Earth's Orbital Speed
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2013, 02:34 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2013 03:12 PM by Raptor Jesus.)
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
(07-08-2013 11:36 AM)LostLocke Wrote:  ...And just to give you an idea, Jupiter's revolution is rated at about 11.8 Earth years, which at 930 "years" would put Adam at 81 regular years..... pretty long lived for a man from that time period...

Oh, I just saw what you did there… Small correction…

1 Jupiter year = 4,307 Earth days = 11.8 Earth years

930 Jupiter years would be 10,974 Earth years. If “Adam” was on the Earth orbiting where Jupiter is (ridiculous for obvious reasons you’ve already mentioned) and counting 930 years from that orbit, his real age would be 10,930 in Earth years. That’s far worse and not helpful.

78.8 years from the Earth located at Jupiter’s orbit would be 930 real Earth years. But that would still have “Adam” actually being 930 years old.

For “Adam” to have been a semi neutral, comparatively acceptable, 50 earth years old while living on Earth in orbit where Jupiter is and judging a year from that vantage point he would have been 4.24 years old in the bible.

But either direction you put him, near Jupiter, or closer to the Sun than Mercury...either way it's a shitty argument to try to justify his age.

Jinun, I hope that helps you thoroughly destroy your friend's claim.

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Raptor Jesus's post
07-08-2013, 02:50 PM
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
(07-08-2013 11:20 AM)jinun Wrote:  ...But I remember reading somewhere that if Earth's orbit sped up, it would move further from the Sun, in which case a year would be longer. If Earth's orbit were to slow down, it would move closer to the Sun and a year would be shorter....

Oh, I just noticed something here too that I should clarify. Faster orbits are closer to the Sun, slower orbits are farther from the Sun. That simply has to do with gravity, mass, and distance.

However, where the Earth is now if more energy was put into it causing it to move faster it's speed would help it break it's gravitational attraction to the sun causing it to move farther away, but gravity would slow it down into slower orbit once it got out there. But still, where would enough energy have come from to "push" the Earth farther out?

If the Earth slowed down than Gravity would have a stronger attractive force "pulling" it in moving it to a closer orbit. But as it fell closer to the Sun, just as things falling on Earth pick up speed as they fall, the Earth would actually pick up speed until it finds it's new faster orbit.

So technically yes, speed it up and it would move out (but slow down), slow it down and it would move in (but speed up). But how would it have speed up or slowed down in the first place. The Earth is where it is for a reason and it doesn't simply speed up or slow down unless something the size of a planet hit it transferring energy, but then who would have survived that? No one...

But technically that’s true, but with a MAJOR caveat that actually makes it not really accurate.

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2013, 03:45 PM
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
(07-08-2013 02:34 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  
(07-08-2013 11:36 AM)LostLocke Wrote:  ...And just to give you an idea, Jupiter's revolution is rated at about 11.8 Earth years, which at 930 "years" would put Adam at 81 regular years..... pretty long lived for a man from that time period...

Oh, I just saw what you did there… Small correction…

1 Jupiter year = 4,307 Earth days = 11.8 Earth years

930 Jupiter years would be 10,974 Earth years. If “Adam” was on the Earth orbiting where Jupiter is (ridiculous for obvious reasons you’ve already mentioned) and counting 930 years from that orbit, his real age would be 10,930 in Earth years. That’s far worse and not helpful.
Ooops, you're right, I went the wrong the direction, didn't I? Blush
Thanks for the correction.

But like you pointed out, it might actually be worse since the Earth would be incredibly close to the sun, doing the math in the right direction.

[Image: 21omssh.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes LostLocke's post
07-08-2013, 05:20 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2013 06:00 PM by Hafnof.)
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
Maybe they were counting months (lunar phase cycles) rather than years (seasonal cycles) to determine age. 930 months is 77.5 years. Methuselah would have lived 969 months = 80.75 years... or maybe they were counting some festival that was practised often in early records but less often in later times.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2013, 05:25 PM
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
(07-08-2013 05:20 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  Maybe they were counting months rather than years to determine age. 930 months is 77.5 years.

That's what I Am mentioned upthread - that it's alleged to be counting lunar months.

There are two problems with that. One is that 'month' and 'year' are different words in all other known sources. The other is that there's absolutely no reason to even think so, other than to try to fudge together some nonsensical re-interpretation and make things slightly (and ever so slightly at that) less ridiculous. You see the same thing with that "well 'day' only means 'unspecified interval'" horseshit.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
08-08-2013, 01:50 AM
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
Hey guys, just been reading through your thread. i'm currently looking through a longevity chart that goes from Adam to Joseph. and from what I can see there is no way of getting out of the literal years in there life spans. If every year means a month then Mahalaleel and Enoch were doing well to become fathers at 6 years old. Also if Moses was the one to start counting years instead of months then why did he not make it uniform throughout the book of Genesis when he edited it? It seems the long life spans began to reduce after the flood. The average before the flood is about 800 years after the flood it is instantly cut in half (Arphaxad 438 years). It then gets shorter and shorter till you get to Joseph 500 years later who lived 110 years. apparently something happened during the flood that really stuffed things up. according to the Bible, before the flood, there was a layer of water in the atmosphere, probably ice. This would have increased air pressure making the climate a bit like living in a hypobaric chamber. The water would have stopped ultraviolet rays coming from the sun therefore preventing cancer and mutations caused by radiation which cause so many diseases today. Testing the oxygen levels of air bubbles in amber has shown that oxygen levels were much higher in the past as well. I think up around the 30% mark. All this combined would be very favourable to long life spans. Maybe the Bible needs to be read literally after all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 06:26 AM
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
(07-08-2013 02:50 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  
(07-08-2013 11:20 AM)jinun Wrote:  ...But I remember reading somewhere that if Earth's orbit sped up, it would move further from the Sun, in which case a year would be longer. If Earth's orbit were to slow down, it would move closer to the Sun and a year would be shorter....

Oh, I just noticed something here too that I should clarify. Faster orbits are closer to the Sun, slower orbits are farther from the Sun. That simply has to do with gravity, mass, and distance.

However, where the Earth is now if more energy was put into it causing it to move faster it's speed would help it break it's gravitational attraction to the sun causing it to move farther away, but gravity would slow it down into slower orbit once it got out there. But still, where would enough energy have come from to "push" the Earth farther out?

If the Earth slowed down than Gravity would have a stronger attractive force "pulling" it in moving it to a closer orbit. But as it fell closer to the Sun, just as things falling on Earth pick up speed as they fall, the Earth would actually pick up speed until it finds it's new faster orbit.

So technically yes, speed it up and it would move out (but slow down), slow it down and it would move in (but speed up). But how would it have speed up or slowed down in the first place. The Earth is where it is for a reason and it doesn't simply speed up or slow down unless something the size of a planet hit it transferring energy, but then who would have survived that? No one...

But technically that’s true, but with a MAJOR caveat that actually makes it not really accurate.

Yes. Kepler's Third Law.
I was just talking about what would happen if Earth, in it's current orbit, were to suddenly speed up.

‹« In Science I Trust »›
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 06:55 AM (This post was last modified: 08-08-2013 07:00 AM by jinun.)
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
(07-08-2013 02:34 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  Jinun, I hope that helps you thoroughly destroy your friend's claim.

I think my acquaintance did a little googling yesterday before replying to me, because he came back basically repeating what I said (about the change in orbit and Kepler's Law) and added that he wasn't implying that Earth's orbit suddenly sped up (because that would be "silly"), but was suggesting "a magical gradual slowing"...aka God Magic (which apparently isn't silly), so it would have a tighter orbit around the Sun and shorter orbital period.

His argument was that being closer to the Sun wouldn't have been so bad because "in the beginning" the Sun had less Helium and gave off less energy. Though he doesn't clarify if the "beginning" was 4.6 billion years ago or 6,000 years ago. I know the Sun converts 500 million metric tons of hydrogen to helium every second, so that part is true (it did have less Helium). But I would assume that if the Earth was closer to the Sun, it would still have to be "magically" spared from the Sun's effects.

I made the argument that even if Earth had Mercury's orbit and orbital period of 88 days, someone like Noah still would have been 144 years old when the flood began and died at 229 years old. In order for Noah to have a normal human lifespan (by today's standards), Earth would have had to have an orbital period of 30-35 days. In which case, Noah would have died between 78-91 years old...which still would have been old for the time.

But since ancient calendars, including some that pre-date "The Flood" had calendar yeas similar to today. The Egyptian, Bulgarian and Sumerian Calendars had 365 days in a year. The Assyrian calendar has 364 days in a year. The Babylonian Calendar had a 360 days in a year. Which means the Earth would have had an orbital period consistent with Earth's current orbit...rendering the whole "Earth had a tighter orbit around the Sun and shorter orbital period" argument moot.

‹« In Science I Trust »›
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2013, 10:03 AM
RE: Earth's Obital Speed
(08-08-2013 06:55 AM)jinun Wrote:  ...His argument was that being closer to the Sun wouldn't have been so bad because "in the beginning" the Sun had less Helium and gave off less energy. Though he doesn't clarify if the "beginning" was 4.6 billion years ago or 6,000 years ago. I know the Sun converts 500 million metric tons of hydrogen to helium every second, so that part is true (it did have less Helium). But I would assume that if the Earth was closer to the Sun, it would still have to be "magically" spared from the Sun's effects...

If you notice the green line that shows the sun's temprature over it's life time, there is not a significant difference in it's past temprature. The lowest it shows, as a ratio of it's current temprature, is at best .98 to 1.

But obviously if he can play so lose with the laws of physics then he won’t have any reason to believe this. But at least you can demonstrate to him that the temperature of the sun, for the most part, has always remained fairly steady.

[Image: 544px-Solar_evolution_(English).svg.png]

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: