The Universe can be 6 days old
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-03-2016, 12:08 PM
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 08:52 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 08:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  What does that even mean?
I wrote this in the post before but I will repeat it for you:
"Any photon that existed since the epoch end of CMB radiation can be less than 1 second old based on the formula for time dilation.

No, it can't, not in any meaningful way. It is billions of years old to any observer.

Pro tip: The photon is not an observer.

Quote:The epoch of CMB radiation is believed to have existed at the beginning of the universe as per the overall scheme of things.

There was no 'epoch of the CMB radiation' and the CMB radiation comes from 378,000 years after the Big Bang when the universe became transparent.

Quote:The formula for time dilation uses a scientifically recognized method for dating the age of an object based on the object's own frame of reference.

So? Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.

Quote:Here is an example of two things that existed at the same time from since the beginning of the universe
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015...rse-egs8p7
The time taken for the photons we now see to reach us from the Galaxy is believed to be around 13.2 billion years but the scienitific age of the photon itself can be less than 1 second due to the effects of time dilation.

Pointless. Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.

Quote:Hence the galaxy in it's present state (if it still exists) is believed to be 13.2 billion years old but the light it emitted 13.2 billion years ago can be less than 1 second old today based on the frame of reference used to date the photon.

Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.

Quote:Age varies based on frame of reference, thus the photon can be both 13.2 billion years old while it can still be less than 1 second old.
There isn't an objective age for a photon & by extension the universe.

No, that is a non sequitur. The universe is as old as the oldest object - not the youngest.

Quote:It's not the first time this topic has been discussed:
https://www.quora.com/How-old-is-the-pho...n-universe

Your conclusions do not follow from your factoids.

Quote:Hence the question:
"How can you date something as large as the universe when it's components from start to finish don't all carry the same age?"
Would you care to answer my question?

Answer above. The universe is as old as its oldest objects.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
22-03-2016, 12:38 PM
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 10:27 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 10:25 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Pretty sure you're wrong. I'm not going to bother to explain why; you're online, educate yourself.
I did. My education tells me you're wrong might be wrong.
Can I borrow your logic for a moment?
"I'm not going to bother to explain why; you're online, educate yourself."

"I know you are, but what am I"?

What, are you ten years old? Oh, wait, you can't be older than six days. That explains everything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
22-03-2016, 03:35 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2016 03:45 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 12:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 08:52 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I wrote this in the post before but I will repeat it for you:
"Any photon that existed since the epoch end of CMB radiation can be less than 1 second old based on the formula for time dilation.

No, it can't, not in any meaningful way. It is billions of years old to any observer.

Pro tip: The photon is not an observer.

Quote:The epoch of CMB radiation is believed to have existed at the beginning of the universe as per the overall scheme of things.

There was no 'epoch of the CMB radiation' and the CMB radiation comes from 378,000 years after the Big Bang when the universe became transparent.

Quote:The formula for time dilation uses a scientifically recognized method for dating the age of an object based on the object's own frame of reference.

So? Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.

Quote:Here is an example of two things that existed at the same time from since the beginning of the universe
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015...rse-egs8p7
The time taken for the photons we now see to reach us from the Galaxy is believed to be around 13.2 billion years but the scienitific age of the photon itself can be less than 1 second due to the effects of time dilation.

Pointless. Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.

Quote:Hence the galaxy in it's present state (if it still exists) is believed to be 13.2 billion years old but the light it emitted 13.2 billion years ago can be less than 1 second old today based on the frame of reference used to date the photon.

Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.

Quote:Age varies based on frame of reference, thus the photon can be both 13.2 billion years old while it can still be less than 1 second old.
There isn't an objective age for a photon & by extension the universe.

No, that is a non sequitur. The universe is as old as the oldest object - not the youngest.

Quote:It's not the first time this topic has been discussed:
https://www.quora.com/How-old-is-the-pho...n-universe

Your conclusions do not follow from your factoids.

Quote:Hence the question:
"How can you date something as large as the universe when it's components from start to finish don't all carry the same age?"
Would you care to answer my question?

Answer above. The universe is as old as its oldest objects.
Your claim that time dilation is only applicable to an observer (i assume you mean inanimate object) is not what science says.

Gps satellites are recalibrated due to time dilation.
Gps satellites are not an observer.

Chas counter the above point before you continue.
I am dealing with your points in chronological order.
I will answer the rest of your points after we are done discussing your first claim.

The person measuring the time is what we call the observer in any given situation. The observer can measure time (age) of an inanimate object using any reference frame he chooses. The age is defined based on the frame of reference that observer chooses to take the measurement from there is no objective age of an object in this regard.

You are confusing the object being dated with the observer
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 03:39 PM
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 12:38 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 10:27 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I did. My education tells me you're wrong might be wrong.
Can I borrow your logic for a moment?
"I'm not going to bother to explain why; you're online, educate yourself."

"I know you are, but what am I"?

What, are you ten years old? Oh, wait, you can't be older than six days. That explains everything.
Why can't I be older than 6 days old?
Did someone say the universe "IS" 6 days old?

Counter the argument of correlating my age to be less than 6 days old using the claim that the universe "can be" & not "is" 6 days old.

Let's see how good your debating skills are. I dare you not to evade this point and tackle the claim you just made.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 03:42 PM
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 03:35 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 12:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, it can't, not in any meaningful way. It is billions of years old to any observer.

Pro tip: The photon is not an observer.


There was no 'epoch of the CMB radiation' and the CMB radiation comes from 378,000 years after the Big Bang when the universe became transparent.


So? Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.


Pointless. Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.


Not everything has that frame of reference, so the universe as a whole does not.


No, that is a non sequitur. The universe is as old as the oldest object - not the youngest.


Your conclusions do not follow from your factoids.


Answer above. The universe is as old as its oldest objects.
Your claim that time dilation is only applicable to an observer (i assume you mean inanimate object) is not what science says.

Gps satellites are recalibrated due to time dilation.
Gps satellites are not an observer.

Chas counter the above point before you continue.
I am dealing with your points in chronological order.
I will answer the rest of your points after we are done discussing your first claim.

The running clocks on GPS satellites are corrected for time dilation. The clocks are the observers.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
22-03-2016, 03:50 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2016 04:29 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 03:42 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 03:35 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Your claim that time dilation is only applicable to an observer (i assume you mean inanimate object) is not what science says.

Gps satellites are recalibrated due to time dilation.
Gps satellites are not an observer.

Chas counter the above point before you continue.
I am dealing with your points in chronological order.
I will answer the rest of your points after we are done discussing your first claim.

The running clocks on GPS satellites are corrected for time dilation. The clocks are the observers.
Chas where is your evidence that only an observer can undergo time dilation.
The theory of time dilation says only an observer can "measure" time dilation.
That would be any of us.
It does not say only an observer can/cannot "undergo" time dilation.

Look at the wiki article
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

No where in the article does it say only an observer can/cannot undergo time dilation.

It speaks about Clocks and other inanimate objects.

Are you telling me that if the clock in question stopped working properly it will not undergo time dilation.
This is not mentioned anywhere in science
Where did you get this information?

Look at the article where it says:
"For instance, two rocket ships (A and B) speeding past one another in space would experience time dilation"
Are you going to tell me rocket ships are observers now?

Chas where is your evidence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 04:16 PM
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 03:50 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Chas where is your evidence that only an observer can undergo time dilation.

Do you seriously not even understand what the term "observer" means in the context of physics?

Get out. Come back when you've passed a high school physics course.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
22-03-2016, 04:20 PM
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(21-01-2016 09:52 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Hello all.
Some Theists claim the world was created in 6 days.
Most Atheists claim this is not possible based on Emperical Evidence.

I would like to debate the possibility that the current world can be created in 6 days.
I believe it can be.

I challenge anyone on these forums.

Lastly I personally don't know if God exists.

I challenge anyone to prove Angelina Jolie is not giving me a blowjob right now. Absurd you say? I agree. If if's and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a party.

We don't need "what ifs" now. If you have a claim, get it in a lab, get your findings independently peer reviewed. Outside that, you are merely mentally masturbating.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Brian37's post
22-03-2016, 04:21 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2016 04:27 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 04:16 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 03:50 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Chas where is your evidence that only an observer can undergo time dilation.

Do you seriously not even understand what the term "observer" means in the context of physics?

Get out. Come back when you've passed a high school physics course.
How is this relevant?
I am not arguing about what an observer is. Whatever you think an observer is according to physics is not up for debate. No one is debating what an observer is.

Can you seriously not recognize what we are debating?

We are discussing what are the things that can undergo time dilation. Chas claims ONLY an observer can undergo time dilation. If I misinterpreted what you are saying, now would be a good time to correct me Chas.

I claim that the definition of time dilation shows there are things other than an observer that can undergo time dilation.
One such example that has been given by the wiki page are rockets.
This is what the wiki article says:
"For instance, two rocket ships (A and B) speeding past one another in space would experience time dilation"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 04:24 PM
RE: The Universe can be 6 days old
(22-03-2016 04:20 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(21-01-2016 09:52 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Hello all.
Some Theists claim the world was created in 6 days.
Most Atheists claim this is not possible based on Emperical Evidence.

I would like to debate the possibility that the current world can be created in 6 days.
I believe it can be.

I challenge anyone on these forums.

Lastly I personally don't know if God exists.

I challenge anyone to prove Angelina Jolie is not giving me a blowjob right now. Absurd you say? I agree. If if's and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a party.

We don't need "what ifs" now. If you have a claim, get it in a lab, get your findings independently peer reviewed. Outside that, you are merely mentally masturbating.
If by mental masturbation you mean engaging in philosophical thought.
What happens when I agree that I am mentally masturbating.
I'm curious to see where you are going with this.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: