NationStates Jolt Archive

I am going to suppose that you all believe in the speed of light. Correct?

Well. Ok.

Speed of light = 186000 miles/second. I don't know the k/s measurement and I'm too lazy to get it, so if anyone doesn't use the good old backwards illogical US system and wants to state the same measurements in the metric system, go ahead and do that for me.

Distance light travels in a year - appx. 5,000,000,000,000 miles.

Ok, the juice, if you look out in to space, you look out in to the past.

When you look at the sun, you see the sun 8 minutes ago. You can prove this because the sun is around 93,000,000 miles away, which ends up being around 8 light minutes away. Because of the time it takes the light to actually travel from the sun to hear, you can conclude that you see what happened on the sun 8 minutes ago, not what is happening right now.

When you look at Alpha Centauri, you see Alpha Centauri 4 years ago. Same justification as above.

The further you look out in to space, the further you look in to the past.

Scientists have found things quite far away, I beleive the farthest they have ever seen is 16 billion light years away, which means, if you feel like grasping the notion, that the universe is about 16 billion years old.

I am not sure how scientists can figure out how far away things are in space, but I wouldn't doubt their results just because I don't know how they got them. Humans have been studying the sky for thousands of years, maybe more.



But the main point... all existence can not physically be 6000 years old, unless God sped up light early on, which is a silly idea and surely isn't in... any religous texts that I know of.




Yeah, all that fun stuff about seeing the past and speed of light and all, just to poo on a basic mythology of religion.



(Edit: I also forgot to mention that this is can be used in place of fossil evidence for the argument against existance being 6000 years old. Then again, humans have prolly been looking at and messing with rocks and bones just as long as they've been studying the sky, if not longer... but a lot of people go "fossils were put here by dah devil tah make yah not believe in God!"... so if they act irrational in that way you can always look at it this way. Besides, astronomy is cool.)

Speed of light = 186000 miles/second. I don't know the k/s measurement and I'm too lazy to get it, so if anyone doesn't use the good old backwards illogical US system and wants to state the same measurements in the metric system, go ahead and do that for me.
3.0 x 10^8 m/s and 3 x 10^10 cm/s. We use the metric system in 10th grade chemistry in California.


But the main point... all existence can not physically be 6000 years old, unless God sped up light early on, which is a silly idea and surely isn't in... any religous texts that I know of.

Well...of course.

you cool

3.0 x 10^8 m/s and 3 x 10^10 cm/s. We use the metric system in 10th grade chemistry in California.

Well...of course.


Yeah, I'm in 10th grade right now and I was taught it earlier in the year, but I've been out a lot due to Mono, and we only use metric in the class so knowing the conversions isn't horribly important.

And on the of course comment.. I know, I know, it's a duh one, it's just that people really should have realized this by now and it's annoying when they don't.

That is a use for E=mc^2 that I hadn't thought to employ. Very well put.

BTW:

c = 186,282 mi/s
c = 300,000 km/s

...or at least that's how I heard it in high school science (okay, that was 1984, but still relevant).

Considering how many people believe that a light year is a measure of time and not distance, I think you're not going to convince people with your otherwise excellent argument.

BTW, it looks like the universal expansion is accellerating (not the speed of light, but the speed that the universe is expanding). There's all sorts of debates about how dark energy is doing this. It's rather neat.

Hmm.... I Would Recommend You Sumbit This Theory To Any Scientific Institute You Can Find. I Think This Would Be An Amazing Discovery.

That is a use for E=mc^2 that I hadn't thought to employ. Very well put.
:confused:
Where was "E=mc2" used?

I've always thought that was very interesting. It would be pretty damn cool if we could go far enough out to look back at our own planet and see light from the past.

Im not very big on physics or anything of the sort, but does that mean light doesnt eventually run out of energy and just stop..?

I've always thought that was very interesting. It would be pretty damn cool if we could go far enough out to look back at our own planet and see light from the past.

Im not very big on physics or anything of the sort, but does that mean light doesnt eventually run out of energy and just stop..?
Light is a product of a chemical reaction. When the source goes out, the light goes out.

And it goes as far as it needs to go until it hits something.

I think.

:confused:
Where was "E=mc2" used?

idiot....

3.0 x 10^8 m/s and 3 x 10^10 cm/s. We use the metric system in 10th grade chemistry in California.

I hate 10th grade chemestry...

idiot....
Err... thanks, I suppose?

No, really, as far as I know there's a rather big difference between the idea of the speed of light and "E=mc2". There's plenty of stuff in the opening post about the speed of light, but I don't see anything about conversion of mass into energy or energy into mass.

I've always thought that was very interesting. It would be pretty damn cool if we could go far enough out to look back at our own planet and see light from the past.
http://www.space.com/images/blue_dot_010925_03.jpg

There you go. Voyager's look at a certain pale blue dot from at the egde of our solar system.

Im not very big on physics or anything of the sort, but does that mean light doesnt eventually run out of energy and just stop..?
Light IS energy.

1. I like our measurements, I've learned metric anyways, but I like ours better, just because.

2. Dark matter

3. Light's like...a...particle wave...wave particle....pave...warticle, I dunno, but it's a form of energy, and it doesnt transfer that energy till it hits something (generally)

4. Yeah, when did E=mc^2 come into this?

http://www.space.com/images/blue_dot_010925_03.jpg

There you go. Voyager's look at a certain pale blue dot from at the egde of our solar system.


Now lets zoom that in and see who shot Kennedy. /joke. hehe. :)

I hate the word dittle.

2. Dark matter
No, dark energy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
Dark matter is something a wee bit different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

No, dark energy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
Dark matter is something a wee bit different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

Ah, sorry. I always hear these theories on dark matter and how it's gonna affect the expansion of the universe.


P.S. Oooooh, Dark energy stars sound intresting....

Considering how many people believe that a light year is a measure of time and not distance, I think you're not going to convince people with your otherwise excellent argument. BTW, it looks like the universal expansion is accellerating (not the speed of light, but the speed that the universe is expanding). There's all sorts of debates about how dark energy is doing this. It's rather neat.

yeah, a lightyear is a measure of SPACE-TIME.. you can't have one without the other. time is the distance between two points in space. that's why a second is called a "second." as for universal expansion, yeah, i've read that it's supposed to be accelerating.. they can tell by the light spectrum, red or blue i really can't remember. and i believe it's dark matter, not dark energy. dark matter was discovered by a woman.. yayyy!! anyway, i was JUST reading about black holes and the event horizon before i came online. neat! i love this stuff!! thanx. :p

Ah, sorry. I always hear these theories on dark matter and how it's gonna affect the expansion of the universe.


P.S. Oooooh, Dark energy stars sound intresting....
That's ok, I wasn't aware of the difference either till someone gave me an article on it.

And they do, don't they?

Vegetarianistica']yeah, a lightyear is a measure of SPACE-TIME.. you can't have one without the other. time is the distance between two points in space. that's why a second is called a "second." as for universal expansion, yeah, i've read that it's supposed to be accelerating.. they can tell by the light spectrum, red or blue i really can't remember. and i believe it's dark matter, not dark energy. dark matter was discovered by a woman.. yayyy!! anyway, i was JUST reading about black holes and the event horizon before i came online. neat! i love this stuff!! thanx. :p
This is true, but trying to get people to wrap their minds around Space-Time just gives them headaches. But I've gotten into more arguments with people who insist that a lightyear is a year, and therefore time, and not the distance light travels in a year (thus a measure of distance).

It's red shift, blue shift means things are getting closer.

And it is dark energy. Read the article I posted up above.

This is true, but trying to get people to wrap their minds around Space-Time just gives them headaches. But I've gotten into more arguments with people who insist that a lightyear is a year, and therefore time, and not the distance light travels in a year (thus a measure of distance).

It's red shift, blue shift means things are getting closer.

And it is dark energy. Read the article I posted up above.

yeah.. tell me about it. i've got a whole spiel (sp?) about it just in case. red shift.. right on. and i need to check that link about dark energy. great stuff. ;) and my brother's learning japanese. i'm more into india myself.

I hate the word dittle.

I apologize

*hangs head*

universe=
dark matter: About 23% is thought to be composed of dark matter.
dark energy: The remaining 73% is thought to consist of dark energy.

WELL, i must say that the last time i read about this, it was thought that dark matter accounted for 75% of matter in the universe. i obviously have gotten behind here. and dated myself. ..thanx! :)

But the main point... all existence can not physically be 6000 years old, unless God sped up light early on, which is a silly idea and surely isn't in... any religous texts that I know of.

Yeah, all that fun stuff about seeing the past and speed of light and all, just to poo on a basic mythology of religion.



I would like to make the point that you are not prouving that God does not exist, merely that organised religion is wrong, which is a rather easy thing to do considering the material the bible holds. Mind you that you are making the same mistake as the hard-line christians make, namely taking the bible too literally.

As for the point that God sped up light is a silly idea, well...we are talking about God, whom, if existing, reasons as to why and how should be incomprehensible to us.

Therefore let us be silent about those matters we can never understand...

I would like to make the point that you are not prouving that God does not exist, merely that organised religion is wrong, which is a rather easy thing to do considering the material the bible holds. Mind you that you are making the same mistake as the hard-line christians make, namely taking the bible too literally.

As for the point that God sped up light is a silly idea, well...we are talking about God, whom, if existing, reasons as to why and how should be incomprehensible to us.

Therefore let us be silent about those matters we can never understand...

You can't prove or disprove that a God exists, so best to just not care until you can.

And the God speeding up time thing would be a *bambam, sidestepped!* type answer, so I would count it as just silly since sidestepping words that don't move on their own is silly enough.

And I didn't talk much about the bible, and I wasn't really going against it, it's an old book with a ridiculous number of inconsistencies and absolute thefts of other mythologies, not to mention tons of lost parts and outright changes, not just from translation on its way to the modern version, but a lot of people actually believe it and that's just silly.

If not wrong.

You can't prove or disprove that a God exists, so best to just not care until you can.

And the God speeding up time thing would be a *bambam, sidestepped!* type answer, so I would count it as just silly since sidestepping words that don't move on their own is silly enough.



The problem with disprouving that God exists is that one never can. This has to do with concept of God namely that he is omnipotent. Therefor every anwser can be given for every scientific fact we use to disprouve him.
The only method to disprouve His existance is when we would become omnipotent ourselves.

You can merely make His existance unlikely, never disprouve it.

That is why the sudden change in the timeline argument can still be true however silly it may be. It is silly to even attempt to attack it scientificly due to the fact the whole notion of God does not cooperate with a basic rule of the scientific method. Namely that we aren't able to prouve or disprouve Him with scientific fact.

Vegetarianistica']universe=
dark matter: About 23% is thought to be composed of dark matter.
dark energy: The remaining 73% is thought to consist of dark energy.

WELL, i must say that the last time i read about this, it was thought that dark matter accounted for 75% of matter in the universe. i obviously have gotten behind here. and dated myself. ..thanx! :)
I just like how that means the stuff we see, and us as well of course, comprise only 4% of the universe.

I haven't studied much space physics, but does the whole light travelling 5 trillion miles or so in a year still mean that something around 5 trillion miles away is still perceived by us here a year behind?


I always learned that a light year was the distance light travels in a year...

I haven't studied much space physics, but does the whole light travelling 5 trillion miles or so in a year still mean that something around 5 trillion miles away is still perceived by us here a year behind?


I always learned that a light year was the distance light travels in a year...
It's a bit... complicated. But yes, your orginal premise is correct as far as it goes. A lightyear is the distance light takes to travel in a year. So something 1 lightyear away is the 5 trillion miles out and the light from it has taken 1 year to get to Earth for us to see it. Meaning that yes, the farther we gaze, the father back in time we go. And, probably, many of the stars we see are no longer even there, but it will take more years than I'll be alive for that to reach us.

It just gets a bit complicated when you add in the universe is acellerating in its movements, while (If I remember correctly) the Milky Way is slowing down, so on and so forth. Calculating distance is easy, but the start time is proving tricky as the speed hasn't been constant.

I am going to suppose that you all believe in the speed of light. Correct?

Well. Ok.

Speed of light = 186000 miles/second. I don't know the k/s measurement and I'm too lazy to get it, so if anyone doesn't use the good old backwards illogical US system and wants to state the same measurements in the metric system, go ahead and do that for me.

Distance light travels in a year - appx. 5,000,000,000,000 miles.

Ok, the juice, if you look out in to space, you look out in to the past.

When you look at the sun, you see the sun 8 minutes ago. You can prove this because the sun is around 93,000,000 miles away, which ends up being around 8 light minutes away. Because of the time it takes the light to actually travel from the sun to hear, you can conclude that you see what happened on the sun 8 minutes ago, not what is happening right now.

When you look at Alpha Centauri, you see Alpha Centauri 4 years ago. Same justification as above.

The further you look out in to space, the further you look in to the past.

Scientists have found things quite far away, I beleive the farthest they have ever seen is 16 billion light years away, which means, if you feel like grasping the notion, that the universe is about 16 billion years old.

I am not sure how scientists can figure out how far away things are in space, but I wouldn't doubt their results just because I don't know how they got them. Humans have been studying the sky for thousands of years, maybe more.



But the main point... all existence can not physically be 6000 years old, unless God sped up light early on, which is a silly idea and surely isn't in... any religous texts that I know of.




Yeah, all that fun stuff about seeing the past and speed of light and all, just to poo on a basic mythology of religion.



(Edit: I also forgot to mention that this is can be used in place of fossil evidence for the argument against existance being 6000 years old. Then again, humans have prolly been looking at and messing with rocks and bones just as long as they've been studying the sky, if not longer... but a lot of people go "fossils were put here by dah devil tah make yah not believe in God!"... so if they act irrational in that way you can always look at it this way. Besides, astronomy is cool.)

Here's what I gotta say, and don't get mad and start flaming me... I'm entitled to my theories/faiths as you are to yours. And that's what yours are, just theories/faiths.

I'm sure most of you, if not all of you, have heard of this guy Jesus. If you haven't, I dunno what to say. Well, this guy Jesus's first miracle was turning water into wine. Now... It takes a long time for grape juice to ferment into wine, months if not years. And here Jesus does it in an instant. All the properties of wine are there. Alcohol, taste, etc... There's only one way for that to happen. He puts those properties in there. Here we have the Son of God doing what seems to be impossible, but it happens in the blink of an eye.

Now, if that was just the Son, imagine what God could do in 6 days. If you don't get the tie-in, you're hopeless. But let me explain just in case. God makes the known universe in 6 days, much like how Jesus make wine in an instant. If Jesus could put the aged properties in the wine, why can't God do the same the universe. Carbon dating, speed of light, fossils, all that jazz.

Now for some hard proof, eceryone loves that right? That's how things are helped proven. I have a friend whos dad works for a company examining rocks from supposedly a long time ago, eg: millions of years B.C.E. What he has discovered in these rocks that haven't been touched or changed in anyway are unusual crystal patterns. From my understanding, these such formations can't exist. They have the properties of a rapid, almost instant formation. Not volcanic, but more like a grown recently style. Yet, they 'date' from a very long time ago. How is that possible? One might say that there were strange and unusual conditions that allowed for this to happen. And I say, correct! Yet, you look at how the world was supposedly made, but science can't prove or show a way for that to happen. That's where God comes back and sheds some light on the situation. It doesn't make sence to us, but to Him it would. He just made the universe that way.

Discuss. :)

Now for some hard proof, eceryone loves that right? That's how things are helped proven. I have a friend whos dad works for a company examining rocks from supposedly a long time ago, eg: millions of years B.C.E. What he has discovered in these rocks that haven't been touched or changed in anyway are unusual crystal patterns. From my understanding, these such formations can't exist. They have the properties of a rapid, almost instant formation. Not volcanic, but more like a grown recently style. Yet, they 'date' from a very long time ago. How is that possible? One might say that there were strange and unusual conditions that allowed for this to happen.
Got a source for those rocks, besides a father of a friend story? Something like that would have made the news and yet I cannot recall ever hearing anything about it.