• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

Science Proves Creation

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by HARK!, Feb 4, 2018.

  1. Ophiolite

    Ophiolite Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

    +5,752
    United Kingdom
    Agnostic
    Private
    No longer much used? Not in my house. Spinning wheel in the bedroom, spinning wheel in the drawing room, spinning wheel in the hall. Raw wool everywhere. The constant click of the wheel. The incessant bleating of the sheep!

    You could also add spin, a positive, possibly distorted, interpretation of potentially negative news, especially in a political situation.
     
  2. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +12,318
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Your definition of "spin" make a much better example. :)
     
  3. HARK!

    HARK! Well-Known Member

    +712
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    It is; but you haven't demonstrated that matter is infinite. Scientists can approximate the quantity of matter in the Universe; by the same logic that scientist approximate its' age.

    Growing into what? Space? Again, what do you suppose is on the other side of your imaginary boundaries of space?

    If you take time to read my previous posts; you'll see my arguments that space is three dimensional. We live in a three dimensional world; which occupies three dimensions of space. Space = 3D. Area = 2D.

    Your example is an example of limited limited area, not limited volume. If the element was able to move freely throughout the sphere; that would be an example of limited volume. The surface of the sphere, defines the volume of the sphere. There is still space outside of the sphere; whether or not your element can travel into that outer space.
     
  4. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +12,318
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Not space.



    We "live" in a three dimensional mental construct. That does not mean that space is three dimensional.
     
  5. Bungle_Bear

    Bungle_Bear Whoot!

    +2,308
    Agnostic
    Married
    I suggested you stop digging as you are making yourself look more and more foolish. Seriously, stop! You've made an erroneous claim which everyone except you can see. Learn from it and move on.
     
  6. HARK!

    HARK! Well-Known Member

    +712
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Did you tell me that before or after I mentioned that GR is flawed?

    General Relativity Does Not Respect Local Energy-Momentum
    There are serious problems with local energy-momentum conservation in general relativity (see [1] for a review). It is well known that Einstein's theory does not assign a definite stress-energy tensor to the gravitational field. This property is extremely unsatisfactory, because one knows that all other fundamental interactions in nature actually do respect the principle of local conservation of energy-momentum. Essentially, the non-existance of a stress-energy tensor is a consequence of the purely geometrical interpretation of gravity as curvature of space-time.
    General Relativity Predicts Space-Time Singularities
    Space-time singularities and event horizons are a consequence of general relativity, appearing in the solutions of the gravitational field. Although the "big bang" singularity and "black holes" have been an topic of intensive study in theoretical astrophysics, one can seriously doubt that such mathematical monsters should really represent physical objects. In fact, in order to predict black holes one has to extrapolate the theory of general relativity far beyond observationally known gravity strengths. Quoting Albert Einstein shows that he was quite aware of this conceptual problem: "For large densities of field and of matter, the field equations and even the field variables which enter into them will have no real significance. One may not therefore assume the validity of the equations for very high density of field and of matter, and one may not conclude that the 'beginning of the expansion' [of the universe] must mean a singularity in the mathematical sense. All we have to realize is that the equations may not be continued over such regions." [2] Many physicists would prefer a gravity theory without mathematical anomalies in its field solutions.
    General Relativity Failed to Be Quantized
    Quantum mechanics can be said to be the cornerstone of modern physics. For every physical field theory it should be possible to formulate it as quantum field theory. Actually, it is generally accepted that the field theories of electromagnetism or gravitation are but an approximation, the "classical limit", of more fundamental underlying quantum field theories. It is also assumed that interaction theories have to be gauge theories. The possibility of formulating gravity as quantum field theory is essential in the context of the unification of all fundamental interactions. However, all attempts to find a consistent quantum gauge field theory of general relativity have failed. This indicates again that general relativity can hardly be an absolutely correct theory of gravitation.
    Towards a Consistent Theory of Gravitation
    It appears that general relativity is not an adequate theory of gravitation, and that it has to be replaced by a new consistent theory.

    The Flaws of General Relativity
     
  7. HARK!

    HARK! Well-Known Member

    +712
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Exactly my point.
     
  8. Kylie

    Kylie Defeater of Illogic

    +3,480
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    No one is saying that GR is the answer to everything. There are things which GR doesn't work well with, which is why we developed QM. But there is, so far as I know, no issue at all where we once used GR but now use QM to explain it. And there is plenty that QM can't work with and we use GR for that stuff instead.

    You seem to be saying that since GR doesn't work for EVERYTHING, it is worthless, and since QM came around after GR, that QM has superseded GR.
     
  9. Ken-1122

    Ken-1122 Newbie

    +726
    Atheist
    Private
    I see your point. IMO I think it would have been better to have simply said the term has been expanded to mean something else as well.
     
  10. Shemjaza

    Shemjaza Regular Member Supporter

    +1,995
    Australia
    Atheist
    Single
    AU-Greens
    Observable universe. Different concept.

    Regardless, I'm not asserting that there is either infinite matter or infinite space... I'm just pointing out that the basis for your assertions that don't have the former and do have the latter are either unjustified or actually counter evidence.

    Stretching, growing in size.

    Also, no boundaries necessary.

    Okay, it seems you are unfamiliar with discussions and terminology about space time topology. I recommend looking up a little, even for a layman it can be fascinating.

    In short, when discussing distorted 3D space it's easier to use 2D analogies.

    With a flat plane standing in for undistorted, or the surface of a whirlpool to symbolise what a singularity does to space/time.

    It's an example of how a space can be limited without needing walls or barriers.

    It's basically impossible to visualise, but you should be able to conceptualise a 3D space streetched around a fourth dimension so that while there is a limited amount of total space the way it curls back on itself means there are no barriers.
     
  11. FrumiousBandersnatch

    FrumiousBandersnatch Well-Known Member

    +4,738
    Atheist
    That would be philosophy (although there are philosophers of science): "Philosophers ask questions like children, answer them like lawyers"
     
  12. FrumiousBandersnatch

    FrumiousBandersnatch Well-Known Member

    +4,738
    Atheist
    Yeah, this trend literally has me climbing the walls and tearing my hair out.
    Oh, wait...
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  13. SLP

    SLP Senior Member

    +543
    Atheist
    Well, there's your problem.
    No background in science.
     
  14. Ken-1122

    Ken-1122 Newbie

    +726
    Atheist
    Private
    If Science proves Creation, why are there a disproportionate number of scientists who don't accept creation?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  15. Jimmy D

    Jimmy D Well-Known Member

    +5,073
    Atheist
    Married
    And creationists that don't accept science? ^_^
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • List
  16. Lazarus Long

    Lazarus Long Member

    346
    +107
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    There are more scientists, in the appropriate fields, named Stephen (or variants of) who accept evolution than there are scientists in all fields who dismiss evolution.
     
  17. FrumiousBandersnatch

    FrumiousBandersnatch Well-Known Member

    +4,738
    Atheist
    When the title of the thread shows such a fundamental misunderstanding of what science does, it's hard to take it seriously...
     
  18. ZNP

    ZNP Well-Known Member

    524
    +162
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Which in turn proves that we went from nothing to the universe, the definition of creation.
     
  19. ZNP

    ZNP Well-Known Member

    524
    +162
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Evolution does not have anything to do with creation. Creation, by definition says the universe started from 0, or in the terms of the Bible "God called not being being". Evolution on the other hand talks about how something can change over time. It never begins with nothing.
     
  20. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +12,318
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    It doesn't say that in the Bible.
    In this case, evolution talks about how life has changed and diversified since it began. Other branches of science treat of those other matters.
     
Loading...