Posted on 06/30/2006 8:26:43 AM PDT by DannyTN
Just because they observed something does not mean we fully understand it.
It is possible for us to travel through spacetime (time-travel) yet we still can't.
First one would need to understand the physics behind what was happening, and how to apply it to a larger scale. Experimentation is one thing, actual understanding is quite different. This actually shows that there are properties of light that we DON'T fully understand, because we never thought this could happen.
(This is all given that this article is relaible).
Alas, this is a loaded statement. "You're not factoring in the God effect" assumes that there is a God, and that this God is indeed the Christian version of God. Not something everyone believes.
Now, whether or not this is what you believe is irrelevant (in argument--of course not in life), for the sake of arguing, you cannot just take everyone to assume that. (and if you will assume it, you ought to state your assumption(s)).
Yes, you cannot apply natural laws to God. But, you can apply natural laws to events in nature. And first, we must prove this Christian God if we are to work off of your premise.
While mysterious, the answer should not require blind faith.
Actually, if you look at modern physics, it is suggested that the modern universe is actually increasing it's rate of expansion. Not slowing down.
Redshift variability can be due to a few things. Gravitational pull among the galaxies being the main factor. For example, the Milky Way Galaxy is one of the largest galaxies we know, and we actually witness a blueshift (it is coming toward us) in a few of our smaller, neighboring galaxies. This is not because they are coming at us, but because the milky way has a certain gravitational pull over them).
This can happen in many systems of galaxies, causing redshift variation.
That being said, look at Edwin Hubble's research, you'll see that the universe is moving very uniformly.
Do a high powered hallucinogen and you'll see time is quite elastic...as well as death and reality and what happens thereafter.
"But doesn't it take just as much ego to point the finger back and call them small, and hold the "almightier than thou" viewpoint because of your belief in God?"
....at the very least, holding out a possiblity of the Almighty grants men the potential for being and becoming bigger than themselves through His grace. As with all things men do, the dimensions and extent of ego involvement in that activity cannot be denied. Some clearly are able to witness and help extend the hand of the Almighty more gracefully than others.
Frankly, it doesn't matter what everyone believes or assumes about God. He is, and that will not be changed by anyone's assumptions or beliefs. :-)
When I came across this, for some reason, I thought of you...
http://homepage.sunrise.ch/homepage/schatzer/space-time.html
Minkowski was one of the brighter lights in physics. His early death was tragic for science since he did not have time to point out that his 4-D solution to relativity was merely geometrical and had no basis in physics itself. There are a very large number, perhaps an infinite number, of solutions to relativity, not all of which correspond to physics as we know it. In fact, most solutions are mere mathematics. Einstein early on rejected a well-known 5-D solution because it doesn't correspond to physics as we see it, but for unknown reasons he latched onto Minkowski's solution, which led to the impasse we experience at present.
Time perceived by a tiny insect might well be 1000 times slower than for us.
I agree with the second part of what you say, it seems faith is quite selective--some have much, some have none at all. I would also go so far to say that you should hold out a possibility of the Almighty, at least until you substantially prove to yourself that there is not one...if that happens I believe you should deny it.
But holding that it is possible does not mean that it is, and while that belief can empower some to become bigger and better, it also weakens others. This was one of Nietzsche's main problems with the church (as well as other philosophers), God is good, but organized religion thrives on the weakness and fear of people. If a belief in God actually makes you a stronger person, go for it, but a belief in God just to assuage your fears of hell (such a stance is so prevalent today!) is weakness, and in that case, the belief in an Almighty makes you weaker.
So whereas it grants the means to empowerment, it does not guarantee it--and just because a belief can empower you, it does not mean you shouldn't be skeptical and question that belief. God does not call us to blind faith, I hope.
Sorry if this was a bit tangential. Do you follow?
Outstanding proof. I am enlightened now! The light has been brought to my eyes!
What if He isn't, and THAT will not be changed by anyone's assumptions or beliefs? How do you know he is? Through faith? The Bible?
Not that your statement really adresses anything I said anyway, I was saying that, for the sake of argument, "Christian God" is a big assumption to make. I already understood your stance on the matter. Thank you for reitterating though.
This is quite true, but that doesn't mean 1/1000 of the time has passed by for that insect. It just means that 1 hour to us SEEMS to be 41 days and 16 hours to an insect. but in reality, it's only one hour.
It's like being at work and saying, "God it feels like I've been here 24 hours," and someone else saying "Man, this day felt like it was 5 minutes."
With modern power tools it took over 300 man-years of labor to build each of the Ark 'replicas'.
|
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.
