11744Re: [CreationTalk] RE: Celestial Mechanics
- Feb 18, 2014I do not claim expertise in biblical Hebrew or celestial mechanics. I do claim that visible creation (cosmic history as in happened) confirms the grammatical Hebrew text and casts doubt on the traditional, Latin-imitating translations found in modern bibles.
I study archeoastronomy. I also study modern celestial mechanics based on Kepler, Julian calendars and clocks. The ancient and modern astronomy methods, are not compatible. Early astronomers did not make calendars to measure time. They tuned their lives to the varying cycles of nature. They saw never ending changes in the very places we claim clock-like orbits. They also looked with longing on the days of the early patriarchs who lived for geological ages. Job listed geological phenomena (such as the dried Mediterranean) during the few days of his life back in the dinosaur era. He mentioned how their faces changed (doubled) before they died. If we lived long enough to observe gradual geological events changing the Earth, we would grow Neanderthal skulls from vast age. The Bible also mentions the shattering of a planet (called rahab) four times, twice in Job, which are similar to the ancient accounts of a crushed planet god.
Ancient astronomical accounts and scientific claims are often incompatible because each is based on contradictory assumptions and define evidence differently. Scientists assume that matter is not changing, which allows them to focus on empiricism and mathematical symbols as evidence. The earliest astronomers used visible evidence. Records of ancient eclipses almost never fit modern ephemerides, which has been known since the seventeenth century. Scientists just assume our computerized methods are correct and adjust the ancient date, location or observation to fit our calculations. The earliest astronomical records, the Venus Tablets, list the lunar dates (over 21 years) for Venus’ appearances and disappearances. Its disappearance on the far side of the Sun were long by weeks and its appearances as morning an evening star were each too short (by half of the extra weeks of disappearance). The short morning and evening phases and the double long disappearances on the other side of the Sun suggest that the solar system was smaller 3,500 years ago. Radar reflections show that Venus has a rotational resonance with Earth at conjunction, as though we once tidally affected each other. The Bible mentions close passages (e.g. Joshua 10:13 & Judges 5:20-21) like the accounts of the early Greeks and Babylonians.
The easiest way to test between ancient astronomical accounts and modern celestial mechanics is to examine the only history that is visible as it happened: galactic history. Many galaxies are tiny and clustered around large ellipticals. The clusters contain long gas streaks and are awash in X-rays. Some early galaxies (in distant clusters) have emerging clumps packed densely with stars, like equally spaced beads on a necklace. At many ranges we observe how trillions of stars streams accelerate out, spiral out, as billions of galaxies grew from unformed matter in the core of each galaxy - often growing into huge, dusty, local, growth spirals. Nowhere in the vast universe do we see any evidence for atomic perpetual motion which is the basis for modern empirical physics. Nowhere do we see any evidence for accretion of stars from dust. Instead, we see jets emerging and forming dusty nebulae and long strings of stars by ejections, which supports the grammatical text of Creation.
Someone might insist, we measure linear clocks, and we use the laws of physics to land spacecraft on Mars so our clock-based laws must be correct. Sending a spacecraft to Mars involves periodic course and speed adjustments, fine tuning it up to the last day to adjust the path to home in on the visible surface features. Despite this fine tuning, we always land long, as though our estimate of Mars’ position is slightly off. This would be the case if our assumption that clocks are linear is faulty. (We navigate to Mars with Doppler which would have small errors if NASA’s clocks were accelerating during the radio round trip). If all clocks are accelerating, this could explain the Flyby and Pioneer Anomalies. In the Pioneer Anomaly, NASA used local atomic clocks to send radio signals that were transponded back to Earth by four spin stabilized spacecraft. The carrier modulated a signal that when returned served to mark twice the range. NASA also used the returned frequencies to calculate Doppler range rate. The Doppler calculations kept slowing anomalously with distance. Astronomers use the observed light clock rate from ancient galaxies, along with the Hubble ratio, to estimate galactic distances. The Anomaly also correlated with distance and the Hubble ratio times the speed of light. Evidently local atomic clocks are speeding up just like the atomic clocks in hundreds of billions of galaxies.
What could cause orbits to not quite close, but to gradually open out. Jacob understood that the days and years of the son are shorter and worse than those of the fathers (Genesis 47:9). Neither Newton nor Einstein predicted tangential forces. Yet gravity aberration must produce tangential forces. At present, since gravity propagates at light speed, the Sun’s gravitational effects are offset by 20" towards the Earth’s bow. This steadily accelerates Earth’s orbit outward and concurrently speeds up our spin rate (relative to the former positions and rates - not clocks). Since gravity aberration is greater for more distant planets, all large objects in the solar system (and planets around nearby stars) end up in logarithmically spaced orbits, as we observe.
What is gravity? The visible history of how clocks keep accelerating along with the outward accelerating orbits (a violation of all modern gravity theories) suggests that gravity is what emerges from matter as it changes relationally. As matter changes relationally, its volume increases, its inertial properties change along with the speed of its light clocks, as we observe in billions of growing galaxies. The sun is changing from red to blue as its matter changes relationally. 3000 years ago the Egyptians painted a red sun and Homer claimed the sky was bronze, as it would have been if matter is continually changing relationally.
Creationist have been interpreting the Bible with science for several centuries. The more they do so, the more we loose the creation - naturalism battle. Scientific creationists are flummoxed by the visible age of the universe. Only the literal, grammatical text of the Bible is confirmed in visible galactic history. Of course what is visible is foolishness to a scientific mindset.
How great will be the triumph of the literal creation account over western science. How will it happen? Telescopes are revealing how the universe formed. What is visible is a violation of the creed of all scientists, the idea the Bible predicted for the last days - that all things remain the same. To prevent what is visible from being so, most scientists believe 80% of all matter is invisible. They speculate that the vacuum of space time pushes galaxies, stretches light and even accelerates its own stretching. They claim stars accreted from dust when visibly we observe them emerging from the formless things God created first.
My explanation of the seven creation days, derived from Hebrew, interpreted with the ancient system of reasoning instead of science, is here under the menu heading Creation Days:
Victor, Changing Earth CreationistOn Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Chuck <chuckpc@...> wrote:
> The laws of celestial mechanics are assumption dependent.
Every thing we think is assumption because unlike God we don’t know every thing and your Changing Earth Creationist assumption dependent. For example you assume that you actually know Hebrew and Greek better than any other human being that has lived for the last 2,000 years. You assume that God inspired the original autographs and then left his word at the mercy of flawed sinful men. You assume that the King James Bible which God as used to win more souls to Christ than even the original autographs themselves, was not inspired by the same God that has so mightily used it. If any of these assumptions are wrong so are you. For the record, they are all wrong.
> They also violate what the Bible says about how the heavenly
> bodies move.
WRONG, nothing in a real Bible says any such thing. However you are free to give me references to actual Bible passages you think say such thing, rather than making baseless claims about what it says.
> The laws of celestial mechanics are based on the western
> concept of time, measured with clocks. In the western
> system, time is believed to be linear and orbits are said
> to be clock-like.
Those laws of celestial mechanics allow us to launch a spacecraft to where its designation planet will be when the spacecraft get there and they always meat right on schedule. We can also use that planet to send the spacecraft in to another planet which is always were it is suppose to be when that spacecraft arrives. That shows that the laws of celestial mechanics with such precision that it shows that time is linear and orbits are said are clock-like.
> Yet orbits are observed to spread out throughout the history
> of how the galaxies formed.
No such observation has ever been made. You may of course provide a reference to support your claim.
> Our ancestors and the biblical prophets mentioned close
> planet passages and the shattering of a nearby planet just
> a few thousand years ago.
No they don’t. Prove it. I know that you have claimed certain passages as saying such but it is just your opinion. You may of course provide a reference to support your claim.
> We also observe how atomic clocks accelerate in billions
> of galaxies, the fastest (normal temperature) atomic
> clocks are local.
We also observe not such thing what is observe is absorption lines being shifted towards red end of the spectrum that increases with increasing distance. By the way some nearby galaxies are blue shifted because they are heading towards us. They are not slower atomic clocks, but rather doppler shifts and or the stretching of space
> Even local atomic clocks when compared to their transponded
> rates from hours ago (the Pioneer Anomaly) suggest that local
> atoms accelerate in the same way as we observe ancient atoms
> changing throughout cosmic history. The signals from hours ago
> of NASA's hydrogen maser atomic clocks were slower than the
> present rate of the clocks, What does this mean? It suggest that
> local atomic clocks are accelerating.
This proves that you are 100% absolutely WRONG!!! What you describe above would be red shift, but the Pioneer Anomaly was a blue shift.
> The earliest atoms ticked at less than 10% of the
> frequencies of modern atoms.
Baseless claim, please provide some actual unique evidence for this.
> The Bible states that God continues in unbroken continuity
> to spread out the plural heavens, He continues to to call the
> stars to come out, He continues to spread out the plural
> heavens like a tent to dwell in. The verbs in the creation
> account mostly refer to continuing actions. In a few cases
> they refer to completed actions, such as the the creation of
> the heavens and the earth (the entire universe) prior to giving
> form to the Earth. He evidently continued to give form to
> the earth by continuing to command light to be. Later he
> continued to form the heavenly luminaries and continued
> to place them in the raqiya. Raqiya is the noun of the verb to
> continually spread out.
These are nothing but your own translation based a poor understanding of Hebrew. I know it a poor understanding of it because of you tendency to insert the meaning of the Hebrew verb tense in front of English verb instead of using the equivalent English for of the verb. I also noticed that you did not give book, chapter and verse any of these. I know the reason. You know that if the gave that information that the reader could look it up in a real Bible and seek clearly that you do not to what you are walking about.> He is not spreading out the vacuum of space time. HeExcept for the fact that NO galaxy has ever been observed to spread out as you describe, NOT ONE. Nor have you ever given one reason not based on circular reasoning to conclude that the word “heavens” in the Bible ever refers to galaxies.
> visibly spread out billions of galaxies into huge local
> growth spirals. This is evidence for what he began to
> continually do on creation day four.
> Earth's continents fit together on a minuscule globe without
> major surface seas.
No they don’t. I’ve seen the illustration and you don’t get a real fit without manipulation.
> The Bible states that God continues to spread out the earth
> three times. It even says He continues to lay the foundations
> of the earth (Zechariah 12:1). The continual spreading ot the
> Earth in our day occurs above the waters. Indeed, a glbal
> expansion seam continues to form new basaltic seafloor as
> the Earth continues to grow in size.
Please provide some real evidence that the actual size of the Earth is increasing. Distances can be measured vary precisely, which is why we know the Moon is receding at 1.5 inches a year. If the Earth were really increasing in size it could probably be measured.
Zechariah 12:1 (KJB) The burden of the word of the
LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth
forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the
earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.
Here is Zechariah 12:1 from a real. One of your mistakes is in confusing the use word Earth some times it refers to the Planet Earth sometimes it refers just to land. The reference here to the foundations of the Earth shows that this is a reference to land. Since the continents literally sit on a granite crust. These foundations are indeed being continually laid by volcanic activity as plate tectonic literally pulls on the land spreading it, but with out increasing the size of the Earth,
> When considering theories of celestial mechanics it is
> important to test the basic assumption upon which
> they were contrived. Because such an assumption is
> elementary, "what is evidence" also depends on the
> first assumption.
I get it now, in your thinking it’s not evidence unless it agrees with you changing Earth idea.>What assumption? The one the Bible predicted for the last2 Peter 3:3-6 (KJB)
> days. Mockers will obfuscate the history of the plural
> heavens with their notion that all things remain the same
> (2 Peter 3:3-6)
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the
last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming?
for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as
they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the
word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth
standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed
with water, perished:
Look at these verses in a real Bible shows that Peter did not say what you claim.
Besides No one is claiming that “all thing remain the same,” such that you have to twist it your own translation to make fit your changing Earth idea, by insisting that the all changed but the change you are pushing is all thing remaining the same.
> The visible history of how galaxies grew from tiny
> naked globs as the stars continued to form and spread
> out trumps all modern theories of celestial mechanics.
None of this is has any truth behind it. Galaxies are not seen growing from tiny naked globs as the stars continued to form and spread, your so called visible history is nothing but a figment of you imagination.
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>