Posted on 02/24/2005 3:54:37 AM PST by PatrickHenry
We might be catching up with some old tired galaxies, and they would pop into view..
Stick around...it may be fun!
Hypothesis 1:
The galaxies which appear to recede at velocities in excess of the speed of light would exceed infinite mass if they were moving THROUGH space.
However, if space itself is moving with the galaxy, then its local velocity would be sub-c.
Other rambling that may or may not apply:
If body A is moving at 0.75c in the x-direction and body B is moving at 0.75c in the negative x-direction, and each shines a light towards the other, then each would see a red shift of 1.5 from the light of the other.
It is!
Well, no wonder our public school system is the way it is!
And Science is suppose to deal with facts
LOL!
Now, who can argue against that!
Sounds like they are back arguing for the eternal universe.
This is not kindergarten. If you want a Nanny State, go to DU.
So, "eternal" is not a scientific theory yet, but a religious or philosphical thought as we know?
What I'm trying my best to comprehend is if "time" is a physical property could it be removed or hidden in existance. How do you even comprehend OUTSIDE OF TIME?
We have discoveredd that time changes or is different with atomic clock experiments... Please understand, I'm not trying to be philosophical about this, but I want to know how it relates to scientific theory...and maybe it doesn't?
Physicist, could it somehow all relate through "digital code?" I mean software is massless, timeless, why does it take up space if it's massless?
I'm sorry, forgive me for my indulgence of questions, but thanks for you insights.
...and it does. Look I don't believe in evolution either, but you just can not say that scientist have not found any evidence that leads them to concluded evolution. I just think there is more evidence for ID than evolution, but in no way do I discount science's discoveries.
If I need a tracheotomy between now and my 10,000th birthday in 11949 I'll just let them do it rather than strangle to death.
What causes virtual particles to appear?
That line always makes me laugh. I wonder what the mass and weight of nothing is when compressed, spun and blown up. Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.. gotta have somethin.. lol
A fun discussion, gentlemen. This stuff blows my mind.
I pity the poor Creationists and ID'ers, I really do. They will never enjoy any of this. They will be stuck in the prosaic and mundane view that ignores the majesty of God's great creation.
Short answer: The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
The Uncertainty Principle is not well understood and is generally taught improperly. The formulation is taken to mean that the position and momentum of a particle cannot be KNOWN to better than h-bar (h-bar is Planck's Constant divided by 2 pi).
delta X times delta P = h-bar
However, what the Uncertainty Principle really means is that a particle does not HAVE a momentum and a position to better than h-bar.
The difference is significant.
Consider a simple hydrogen atom with an electron around the nucleus. What keeps the negatively charged electron from spiraling in to the nucleus and combining with the proton??? It is a classic General Exam question. Indeed, if you calculate the answer from classical electrodynamics, the electron does spiral into the nucleus in something like 10^-31 seconds. The reason that it doesn't is that if the electron got too close to the nucleus, its position would be very small and therefore it would have to have a higher momentum. The momentum shoots the electron away from the nucleus.
It is the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle that keeps the electrons in atoms from collapsing into the nucleus.
A reformulation of the HUP is delta Energy times delta Time = h-bar.
delta E * delta t <= h-bar
In a similar fashion, this formulation means that, for sufficiently short periods of time, the vacuum field (not vacuum space) must have signficant energies. And, if these energies are greater than the mass of a particle and its anti-particle, then the particles are formed. However, they recombine immediately and return the energy to the field, because this can only occur on time scales that are very short. That is why they are called virtual particles.
This makes me think of something. It's not the mass and weight of matter and where it came from more than it is the INFORMATION that HAD to be introduced to form it.
Where does the information come from?
What am I missing here?
Yeah, that's a little tough to explain too. If I close my fist and there's nothing in my hand, I'd be shocked if it just blew up and a Zebra was sitting on my fingers.. And the odds of that happening are far better than what they describe. On the other hand, I'd love a universe like the fantasy they presume to sell. I could empty my closets and every so often open the door to find a pile of stuff that just appears and forms itself out of nothing. Some would argue 'it doesn't happen that way'. How can they say that - they don't know it happened that way once or what governs it, frequency, etc. Just kills me. It's like that quote from Fright Night "You have to have faith for that to work.." LOL
We know what makes up the human machine.
We know the genes, the stuff in the genes. Scientists say it was a primordial ooze that was the crock pot.
I say get all the ingredients together and lets see if we can grow a human.
For all the right stuff to be in the right place at exactly the right time? Can't see it happening.
As Thomas Jefferson (the Atheists most admired) said:
"I hold, that when we take a view of the universe, in its parts, general or particular, it is impossible for the human mind not to perceive and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of its composition.
The movements of the heavenly bodies, so exactly held in their course by the balance of centrifugal forces, the structure of our earth itself with its distribution of lands and waters and atmosphere, animal and vegetable and bodies, examined all in the minutest particles, insects mere atoms of life, yet as perfectly organized as man or mammoth; the mineral substances, their generation and uses; it is impossible I say, for the human mind not to believe that there is in all this, design, cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a fabricator of all things from matter and motion, their Preserver and Regulator while permitted to exist in their present forms, and their regeneration into new and other forms.
We see too, the evident proofs of the necessity of a superintending power, to maintain the universe in its cause and order. So irresistable are these evidences of an intelligent and powerful Agent, that, of the infinite numbers of men who have existed through time, they have believed, in the proportion of a million at least to unit, in the hypothesis of an external pre-existance of a Creator. Rather than that of a self existant universe."
Nuff said.
What am I missing here?
I don't know. Are you a creationist???
I pity the poor Creationists and ID'ers, I really do. They will never enjoy any of this. They will be stuck in the prosaic and mundane view that ignores the majesty of God's great creation.
That's why I asked, "What did I miss?"
I am facinated by sciences discoveries of God's appearent creation...I don't discount any of sciences theories expect those that are perpetrated as FACT when they are nothing but conjecture or at best, just a guess.
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.