Posted on 05/05/2016 6:53:04 PM PDT by MtnClimber
Wouldn't that just take the cake!
Good biological explanation.
Here is an earlier version of the article, http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.01843v2.pdf
On the contrary, it is one of the most well-founded theories in all of science, second only to general relativity. If you're worried about the religious implications, you should know that astronomers who embraced it were accused of joining "The First Church of Christ of the Big Bang," because the atheists do not want there to be a beginning point of all things, because that points to a creation, and with a creation, you need a Creator. Which is what Hawking has been fighting against since the 70's.
I'm a Christian, and my God is big enough to have handcrafted a Big Bang. If you're a young-earther, you're going to have problems with a billions-year-old universe anyway.
It's clear you don't know anything about physics. Look up 'Lyman Alpha Line' and get back to me. Light from stars has distinctive spectral lines that are still obvious even when red-shifted.
It’s one of the most well-funded theories, but it’s not well-founded at all. It’s not even internally consistent.
Despite your gross condescension, I will attempt a response (notwithstanding I don't belong in the same conversation with someone so intellectually and scientifically astute as yourself).
I am NOT asserting that we don't have the ability to measure spectral qualities and quantities of distant objects. We do.
I am merely stipulating that, perhaps, we have no way of assuming, much less knowing, what spectral qualities a particular galaxy OUGHT to present.
And, while it is clear that you probably have some pretty good talking points up your astrophysics, it is even more clear that you don't have a clue about polite dialogue, which is quite typical of know-it-alls.
So I will give you the argument, as it has been aborted by your causticity.
I am not trying to sound arrogant, but yes, we can know what the spectral qualities of a distant galaxy should be. It's hydrogen gas, heated to thousands and millions of degrees. Of course we know. We must assume that matter, when heated, radiates its signature spectral characteristics, regardless of its location, anywhere in the universe. If we cannot agree to that, well, that isn't science.
Besides, why would a good God make matter in a distant galaxy that radiates a redshifted signature, to make it look like the universe is bigger and older than it is? To suggest that defames God's character. "God cannot lie" Hebrews 6:18.
And, while it is clear that you probably have some pretty good talking points up your astrophysics, it is even more clear that you don't have a clue about polite dialogue, which is quite typical of know-it-alls.
That may be. However, there is another factor you are not aware of that caused me to be short with you: it bothers me greatly when Christians (which I assume you are) antagonize the very scientists and their conclusions, who should be their natural allies in showing that the universe has a Creator.
Yes, natural allies. Some astrophysicists, as I said before, were and are still castigated because they believe in a Big Bang, in a beginning of all things, because as atheist Richard Lewontin pointed out in his famous editorial "billion and billions of demons," "We cannot allow the divine foot in the door."
These astrophysicists are staking their reputations on a Big Bang because of the evidence, even if their atheist colleagues are castigating them for the "divine foot in the door" their theory allows. When Christians also castigate them, when we should be allies, yes, it bothers me a lot.
Detail ONE internal inconsistency in modern big-bang theory. Go ahead. I'm ready.
The other 11 dimensions describe the topography of this universe and could make it possible to transit to another universe or to transit from one pint to another instantaneously in this universe ... but you’d have to be really, really small ...
Well, for starters, the idea of cosmic inflation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Have a listen to Roger Penrose on the subject.
http://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/sir-roger-penrose-cosmic-inflation-is-fantasy/
Are you using a Kaluza-Klein space of 10 dimensions? :)
Reality as we know it. You can move beyond that and also argue that all 3 dimensions + 1 (time) are ‘illusions’ only on a *physical plane*. Physical Plane or World is the independent variable. Who is to say with any certainty there are or will be 3 dimensions and a concept of time once we depart the physical world? We may well be able to move back and forth “in time” too.
Atoms can’t exist in a purely 2D space.
They have height, width, and depth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.