YEC explanation for traveling light.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-07-2014, 12:45 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
In part this relies on calculations based on how long the light takes to reach us, but part of the calculation for that necessarily involves the speed of expansion of the universe - which scientists discovered in 1999 they were completely wrong about. The Hubble Telescope revealed that the universe was actually accelerating in expansion, which completely contradicted all Big Bang theories.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/foc...ark-energy

How they realized it was accelerating I'm not sure, sometimes they claim something is accelerating if the speed of expansion or light travel is too fast, so maybe the universe showed too fast a rate of light travel consistent with a young universe, so they decided it must have been slower in the past, ergo "accelerating."

Either way, if the universe is expanding faster than believed, then the light would take less time to reach us because the universe would be moving outward at a different rate than expected. The light from distant planets in essence would be traveling to us as we, along with the rest of the universe, expand away from it. It's like calculating how long it takes you to catch up to a car going 20 mph. If you think it's going 50 mph when it's only going 20 mph, your calculations will be horribly off.

Point is, there are some serious problems for triangulation since that 1999 discovery.

My website refuting alleged contradictions will be at BereaWiki.com.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2014, 12:47 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 12:42 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(17-07-2014 12:34 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  Triangulation or parallax calculations are basically just plotting a star's location and traveling speed by checking where it's at when we're at different points in the Earth's orbit, seeing it from different positions. Same kind of math used to determine the length of the side of a triangle that got used in math class.

Of course you are assuming that Big Bang theory is true and everything is travelling from an original core explosion, and that it's the explosion causing the stars to travel outward. If they were created in original positions and God is expanding the universe as the Bible repeatedly states (e.g. Job 9:8, Isaiah 44:24) then your triangulation calculations won't work.

So in essence triangulation is just circular reasoning, you have to assume the universe is old to get calculations that believe it is old.

I'm not sure where to even start with all the misinformation here. Triangulation and parallax techniques are only useful for stars that are very close to us (relatively speaking). This is a tiny percentage of stars in general. The distance (and age) of stars in general is calculated using other techniques, most of which pre-date the Big Bang theory and have little or nothing to do with it. The stars are where they are (and are as old as they are) regardless of how they got there and what causes their movement. There is no circular reasoning involved except in your own muddled mind.

Nope, that was an accurate description.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/as...t99676.htm

My website refuting alleged contradictions will be at BereaWiki.com.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2014, 12:49 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 12:34 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  
(13-01-2012 12:23 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Does anyone know their apologetics for this?

I've heard "God placed the light there" and "we don't know how long ago God created the light before the earth" and "God did it. Period."

Do they have a better satisfactory answer?

Triangulation or parallax calculations are basically just plotting a star's location and traveling speed by checking where it's at when we're at different points in the Earth's orbit, seeing it from different positions. Same kind of math used to determine the length of the side of a triangle that got used in math class.

Of course you are assuming that Big Bang theory is true and everything is travelling from an original core explosion, and that it's the explosion causing the stars to travel outward. If they were created in original positions and God is expanding the universe as the Bible repeatedly states (e.g. Job 9:8, Isaiah 44:24) then your triangulation calculations won't work.

So in essence triangulation is just circular reasoning, you have to assume the universe is old to get calculations that believe it is old.

A sublime demonstration of ignorance in action, people; it's a terrifying thing.

Suffice to say no. That is not how cosmology and astrophysics work.

Protip: redshift is a thing. Intensity is a thing. Only for very close stars is parallax useful. You also have absolutely no idea what the big bang was nor how its consequences are known. And they assuredly are known, as well as we know anything.

Of course, your hermeneutics are dogshit, too. To the ancient Jews the "heavens" were a literal firmament.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
17-07-2014, 12:50 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(13-01-2012 12:23 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Does anyone know their apologetics for this?

I've heard "God placed the light there" and "we don't know how long ago God created the light before the earth" and "God did it. Period."

Do they have a better satisfactory answer?

As long as you accept that a conscious being created everything through an act of will then anything is possible because everything would be subjective.

This premise is false because it contradicts a known fact of reality, namely the primacy of existence principle.

Any argument for a "God" of any type creating anything through an act of will commits the fallacy of the stolen concept and is invalid.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2014, 12:51 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 12:47 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  
(17-07-2014 12:42 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  I'm not sure where to even start with all the misinformation here. Triangulation and parallax techniques are only useful for stars that are very close to us (relatively speaking). This is a tiny percentage of stars in general. The distance (and age) of stars in general is calculated using other techniques, most of which pre-date the Big Bang theory and have little or nothing to do with it. The stars are where they are (and are as old as they are) regardless of how they got there and what causes their movement. There is no circular reasoning involved except in your own muddled mind.

Nope, that was an accurate description.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/as...t99676.htm

Indeed. Notice how this is a casual answer for schoolchildren.

I'd ask you for a real citation, but we both know you don't have access to any real scientific journals.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2014, 12:56 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 12:51 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(17-07-2014 12:47 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  Nope, that was an accurate description.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/as...t99676.htm

Indeed. Notice how this is a casual answer for schoolchildren.

I'd ask you for a real citation, but we both know you don't have access to any real scientific journals.

I'm sure it would be easier to make blanket claims that everyone who disagrees is wrong without providing any sources like some here. Smile

My website refuting alleged contradictions will be at BereaWiki.com.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2014, 12:56 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 12:45 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  In part this relies on calculations based on how long the light takes to reach us, but part of the calculation for that necessarily involves the speed of expansion of the universe - which scientists discovered in 1999 they were completely wrong about. The Hubble Telescope revealed that the universe was actually accelerating in expansion, which completely contradicted all Big Bang theories.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/foc...ark-energy

How they realized it was accelerating I'm not sure, sometimes they claim something is accelerating if the speed of expansion or light travel is too fast, so maybe the universe showed too fast a rate of light travel consistent with a young universe, so they decided it must have been slower in the past, ergo "accelerating."

Either way, if the universe is expanding faster than believed, then the light would take less time to reach us because the universe would be moving outward at a different rate than expected. The light from distant planets in essence would be traveling to us as we, along with the rest of the universe, expand away from it. It's like calculating how long it takes you to catch up to a car going 20 mph. If you think it's going 50 mph when it's only going 20 mph, your calculations will be horribly off.

Point is, there are some serious problems for triangulation since that 1999 discovery.

None of what you reference here has anything to do with "triangulation". You don't even know the meanings of the words you're using.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2014, 01:01 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 12:47 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  
(17-07-2014 12:42 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  I'm not sure where to even start with all the misinformation here. Triangulation and parallax techniques are only useful for stars that are very close to us (relatively speaking). This is a tiny percentage of stars in general. The distance (and age) of stars in general is calculated using other techniques, most of which pre-date the Big Bang theory and have little or nothing to do with it. The stars are where they are (and are as old as they are) regardless of how they got there and what causes their movement. There is no circular reasoning involved except in your own muddled mind.

Nope, that was an accurate description.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/as...t99676.htm

Your initial description of parallax and triangulation is reasonably accurate, but then you went off on a tangent that is completely unrelated to those subjects. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. You're like those people who dismiss the known age of the earth because of inaccuracies in carbon-dating. Hint: the age of the earth was not established by carbon-dating, and the scale and age of the universe was not established by triangulation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
17-07-2014, 01:11 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 01:01 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(17-07-2014 12:47 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  Nope, that was an accurate description.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/as...t99676.htm

Your initial description of parallax and triangulation is reasonably accurate, but then you went off on a tangent that is completely unrelated to those subjects. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. You're like those people who dismiss the known age of the earth because of inaccuracies in carbon-dating. Hint: the age of the earth was not established by carbon-dating, and the scale and age of the universe was not established by triangulation.

My initial description of parallax is well-known, that's why. My second post involved something that isn't addressed by anyone else, to my knowledge. As I pointed out there however, the universe's expansion is accelerating according to NASA, and this contradicted predictions when it was discovered in 1999.

So I was pointing out that prior calculations based on triangulation will not have properly taken into account said accelerating expansion of the universe when calculating how long light takes to reach us, simple as that. They incorrectly plotted the expansion rate of the universe in such calculations, thus the time light takes to reach us will be off also since the universe is expanding at a different rate than had been believed.

My website refuting alleged contradictions will be at BereaWiki.com.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2014, 01:17 PM
RE: YEC explanation for traveling light.
(17-07-2014 01:11 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  
(17-07-2014 01:01 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Your initial description of parallax and triangulation is reasonably accurate, but then you went off on a tangent that is completely unrelated to those subjects. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. You're like those people who dismiss the known age of the earth because of inaccuracies in carbon-dating. Hint: the age of the earth was not established by carbon-dating, and the scale and age of the universe was not established by triangulation.

My initial description of parallax is well-known, that's why. My second post involved something that isn't addressed by anyone else, to my knowledge. As I pointed out there however, the universe's expansion is accelerating according to NASA, and this contradicted predictions when it was discovered in 1999.

So I was pointing out that prior calculations based on triangulation will not have properly taken into account said accelerating expansion of the universe when calculating how long light takes to reach us, simple as that. They incorrectly plotted the expansion rate of the universe in such calculations, thus the time light takes to reach us will be off also since the universe is expanding at a different rate than had been believed.

The prior calculations are not based on triangulation! You don't seem to be getting that. Triangulation is only useful for a few stars within our own galaxy, which are in general not accelerating relative to us. You are throwing technical terms around with no apparent knowledge of what they mean, or whether or not they apply to a given situation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: