- Jan 17, 2005
- 44,905
- 1,259
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
No? So laws do not exist? How about forces? What it is all a dream inside your head? You can jump off a tower and not fall?
Upvote
0
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.
No? So laws do not exist? How about forces? What it is all a dream inside your head? You can jump off a tower and not fall?"The Laws of the Universe"
---
The Universe has no the laws. Just a matter (substance) have properties. The laws - it is scientific abstraction. The laws do not exist. =)
What's the point of this game where you tell people everything was the same but you actually have no idea, and have chosen to ignore the actual observations of the record?What's the point of this game where you tell people everything was different but you have no idea what the differences were, and the text you seem to get your idea from describes everything as being pretty much the same as it is now?
Irrelevant drivel. If you want to offer a specific here, do so.It's time for us to offer a new term: "variable-constant".
You can start do - found in Wikipedia: "variable speed of light".
You can also read the M-theory. And more.
?? Such as?Well we have relative absolutes already; look at all the different versions of the absolute Law in the infallible book
What's the point of this game where you tell people everything was the same but you actually have no idea, and have chosen to ignore the actual observations of the record?
I agree with science, on the present rotation of the earth. Why wouldn't I?? Point? Now if you want to offer proof that the earth always rotated as now, even before the flood, do so? We can look at that.I want your answer first. You know, I asked first.
So, when did the Earth start to rotate?
Says you.Your so-called record is incorrect.
Show us the BASIS for claiming ligght was 60 times faster.My post about not only the theory of relativity. It Is the answer to...:
Quote - "If the laws were different back then, in what way were they different?". And etc.
Example - in the article in Wikipedia "Variable speed of light":
"The idea from Moffat and the team Albrecht-Magueijo is that light propagated as much as 60 orders of magnitude faster in the early universe...". etc
Also, M-theory has only a "variable-constant".
That is, maybe, the laws were different back then.
----
This articles is serious. It is not creationism.
The laws that are not known in the far past need not be changed. They need not have been here. What is needed is for you to stick to what you know. What the laws were or not is not included there.The game has no point -- just so long as dad can continue to arbitrarily change the rules so that he is never committed to any answer; thus he can never be wrong.
Says you.
No, you were stating an unsupported godless opinion, o man.Just stating a fact, brah.
The forces is - exist. But Newton's Law of Gravitation do not exist. It is scientific abstraction. The matter has properties. And the properties may vary.:No? So laws do not exist? How about forces? What it is all a dream inside your head? You can jump off a tower and not fall?
Show us the BASIS for claiming ligght was 60 times faster.
You still avoid the question. I'm asking you "when the Earth started to rotate?". The question didn't imply that you do not accept the current state of things. So, if the Earth is rotating, and you agree with that, at some point of its existence it must start to do so. It is either at the moment of its creation, so it was created rotating or it could be any other moment when the Earth changed its rotation from static to rotating. So, can you use your theory to show when it happened?I agree with science, on the present rotation of the earth. Why wouldn't I?? Point? Now if you want to offer proof that the earth always rotated as now, even before the flood, do so? We can look at that.
Forget Newton. There is a force we can call gravity. Why it works is above your pay grade.The forces is - exist. But Newton's Law of Gravitation do not exist. It is scientific abstraction.
Especially when the spiritual is added. Boy has that been shown to vary from the norm. Easter is like that. Case in point.The matter have only the property. And the properties may(can?) - vary.:
At all? Or as is?You still avoid the question. I'm asking you "when the Earth started to rotate?".
So, if the Earth is rotating, and you agree with that, at some point of its existence it must start to do so. It is either at the moment of its creation, so it was created rotating or it could be any other moment when the Earth changed its rotation from static to rotating. So, can you use your theory to show when it happened?
You are misinformed then. Unless you mean since the laws came to be. That would not be long ago, just after the flood, if the records are correct.Hmm, I'n under the impression that the laws have stayed constant- at least according to our knowledge of the Universe. But who knows? They could always change in the future. There's no evidence to suggest that they can't.
Hmm, I'n under the impression that the laws have stayed constant- at least according to our knowledge of the Universe. But who knows? They could always change in the future. There's no evidence to suggest that they can't.
Well, after the last huge earthquake in Japan it moved slightly, so yes the axis is known to move, at least slightly. That however is connected with events releasing massive amount of energy, like earthquakes. That's what we know. What is your projection into the past?The evidence indicates that the heavens will be different in the future. Also in the far past. So I would expect that major changes came after creation. If rotation was the mechanism for rapid continental separation, that might make sense..we would need to look at the evidence...what is known. The axis is not known to have been the same, for example..right?
In the thread, Dad has been making the claim that the laws of the universe way back a long time ago were different to the laws we see today. That is taking that thread off topic, so I decided to create this thread to discuss whether the laws of the universe have always been the way they are now, or whether they have changed.
I am of the position that the laws have always been as they are now (with the possible exception of the first few seconds). My main reason for this position is that we get meaningful results when we look at ancient evidence for things. if the laws were different back then, would we get any meaningful results?
So, for Dad and anyone else who has the opinion that the laws that govern the universe were different in the ancient past, here are some questions.
- What evidence is there to support your claim? Please be specific.
- How do you explain the fact that we get meaningful results without this assumption?
- If the laws were different back then, in what way were they different?
- What caused the laws to change from what they were to what they are now?
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?