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.
Sure .. but we're not even up to Calculus when we're still talking parallax calculations done using basic trigonometry!?Indeed. Hence my comment a while back that he would, by rationale, need to disregard Calculus entirely....
No comment .. (for fairly obvious reasons).46AND2 said:Which is odd considering he claims to be a physics teacher. Must be algebra based physics for non-STEM students.
Sure .. but we're not even up to Calculus when we're still talking parallax calculations done using basic trigonometry!?
My burning question is: how does basic trig somehow introduce speculation about what a year is?
No comment .. (for fairly obvious reasons).
Sure .. but we're not even up to Calculus when we're still talking parallax calculations done using basic trigonometry!?
My burning question is: how does basic trig somehow introduce speculation about what a year is?
No comment .. (for fairly obvious reasons).
Also, thank you for your educative posts.
Speculation plays a role in science .. (no two ways about that). But how a basic time measurement like a year, when referenced within math operations, becomes speculative, requires an explanation .. especially in a physical sciences forum.Truth. But I don't want to gloss this over for him. Literally the issues he has with "speculation" apply to almost everything in physics.
Indeed. Hence my comment a while back that he would, by rationale, need to disregard Calculus entirely....
Which is odd considering he claims to be a physics teacher. Must be algebra based physics for non-STEM students.
If it added up to 666 all the time.Wasn't math once considered satanic in western culture.
I did find all your thoughts interesting. But to focus on this, which as to my understanding is still the strongest evidence in some way for an old universe. But maybe we cannot even begin to speak about what we think "old" means.
The idea that God should create light on its way is of course ridiculous. I cannot think that God should need to cover up his tracks.
However, oddly enough, going even further out, with the hubble space telescope, I read that they see now galaxies at a distance of 20B light years or something. And these are not baby galaxies but fully developed galaxies. So maybe the idea that looking far into space will also provide a view back in time, must take a hit.
There is a sentence in book of psalms, that God "stretches out the heavens". I think, some of my questions are
- is speed of light really as constant as we want it to be?
- how would one in scientific terms describe the stretching of the heavens? And could it be observable?
That's disappointing. I was going to give an example I'm sure you'd agree with, but he don't wanna hear it from me.
Wasn't matn once considered satanic in western culture
Science turns idle speculation into practical usefulness.speculation plays a roll in everything, ever. so what.
True. But we shouldn't discount they may be.That's an interesting question. But all mysteries are not miracles.
True. But we shouldn't discount they may be.
What one believes to be possible, is not the same as possibilities constrained by the physical laws and constants.True. But we shouldn't discount they may be.
That it exists is evidence (some accept, others reject).Evidence would be helpful.
The age of stars and the existence of supernovae and lead are two good indicators that the universe is old.
As to the question of where everything came from, there is good evidence that the sum total of matter and energy in the universe is zero. Gravity is negative compared to matter being positive. But think of it this way: If a positive particle and a negative particle come into existence at the same time, the sum total does not change. If I have a $20 bill in my pocket but receive an invoice for $20, my net worth is zero. Temporary local accumulations don't change the sum total.
I agree. The constraints of physical laws cannot definitely account for (or even point to) an event outside of its own constraints.What one believes to be possible, is not the same as possibilities constrained by the physical laws and constants.
Science can though .. its called a belief.I agree. The constraints of physical laws cannot definitely account for (or even point to) an event outside of its own constraints.