2. Robert Boyle (1627-1691) is credited with being the father of modern chemistry. He also was active in financially supporting the spread of Christianity through missions and Bible translations.
3. Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) was one of the greatest early mathematicians, laid the foundations for hydrostatics, hydrodynamics, differential calculus, and the theory of probability. To him is attributed the famous Wager of Pascal, paraphrased as follows: "How can anyone lose who chooses to be a Christian? If, when he dies, there turns out to be no God and his faith was in vain, he has lost nothing--in fact, has been happier in life than his nonbelieving friends. If, however, there is a God and a heaven and hell, then he has gained heaven and his skeptical friends will have lost everything in hell!"
4. John Ray (1627-1705) was the father of English natural history, considered the greatest zoologist and botanist of his day. He also wrote a book, "The wisdom of God Manifested In The Works of Creation."
5. Nicolaus Steno (1631-1686) was the father of Stratigraphy. He believed that fossils were laid down in the strata as a result of the flood of Noah. He also wrote many theological works and late in his life took up religious orders.
6. William Petty (1623-1687) helped found the science of statistics and the modern study of economics. He was an active defender of the Christian faith and wrote many papers sharing evidence of God's design in nature.
7. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) invented calculus, discovered the law of gravity and the three laws of motion, anticipated the law of energy conservation, developed the particle theory of light propagation, and invented the reflecting telescope. He firmly believed in Jesus Christ as his Savior and the Bible as God's word, and wrote many books on these topics.
8. Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778) was the father of biological taxonomy. His system of classification is still in use today. One of his main goals in systematizing the varieties of living creatures was an attempt to delineate the original Genesis "kinds." He firmly believed in the Genesis account as literal history.
9. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) was one of the greatest physicists of all time, developed foundational concepts in electricity and magnetism, invented the electrical generator, and made many contributions to the field of chemistry. He was active in the various ministries of his church, both private and public, and had an abiding faith in the Bible and in prayer.
10. Georges Cuvier (1769-1832) was the founder of the science of comparative anatomy and one of the chief architects of paleontology as a separate scientific discipline. He was a firm creationist, participating in some of the important creation/evolution debates of his time.
11. Charles Babbage (1792-1871) was the founder of computer science. He developed information storage and retrieval systems, and used punched cards for instruction sets and data sets in automated industrial controls. He was also a Christian with strong convictions and wrote an important book defending the Bible and miracles.
12. John Dalton (1766-1844) was the father of atomic theory, which revolutionized chemistry. He was an orthodox, Bible-believing Christian.
13. Matthew Maury (1806-1873) was the founder of oceanography. He believed that when Psalm 8:8 in the Bible talked about "paths in the seas," that there must therefore be paths in the seas. He dedicated his life to charting the winds and currents of the Atlantic and was able to confirm that the sea did indeed have paths, just as spoken of in the Bible.
14. James Simpson (1811-1879) discovered chloroform and laid the foundation for anesthesiology. He said his motivation to perform the research leading to this discovery was a fascination in the book of Genesis with Adam's deep sleep during the time in which Eve was fashioned from his side. He said his biggest discovery was finding Jesus Christ as Savior.
15. James Joule (1818-1889) discovered the mechanical equivalent of heat, laying the foundation for the field of thermodynamics. Joule also had a strong Christian faith.
16. Louis Agassiz (1807-1873) was the father of glacial geology and a great paleontologist. He believed in God and in His special creation of every kind of organism. When Darwin's Origin began to gain favor, Agassiz spoke out strongly against it.
17. Gregory Mendel (1822-1884) was the father of genetics. He had strong religious convictions and chose the life of a monk. He was a creationist and rejected Darwins's ideas, even though he was familiar with them.
18. Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) was the father of bacteriology. He established the germ theory of disease. His persistent objections to the theory of spontaneous generation and to Darwinism made him unpopular with the scientific establishment of his day. He was a Christian with extremely strong religious convictions.
19. William Thompson, Lord Kelvin (1824-1907) is considered one of the all-time great physicists. He established thermodynamics on a formal scientific basis, providing a precise statement of the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Lord Kelvin was a strong Christian, opposing both Lyellian uniformitarianism and Darwinian evolution. In 1903, shortly before his death, he made the unequivocal statement that, "With regard to the origin of life, science...positively affirms creative power."
20. Joseph Lister (1827-1912) founded antiseptic surgical methods. Lister's contributions have probably led to more lives being saved through modern medicine than the contributions of any one else except Pasteur. Like Pasteur, Lister was also a Christian and wrote, "I am a believer in the fundamental doctrines of Christianity."
21. Joseph Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) developed a comprehensive theoretical and mathematical framework for electromagnetic field theory. Einstein called Maxwell's contributions "the most profound and most fruitful that physics has experienced since the time of Newton." Maxwell rejected the theory of evolution and wrote that God's command to man to subdue the earth, found in the first chapter of the book of Genesis in the Bible, provided the personal motivation to him for pursuing his scientific work. He acknowledged a personal faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.
22. Bernhard Riemann (1826-1866) developed the concept of non-Euclidian geometry, which was used by Einstein in his development of the theory of relativity. Riemann was also a Christian and had hoped to go into the ministry until he got sidetracked by his interest in mathematics. He apparently made several efforts to prove the validity of the book of Genesis using mathematical principles.
23. Joseph Henry Gilbert (1817-1901) was a chemist who developed the use of nitrogen and superphosphate fertilizers for farm crops and co-developed the world's first agricultural experimental station. He thus laid the foundations for the advances in agricultural science which have provided the means for farmers to feed the large populations in the world today. Gilbert is yet another scientist with a strong faith and demonstrated this by signing the Scientist's Declaration, in which he affirmed his faith in the Bible as the Word of God and expressed his disbelief in and opposition to Darwin's theories.
24. Thomas Anderson (1819-1874) was one of the initial workers in the field of organic chemistry, discovering pyridine and other organic bases. Like Gilbert, he also signed the Scientist's Declaration, in which he affirmed his faith in the scientific accuracy of the Bible and the validity of the Christian faith.
25. William Mitchell Ramsay (1851-1939) was among the greatest of all archeologists. He acquired "liberal" theological beliefs during his days as a university student. However, as he began to make various archaeological discoveries in Asia Minor, he began to see that archaeology confirmed the accuracy of the Bible and as a result he became converted to Christianity.
26. John Ambrose Fleming (1849-1945) was the inventor of the Fleming valve which provided the foundation for subsequent advances in electronics. He studied under Maxwell, was a consultant to Thomas Edison, and also for Marconi. He also had very strong Christian beliefs and acted on those beliefs by helping found an organization called the "Evolution Protest Movement." He wrote a major book against the theory of evolution.
27. Werner Von Braun (1912-1977) was the father of space science. He wrote, ."..the vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator. I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science."
28. Albert Einstein (1879-1955), formulator of the theory of relativity, which is one of the single greatest intellectual accomplishments in the history of man. Einstein was Jewish and thus did not follow in the Christian tradition of Newton or Faraday. He did not believe in a personal God, such as is revealed even in the Jewish Bible. Yet, he was overwhelmed by the order and organization of the universe and believed this demonstrated that there was a Creator.
14 posted on 7/1/02 8:38 AM Pacific by Tightsqueeze
The post a couple of notches above this one, post 274, was a reply to one of the inane comments made by "Tightsqueeze" on the first page of this thread.
See #79. I hope you got better sources on the others than you did on Newton ;)
Einstein was a bright fellow and he probably has other credits to his name which will stand the test of time. Relativity will not.
Albert Einstein was trying to use relativistic time to account for the fact that light does not obey the ordinary additive laws for velocities. This was based on what he called "thought experiments", such as the mirror-clock experiment, rather than upon anything resembling real evidence or real experiments. Thought experiments, it turns out, are not a terribly good basis for physics. Moreover, the basic approach is unsound. Louis Carrol Epstein ("Relativity Envisioned"), uses the following analogy: a carpenter with a house in which everything worked flawlessly other than one door which bound, would usually plane the door until it worked. He COULD, however, purchase a couple of hundred jacks and jack the foundation of the house until the one door worked, and then try to somehow or other make every other door and window in the house work again... Light is the one door in the analogy; distance, time, mass etc., i.e. everything else in the house of physics are the other doors and windows. Epstein assumes that relativity is the one case you will ever find in which that sort of approach is the correct one, nonetheless, common sense tells us it isn't terribly likely.
It turns out there is another way in which one could account for light not obeying additive laws, and that this other way is the correct one. That is to assume that light simply does not have a velocity; that it is an instantaneous force between two points, and that the thing we call the "velocity of light" is the rate of accumulation of some secondary effect.
The story on this one lives HERE
The basic Ralph Sansbury experiment amounts to a 1990s version of the Michelson/Moreley experiment using lasers and nanosecond gates, which Michelson and Moreley did not have. Wallace Thornhill, an Australian physicist, describes it:
>I mentioned a few weeks ago that an epoch making experiment had been >performed in the realm of fundamental physics which had great >importance for Velikovskian style catastrophism (and just about >everything else for that matter). The experiment, performed by Ralph >Sansbury, is amazingly simple but has amazing consequences. > >Sansbury is a quiet spoken physicist from Connecticut. He is >associated with the Classical Physics Institute, or CP Institute, of >New York which publishes the Journal of Classical Physics. In the >Notes to Contributors we find the focus of the journal: "Marinov's >experiment, Bell's theorem, and similar works reveal increasing >discontent with the dogmas of modern physics. Some physicists >postulate that blackbody radiation, atomic spectra, nuclear reactions, >electron diffraction, the speed of light and all other phenomena which >Quantum Wave Mechanics and Relativity were designed to explain will >require different explanations. It is the viewpoint of this journal >that the new explanations probably will be consistent with >Aristotelian logic and Newtonian or Galilean mechanics." Volume 1, >Part 1, in January 1982 was devoted to an article titled "Electron >Structure", by Ralph Sansbury. The title itself should raise >physicist's eyebrows since electrons are considered to have no >structure. They are treated as being indivisible, along with quarks. > >The fallout from Sansbury's idea, if proven, is prodigious. To begin, >for the first time we have a truly unifying theory where both >magnetism and gravity become a derived form of instantaneous >electrostatic force. The Lorentz contraction-dilation of space time >and mass is unnecessary. Electromagnetic radiation becomes the >cumulative effect of instantaneous electrostatic forces at a distance >and the wave/particle (photon) duality disappears. Discontinuous >absorption/emission of energy in quanta by atoms becomes a continuous >process. And there is more. > >Sansbury's was a thousand dollar experiment using 10 nanosecond long >pulses of laser light, one pulse every 400 nsec. At some distance from >the laser was a photodiode detector. But in the light path, directly >in front of the detector was a high speed electronic shutter (known as >a Pockel cell) which could be switched to allow the laser light >through to the detector, or stop it. > >Now, light is considered to travel as a wavefront or photon at the >speed of light. Viewed this way, it covers a distance of about 1 foot >per nanosecond. So the laser could be regarded as sending out 10ft >long bursts of light every 400ft, at the speed of light. The >experiment simply kept the Pockel cell shutter closed during the 400ft >of no light and opened to allow the 10ft burst through to the detector. > >What happened? > >The detector saw nothing!!! > >It is as if a gun were fired at a target and for the time of flight of >the bullet a shield were placed over the target. At the last moment, >the shield is pulled away - and the bullet has disappeared; the target >is untouched! > >What does it mean? > >Only that Maxwell's theory of the propagation of electromagnetic waves >is wrong! Only that Einstein's Special theory of relativity (which was >to reconcile Maxwell's theory with simple kinematics) is wrong! Only >that, as a result, the interpretation of most of modern physics is >wrong! > >As another classical physicist using a theoretical approach to the >same problem succinctly put it: > >"... there emerges the outline of an alternative "relativistic" >physics, quite distinct from that of Maxwell-Einstein, fully as well >confirmed by the limited observations available to date, and differing >from it not only in innumerable testable ways but also in basic >physical concepts and even in definitional or ethnical (sic) premises >as to the nature of physics. Thus a death struggle is joined that must >result in the destruction of one world-system or the other: Either >light is complicated and matter simple, as I think, or matter is >complicated and light simple, as Einstein thought. I have shown here >that some elegant mathematics can be put behind my view. It has long >been known that inordinate amounts of elegant mathematics can be put >behind Einstein's. Surely the time fast approaches to stop listening >to mathematical amplifications of our own internal voices and to go >into the laboratory and listen to what nature has to say." - >Modifications of Maxwell's Equations, T E Phipps, The Classical >Journal of Physics, Vol 2, 1, Jan 1983, p. 21. > >Ralph Sansbury has now done precisely that! > >In simple terms, Sansbury gives the electron a structure by proposing >a number of charged particles (he calls subtrons) orbiting within the >classical radius of an electron. A simple calculation gives the >surprising result that these subtrons are moving at a speed of 2.5 >million light years per second! That is, they could theoretically >cover the distance from Earth to the far side of the Andromeda galaxy >in one second. This gives some meaning to the term 'instantaneous >action at a distance'. (Note that this is a requirement for any new >theory of gravity). (Also I have always considered it evidence of >peculiar naivety or arrogance on the part of scientists, such as >Sagan, who search for extra-terrestrial intelligence (SETI) by using >radio signals. What superior intelligence would use such a slow, and >therefore useless, interstellar signalling system?) Such near infinite >speed requires that there can be no mass increase with velocity. The >speed of light is not a speed barrier. All of the experiments which >seem to support Einstein's notion are interpreted by Sansbury in a >more common-sense fashion. When an electron or other charged particle >is accelerated in an electromagnetic field, it is distorted from a >sphere into an ellipsoid. The more electromagnetic energy applied to >accelerating the particle, the more energy is absorbed by distortion >of the particle until, ultimately, at the speed of light, there is an >expulsion of the subtrons. Under such conditions, the particle only >APPEARS to be gaining mass. > >Notably, in the past few months, scientists in Hamburg using the most >powerful electron microscope have found on about a dozen occasions out >of 10 million trials, relativistic electrons recoiled more violently >off protons than had ever been seen before. This may turn out to be >direct experimental proof of Sansbury's model of the electron having >structure. > >To return to the experiment involving a "chopped" light beam: One of >the major requirements of the new theory is instantaneous >electrostatic forces between subtrons. This forms the basis of a >radical new view of the basis of electromagnetic radiation which is >now the subject of stunning experimental confirmation. In Sansbury's >view, a signal from a light source is received instantly by a distant >detector and the speed of light delay in detecting the signal is due >to the time taken for the ACCUMULATED RESPONSE of the subtrons in the >detector to result in a threshold signal at the electron level. This >is totally at variance with orthodox interpretations which would have >the light travelling as a discrete photon or wave packet at the speed >of light. > >In terms of the gun and target analogy, it is as if particles of the >bullet are being absorbed by the shield from the instant of firing, so >that when the shield is pulled aside there is no bullet left to hit >the target. > >It is not possible to overstate the importance of this work because it >lends direct support to a new model of the electron in particular, and >matter in general, which EXPLAINS magnetism, gravity and quantum >effects without any resort to the kind of metaphysics which allows our >top physicists to think they can see "God" in their equations. The >new classical physicists can mix it with the best of them when it >comes to the mathematics but they are more prepared to "go into the >laboratory and listen to what nature has to say." > >This work is of crucial importance for Velikovskian re-arrangements of >the solar system in recent times because astronomers have been able to >say that such scenarios defy the laws of physics - which is true, >insofar as they know the laws of physics. To discover that gravity is >a form of charge polarization within the particles that make up the >atom, rather than a warp in space (whatever the hell that means), >gives us a simple mechanism by which the solar system can be rapidly >stabilised after a period of chaotic motion. > >There is an impression, as I reread the work of Sansbury and other >classical physicists, that what we are facing is something like "Back >to the Future". And like the movie of that name, the possibilities >that we encounter will seem like science fiction come true. But it is >well-known that science fiction writers are better at predicting the >future of science than experts!
Clipped and Saved.