How do you rectify a light year?
If our telescopes can see light from objects billions of light years away, that would mean the light we are seeing is billions of years old.
Do you disagree with the concept of light speed? Or our ability to calculate vast distances?
I'm curious.
Page 1 of 4
-
Actually the light we see may be coming from stars that no longer exist .
I dont understand your point though.Even if the earth is 6000 years old we would still be receiving light which is millions of light years away from the cosmos .Fin D likes this. -
-
But, analyzing your comment, in Genesis the earth and universe were supposedly created simultaneously. In order for this to be true we should not see stars certain light year distances away because they didn't exist if the bible is correct. Either that or mathematics is all screwed up!!!!
great observation and a topic that could get very deep and very offensive to some......wouldn't offend me if your up to it?????:hi5: -
-
How do you get that the earth and universe were created simultaneously? Bible never says t
hat. Just that they were created at the beginning...before the story starts. No reason not to read that to mean he created the universe and then he created Earth at the beginning. You're simply projecting simultaneously was what they meant -
The facts severely outweigh the tale IMO.
Signed
-- A Christian who believes that God wouldn't mislead his children so, the creation story in Genesis must be a parable or was not divinely inspired. -
-
late again, Themole, gafinfan and 4 others like this.
-
-
gafinfan likes this.
-
Themole likes this.
-
No one said the book was written for a numerical breakdown, not sure why you'd bring it up, twice. But, if you choose that route, realize, I'm not the one saying one can create a specific numerical breakdown, my question was, obviously for the people who do think that. -
gafinfan, unluckyluciano, Celtkin and 1 other person like this.
-
Fair enough. So how old is the earth supposed to be in the young earth theory? 6000 years old? well i'm not in that camp -
-
-
-
-
well there are theories out there that the velocity of light is declining which would make the earth much younger than currently believed though not 6000 years old. also i believe that there are theories that dont have light being a constant
Celtkin likes this. -
Fin D likes this.
-
One experiment people may want to read about is michelson morley experiment. This supposedly is one of the experiments einstein based relativity on.......Fin D likes this. -
Light is a constant to all observers. The best analogy I've heard is that of a car. Just pretend light moves at 101 MPH okay?
You get in your car and decide to race a beam of light. Your car only goes 100 MPH but you're going to give it a shot anyway. You speed off and reach 100 MPH. If light weren't a constant, you would see the light moving at 1 MPH ahead of you, but that isnt what you see. The light (to your surprise) is still moving 101 MPH faster than you are, even though its speed hasn't changed.
Confusing? You bet. But it's been proven experimentally over and over and over again.
EDIT: To add on, if someone was watching this race they would in fact see you 1 MPH behind the beam of light. Which is why light is constant to all obervers. They are standing still, and move differently though space time than you (a moving object).2socks likes this. -
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/07/tech/main517850.shtml
I did a quick search of the university's website, I found the astrobiologist / theoretical physicist, but nothing on this topic. I'll see what I can find later when I have more time, seems interesting.unluckyluciano likes this. -
-
Science is at its best when people look for new ways to understand old ideas, the work of Michio Kaku immediately comes to mind. To think that we already have all the answers is silly. :wink2: -
BTW ... I'm not a young Earther, but I do believe the "heavens" referred to in the scripture cited are the skies, not the universe. See verses 7 and 8.
-
I don't think anyone has said we have all the answers. We clearly don't. That however doesn't mean we have nothing but questions. We do have some answers, like math, gravity, fossils, DNA, etc. I think its important things like this are acknowledged. The reason is, science accepts something when they answer a question. Non-science or organized religion accepts something when there's a question. Case in point:
Science asked the question how was the Universe formed. They came up with the answer of the Big Bang. That came up with answer based on all the data they have. Now science has the question of how did the Big Bang happen. They are still trying to answer that one. Maybe they will, maybe they won't, however, it doesn't affect the data that clearly points at the Big Bang. Organized religion looks at there's a question about how the Big Bang happened, and then discounts all data pointing to it, because that question exists without an answer.
So yes, asking questions is very important, but asking the right questions is infinitely more important, and on top of that, quantifying what an answer is more important still. -
Page 1 of 4