The Aliens are going to laugh at earth cosmologists explaining 13.8 billion years from creation.

[StevenMerten]

0 velocity relative to what? This seems to be a problem for many, they think about velocity and time in contexts of a fuxed universal background. No such fixed backdrop exists. It's all relative, that's kind of the point

Hello Armoured,
1080 million kilometres per hour (1.08 x 10 to the ninth power)(186000 miles per second), is the speed of light. Light travels this fast whether or not it is passing by something. 0 velocity would be 186000 miles per second slower than this, I would imagine.

 

[Armoured]

Hello Armoured,
1080 million kilometres per hour (1.08 x 10 to the ninth power)(186000 miles per second), is the speed of light. Light travels this fast whether or not it is passing by something. 0 velocity would be 186000 miles per second slower than this, I would imagine.

Stand still, and shine a flashlight awa6 from you. The light will be moving away from you at a velocity of C. Your relative velocitywill be zero. Does time stop for you?

 

[Paul Yohannan]

Hello Papias,
I will bring it down. You had indicated that Wikipedia was correct on space flight and Time dilation.

Time dilation and space flight​

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on earth. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home. Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel through the entire known Universe in one human lifetime. The space travelers could return to Earth billions of years in the future. A scenario based on this idea was presented in the novel Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle.
Quoted From: Wikipedia Time Dilation​

And find Earth destroyed by an expanding sun.

 

[StevenMerten]

Stand still, and shine a flashlight awa6 from you. The light will be moving away from you at a velocity of C. Your relative velocitywill be zero. Does time stop for you?

Not sure what you are saying. Take your flashlight and shine it from one edge the night sky to the other. Did light just travel from one end of the universe to the other? Ah, No.

Unless there is a planet out there where stars do not shine, then planets always are always being passed by, by light. Light travels at 186000 miles per second compared to anything that is traveling at 0 velocity.

 

[Armoured]

Not sure what you are saying. Take your flashlight and shine it from one edge the night sky to the other. Did light just travel from one end of the universe to the other? Ah, No.

Of course not. But that's not what I said. just shine a flashlight away from you. The photons from the flashlight are moving at C velocity, and you have a relative velocity of 0.

Unless there is a planet out there where stars do not shine, then planets always are always being passed by, by light. Light travels at 186000 miles per second compared to anything that is traveling at 0 velocity.

Yes. And?

 

[Steve Petersen]

There is a creation seminar going on at the edge of the universe. Earth’s brightest cosmologists are invited to be the guest speakers. Earth’s starships can travel at nearly the speed of light. It is a two hour trip. Earth’s brightest cosmologists begin to explain that the universe is 13.8 billion years old; all the Aliens start laughing. Earth cosmologists call home for help. The person on the other end of the line tell them that those people do not work there anymore, they died 13 billion years ago. This is Time Dilation. Realizing their error, earth cosmologists add 13 billion years, rather than two hours, to their calculations as to when creation happened. The Aliens are on the floor roaring with laughter.

The Aliens start chanting, ‘Flat Time! Flat Time! Flat Time!’. One of the Aliens explains to earth’s cosmologists, ‘Has earth had scientists that thought the earth was flat? Well now let’s get you up to speed on how physical time works.’

Physical time is a variable and not the constant that atheist cosmologist creationists want to make it out to be. Albert Einstein discovered Time Dilation and published his ‘Theory of Relativity’. Physical time slows down as velocity increases. It is said that at the, speed of light, time stops. So from the prospective of Aliens from all over the universe, from planets traveling at a whole spectrum of different velocities, the physical time from creation varies vastly. So stating that creation happened at a specific time, when physical time is a variable and not a constant, is meaningless.

Earth’s cosmologists ask the Alien, ‘If they all knew this, why did so many come to our seminar?’. The Alien responds, ‘Because you come from earth where our Lord, God and Savior died for our sins. The Holy Spirit has sent the whole universe massive numbers of prophets telling of Jesus’ glory! Physical time may be a variable, but Christ’s Salvation is a constant throughout the Universe!’.

Time dilation and space flight​

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on earth. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home. Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel through the entire known Universe in one human lifetime. The space travelers could return to Earth billions of years in the future. A scenario based on this idea was presented in the novel Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle.

Quoted From: Wikipedia Time Dilation​

Refutation of Time Dilation argument of YECs:

CE412: Fast old light

 

[Papias]

Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel through the entire known Universe in one human lifetime.

No, you are misunderstanding a hypothetical statement, thinking they mean this as a serious possibility. It's not. At that acceleration, you would reach the speed of light in less than a year, and keep accelerating past the speed of light, reaching speeds many times the speed of light, which is impossible.

It's just an illustration, similar to if I said "A person stacking basketballs to the height of the moon would be able to do so with 1.378 billion basketballs". While the statement is literally true, I am in no way suggesting that a person literally could stack the basketballs.

Papias

 

[StevenMerten]

No, you are misunderstanding a hypothetical statement, thinking they mean this as a serious possibility. It's not. At that acceleration, you would reach the speed of light in less than a year, and keep accelerating past the speed of light, reaching speeds many times the speed of light, which is impossible.

It's just an illustration, similar to if I said "A person stacking basketballs to the height of the moon would be able to do so with 1.378 billion basketballs". While the statement is literally true, I am in no way suggesting that a person literally could stack the basketballs.

Papias

Hello Papias,
Lets go with the hypothetical as the science guys are doing at Wickipedia. Do you agree that time is a variable and not a constant? Do you agree that the Aliens are going to find earth cosmologist's 13.8 billion years from creation very funny because the Aliens are from a whole spectrum of Time Dilation velocities, with a whole spectrum of various times from creation?

 

[Armoured]

Hello Papias,
Lets go with the hypothetical as the science guys are doing at Wickipedia. Do you agree that time is a variable and not a constant?

yes

Do you agree that the Aliens are going to find earth cosmologist's 13.8 billion years from creation very funny because the Aliens are from a whole spectrum of Time Dilation velocities, with a whole spectrum of various times from creation?

Whole lotta assumptions here.

 

[Papias]

Hello Papias,
Lets go with the hypothetical as the science guys are doing at Wickipedia. Do you agree that time is a variable and not a constant?

I don't think you understand what is meant by a "variable" and a "constant". In science, these are terms that designate symbolic names for terms in equations. They do not directly and perfectly match the common useage of the words "variable" and "constant".

In other words, saying one is a "variable" doesn't mean that it always changes or that it is unreliable. For instance, the standard mass of a kilogram is defined by the mass of a polished platinum ball kept in a vault - it's mass never changes. Yet, by the same relativistic effects used in this thread, it's mass would be measured as something other than 1 kg under some conditions. The fact that "mass" is a common variable in equations in no way means that mass is not sometimes constant.

In the same way, a "constant" doesn't mean that it can't change. For instance, the speed of light is not always the same - it slows down significantly in diamond, for instance. Even "cosmological constants" are only constant in this universe.

The upshot is that you are confusing the scientific use of a word with it's common vernacular use, and that's why your story and argument make no sense. The story obfuscates the truth that time, as measured in Earth's reference frame, can indeed be measured and that the age of the earth is 4.6 billion years, with an overall age of the Universe of 13.8 billion years. Those numbers have been confirmed repeatedly, and stories that misuse terms to hide that reality help no one.

Do you agree that the Aliens are going to find earth cosmologist's 13.8 billion years from creation very funny because the Aliens are from a whole spectrum of Time Dilation velocities, with a whole spectrum of various times from creation?

There is not a "whole spectrum of times". The story is kinda cute, just like my 6 year old's pun about a horse walking into a bar and saying "hey, bartender!" ("hay, bartender.") is cute. It's wrong and is a deliberate misuse of terms, but it's cute.

Of the several mistakes in the story, maybe this will help.

Earth’s starships can travel at nearly the speed of light. It is a two hour trip. Earth’s brightest cosmologists begin to explain that the universe is 13.8 billion years old; all the Aliens start laughing. Earth cosmologists call home for help.

If "it's a two hour trip", then you must mean from the perspective of the people in the starship - because if you mean in the earth's reference frame, then a "two hour trip", even at nearly the speed of light, would not even get you to Neptune. So that means that they are over 10 billion light years away, which means that "calling home" for help would take billions of years for the signal to reach earth, which means that the whole story falls apart. and so on.

Thinking that this kind of cute story says anything about reality is incoherent. At least the basketball example I gave was consistent with reality. When Christians try to use a cute pun like that as if it made up any kind of coherent argument, it makes it look like being Christian means being stupid. I don't think that helps.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[StevenMerten]

Hello Papias,
Basic math on physical time vs velocity in years from creation. Traveling at the velocity of the speed of light, physical time stops. Therefore at the speed of light there is 0 physical time from creation. Traveling at 0 velocity, physcial time is infinite. Therefore traveling at 0 velocity it is infinite physical time from creation. In between these two extremes of velocity vs physical time, exists a whole spectrum of outcomes in years from creation.

Do we agree?

 

[Papias]

Hello Papias,
...... In between these two extremes of velocity vs physical time, exists a whole spectrum of outcomes in years from creation.

Do we agree?

A whole spectrum of possible time rates exists, but for the vast majority of these, nothing is actually moving at that speed, so nothing is actually experiencing time in that way.

So if you meant that there is a spectrum of possible outcomes, most of which don't actually exist, then yes. It is hypothetically possible that an object left the earth at it's formation, and if that object was accelerated to near the speed of light back then, it would, in it's time frame, be only a week from the formation of the earth to now. But that's not only unscriptural, but it doesn't change the fact that the order of creation described by a literal reading of Genesis is out of order in many ways, which of course time dilation can't affect.

Papias

 

[StevenMerten]

A whole spectrum of possible time rates exists, but for the vast majority of these, nothing is actually moving at that speed, so nothing is actually experiencing time in that way.

So if you meant that there is a spectrum of possible outcomes, most of which don't actually exist, then yes. It is hypothetically possible that an object left the earth at it's formation, and if that object was accelerated to near the speed of light back then, it would, in it's time frame, be only a week from the formation of the earth to now. But that's not only unscriptural, but it doesn't change the fact that the order of creation described by a literal reading of Genesis is out of order in many ways, which of course time dilation can't affect.

Papias

Hello Papias,
Thank you for a parcial agreement.

I think, God using Time Dilation, can make creation happen in six days. I am only looking for science to admit that six days of creation on the week Adam was made, is plauseable.

First of all, earth was created before light according to the Bible. So we have two different events. The creation of earth and then the big bang goes off. I see the big bang as God saying, 'Let There Be Light!'. The mass of one septillion stars on the head of a needle. That is a lot of gravitational force pulling on earth to get earth up to a speed close to the speed of light. I read where science suggests that empty space came into existance ahead of the big bang. If this is correct, then God can control the distance and gravitational pull by simply feeding out empty space between the two. Or God can simply create earth already traveling near the speed of light.

Earth is simply rotating in front of the big bang for the first four days. God's clock and man's clock are the same, earth rotating in front of a light source. Earth is only put into our sun's orbit on the fourth day of creation. As long as God has earth time dilated close to the speed of light and the big bang at a far lower velocity, then billions of years of star formation can occur in four days on earth.

Do you agree that mathmatically, billions of years of star formation can occur in four days, if God is using Time Dilation to do so?

 

[StevenMerten]

Hello everyone,
I just wanted to state that I am copyrighted on the concept of God using 'Time Dilation' to create billions of years of star formation in six days.

Using Time Dilation, Billions of years of Star Formation Can Occur in Six Days.

Please talk about and share the idea. I just ask that you not try to copyright my copyrighted idea.

 

[Papias]

Hello Papias,
Thank you for a parcial agreement.
I think, God using Time Dilation, can make creation happen in six days. I am only looking for science to admit that six days of creation on the week Adam was made, is plauseable.

It's a new idea, but it doesn't make the six day creation plausible. That's because if the whole earth were moving at near the speed of light, then all the history of the earth would be similarly time contracted, and all of our dating methods would give a six day age. That doesn't fit the fact that all the dating methods show a 4.6 billion year old earth, and that these different methods confirm each other's dates. Basically, all the problems with standard YEC still exist.

Plus, it would be obvious in looking up at the sky. Stars in the direction of movement would be heavily blue shifted, and stars we see by looking in the other half of the sky would be heavily red shifted, and we don't see that. You can look up at the sky any clear night and see for yourself that the stars in all directions look the same.

First of all, earth was created before light according to the Bible. The creation of earth and then the big bang goes off. I see the big bang as God saying, 'Let There Be Light!'.

Yes, that's what a literal reading suggests, but it doesn't match the evidence. The earth was clearly made well after the Big Bang (9.2 billion years later). Of the many ways to see that, perhaps the clearest is the fact that the earth is made up of former star material. You can see that it's made of heavier elements just by picking up a clod of dirt. The Big Bang produced hydrogen and a little helium. Stars formed from that, and used fusion to fuse the hydrogen and helium into heavier elements like carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, silicon - and then the stars blew up in supernovae, making iron, copper, gold, zinc, silver, etc, and sending all those elements out into space, where they could form our current solar system. That's why we know our solar system is not a first generation solar system.

As pointed out before, the order of creation described by a literal reading of Genesis is very different from that shown by the evidence. Time dilation won't change the order.

then billions of years of star formation can occur in four days on earth.

But according to a literal reading of Genesis, the stars weren't made over four days. They were made all on day four - maybe instantly, maybe over a day, but in either case, it doesn't fit your time dilation idea, because stars have been being made continually from just after the Big Bang through today - stars are forming right now, as we speak.

Do you agree that mathmatically, billions of years of star formation can occur in four days, if God is using Time Dilation to do so?

No, as pointed out above, the math doesn't work out at all, time dilation or not, unless one avoids a literal reading of Genesis - and if you are going to do that, then there is no need for the time dilation idea anyway.

Time dilation doesn't help explain genesis, and simply doesn't work to salvage a literal reading. It's a nice idea and such, but that's about it. The framework approach or some other, non-literal interpretation works.

In Christ -

Papias

 

[StevenMerten]

It's a new idea, but it doesn't make the six day creation plausible. That's because if the whole earth were moving at near the speed of light, then all the history of the earth would be similarly time contracted, and all of our dating methods would give a six day age. That doesn't fit the fact that all the dating methods show a 4.6 billion year old earth, and that these different methods confirm each other's dates. Basically, all the problems with standard YEC still exist.
In Christ -

Papias

Hello Papias,
If I am reading you right, we agree, you, me and science, all agree that billions of years of star formation can occur in six days. This is good. It is a first step toward creationism and science coming together on common ground. So God can create billions of years of star formation while only days are going by on earth. The laws of science agree with this. Now we are down from 13.6 billion years from creation to 4.5 billion years from creation. This is a big step forward for creationists and scientists to come to mutual ground.

Peace,
Steven

 

[StevenMerten]

Yes, that's what a literal reading suggests, but it doesn't match the evidence. The earth was clearly made well after the Big Bang (9.2 billion years later). Of the many ways to see that, perhaps the clearest is the fact that the earth is made up of former star material. You can see that it's made of heavier elements just by picking up a clod of dirt. The Big Bang produced hydrogen and a little helium. Stars formed from that, and used fusion to fuse the hydrogen and helium into heavier elements like carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, silicon - and then the stars blew up in supernovae, making iron, copper, gold, zinc, silver, etc, and sending all those elements out into space, where they could form our current solar system. That's why we know our solar system is not a first generation solar system.
In Christ -

Papias

Hellon Papias,
Ok, so earth is time dilated out to traveling close to the speed of light. Only days are passing on earth while billions of years of star formation is occuring at a slower, big bang velocity. Earth has to pass through the debris field of all this billions of years old star junk. Earth is going to get some of this billions of years old junk on her. It is my bugs on the windshield comparison. So Earth is only days old but science is seeing all this billions of years old star junk on her, so they say that earth must also be billions of years old. Not true. It is young earth wearing old star junk that science is looking at.

This is scientifically plausible. Do we agree?

 

[Papias]

...Earth is going to get some of this billions of years old junk on her. It is my bugs on the windshield comparison. So Earth is only days old but science is seeing all this billions of years old star junk on her, so they say that earth must also be billions of years old. Not true. It is young earth wearing old star junk that science is looking at.

A creative idea. Let's look at it.

1 In that scenario, the first stuff to hit would be after a short time, say a billion years, and the most recent (last)stuff to hit would have much longer ages (say, 10 billion years). So the youngest stuff is at the deepest earth layers, and the oldest on top. That's the opposite of what is seen (the oldest stuff is reliably at the bottom).

2 Next, think of the millions of fossils. We have, say, fish that show an age of 200 million years. So these fish were in space, and then hit the earth? A T-rex out in space, "getting old", before it hit the earth? I don't think that makes sense. We have millions of fossils that are old - this sounds like they had to be waiting around out in space until the earth hit them.

3 Plus they would get destroyed on impact - we wouldn't have the nice, nearly complete skeletal fossils we sometimes have.

4 The impact energy scales with the square of the speed (E=mv^2) - that's why the dinosaur asteroid could do so much damage worldwide. But at nearly the speed of light, those things hitting would have enough energy to destroy the earth, because they are moving thousands of times as fast as the dinosaur asteroid, and would hence have millions of times the energy.

I could go on, but basically the windshield idea doesn't work at all.

This is scientifically plausible. Do we agree?

It's not plausible. As pointed out above, the windshield idea simply doesn't work.

Plus, the other points brought up last post are still a problem:

5 You can look up at the sky any clear night and see for yourself that the stars in all directions look the same. (red shift/blue shift)

6 As pointed out before, the order of creation described by a literal reading of Genesis is very different from that shown by the evidence. Time dilation won't change the order.

7 You can see that it's made of heavier elements just by picking up a clod of dirt. The Big Bang produced hydrogen and a little helium. Stars formed from that, and used fusion to fuse the hydrogen and helium into heavier elements like carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, silicon

8 But according to a literal reading of Genesis, the stars weren't made over four days. They were made all on day four - maybe instantly, maybe over a day, but in either case, it doesn't fit your time dilation idea.....

As I wrote before:

No, as pointed out above, the math doesn't work out at all, time dilation or not, unless one avoids a literal reading of Genesis - and if you are going to do that, then there is no need for the time dilation idea anyway.

Time dilation doesn't help explain genesis, and simply doesn't work to salvage a literal reading. It's a nice idea and such, but that's about it. The framework approach or some other, non-literal interpretation works.

Now we are down from 13.6 billion years from creation to 4.5 billion years from creation.

OK, so this is a different idea. Now the idea is that the earth moved at the speed of light for the first 9 billion years, then stopped since then (4.6 billion years ago)? How does that help?

In Christ-

Papias

 

[Micah G]

I'm not to0 concerned with "Aliens" right now. We got enough work to do here on Planet Earth...

 

[Everybodyknows]

Therefore traveling at 0 velocity it is infinite physical time from creation.

This is your theory's fatal flaw, and completely wrong. You seem to hold the view that time is relative but velocity is not. Velocity of an object is only definable relative to another object. There is no fixed cosmic background against which velocity can be measured in an absolute sense. This is the basis from which the General Theory of Relativity gets its name. In my own frame of reference I'm always moving at 0 velocity and I'm not experiencing time passing at an infinite rate otherwise my life would end instantly.

Light travels at 186000 miles per second compared to anything that is traveling at 0 velocity

The speed of light is constant compared to anything traveling at any velocity. That is to say the speed of light is constant measured in any frame of reference. If I'm traveling at 0.999 C I still measure the light coming from stars behind me at the same speed as the light coming from stars in front. Stars in front will appear blue shifted and stars behind will be red shifted. If I turn on my spaceship headlamps the light will move away from me at C.