh? I might point out that no one else can either. At least you are defeated and honest enough to not even try to debate intelligently any more.
Speaking of black holes, I notice they admit not knowing all that much about them.
"One of the biggest problems when studying black holes is that the laws of physics as we know them cease to apply in their deepest regions. Large quantities of matter and energy concentrate in an infinitely small space, the gravitational singularity, where space-time curves towards infinity and all matter is destroyed. Or is it?"
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160805085747.htm
I suppose they might as well say something like..'black holes are real and based on physics...or are they--maybe we don't really know what we are talking about whatsoever!?' Ha. Lurkers, remember that the claims of so called science really just are 'godless inspiration, that comes from the nethermost regions of the deluded evo mind'
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?