Post Reply
Page 1 of 8  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Doomsday prophecies of astronomers vs. the good news of God's Kingdom.
2 years ago  ::  May 01, 2012 - 6:43AM #1
Newtonian
Posts: 11,972

Doomsday prophecies of astronomers vs. the good news of God's Kingdom.


This is a spin off thread and to make it more appropriate for this forum section I will be quoting our literature frequently (first), along with the body of scientific literature (later).


The first doomsday prophecy I will discuss is one brought up by knowsnothing - heat death scenarios for our universe.  Heat death models are just one branch of a number of doomsday prophecies currently popular among astronomers but which are inaccurate scientifically and also contradictory to the Bible.


And the first false assertion involved with this false prophecy is the fact that thousands of galaxies are being attracted to the Great Attractor, as our literature has noted:



"Still another problem for the big bang has come from steadily mounting evidence of "bubbles" in the universe that are 100 million light-years in size, with galaxies on the outside and voids inside. Margaret Geller, John Huchra, and others at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics have found what they call a great wall of galaxies some 500 million light-years in length across the northern sky. Another group of astronomers, who became known as the Seven Samurai, have found evidence of a different cosmic conglomeration, which they call the Great Attractor, located near the southern constellations of Hydra and Centaurus. Astronomers Marc Postman and Tod Lauer believe something even bigger must lie beyond the constellation Orion, causing hundreds of galaxies, including ours, to stream in that direction like rafts on a sort of "river in space."



All this structure is baffling. Cosmologists say the blast from the big bang was extremely smooth and uniform, according to the background radiation it allegedly left behind. How could such a smooth start have led to such massive and complex structures? "The latest crop of walls and attractors intensifies the mystery of how so much structure could have formed within the 15-billion-year age of the universe," admits Scientific American—a problem that only gets worse as Freedman and others roll back the estimated age of the cosmos still more." - "Awake!," 1/22/96, p. 5.



Note the evidence for these "Great Attractors" has been known for over 20 years -  granted the most recent Great Attractor (postulated cause: interaction with another universe)  deduced from WMAP studies is very recent - but notice this in our literature over 20 years ago!



"A COMPLEX UNIVERSE



The discovery of vast structures in space may force scientists to reevaluate their theories. One such structure, referred to as "the great wall," is described as an immense, flat expanse of galaxies spread out over a thousand million light-years. Another structure is termed "the great attractor" because it is pulling so many galaxies, including our own, toward itself. The New York Times notes that such structures, which "are not simply galaxies or clusters of them, but huge ‘continents of galaxies,’" confirm theories that "the basic objects in the universe are far larger and more complicated than astronomers had imagined." One astrophysicist told the Times that many theorists were hoping that the great attractor would go away. Why? "We just don’t understand how such a large structure can be formed," he said."



So, next time you here a report, such as on a recent episode of  "Through the Wormhole," that all galaxies are receding from each other, remember the above!


 Cherubino had brought up thermodynamics - of course, heat simply distributes - it doesn't die - and that also involves the law of conservation of matter and energy.


 Heat death makes a number of assumptions, most simply unlikely - others actually false - I'll start with an obvious false assertion:


1. Many popular astronomy programs (TV), etc., falsely state that all galaxies are receding from each other and from Milky Way. Thus they teach our skies will ultimately become darker as dark energy forces apart galaxies and stars. Actual observation disproves this false assertion.


For example, most galaxies, including ours, have a large proportion of dark matter that actually causes more distant stars to revolve around galactic centers at roughly the same velocity (speed) as stars closer to galactic centers - quite different from planets revolving around stars, like in our solar system - where further planets revolve more slowly that closer planets. Dark matter exerts gravity and has, in fact, caused the formation of galaxies in our universe - and it is not going anywhere, to our knowledge - so galaxies will remain mostly in tact.


Our literature notes concerning this: (gradually as science has experienced progressive enlightenment, as has our literature):



"Has Anybody Seen My Missing Mass?



  The Andromeda galaxy, like all spiral galaxies, rotates majestically in space as if it were a giant hurricane. Astronomers can calculate the rate of rotation for many galaxies from the light spectra, and when they do, they discover something puzzling. The rotation rates seem to be impossible! All spiral galaxies seem to rotate too fast. They behave as if the visible stars of the galaxy were embedded in a much larger halo of dark matter, invisible to the telescope. "We do not know the forms of the dark matter," admits astronomer James Kaler. Cosmologists estimate that 90 percent of the missing mass is unaccounted for. They are frantic to find it, either in the form of massive neutrinos or some unknown but superabundant type of matter."



Of course, this is now called "dark matter" - as our literature further notes:



 



"Dark energy, however, is not the only "dark" oddity discovered in recent times. Another was confirmed in the 1980’s when astronomers examined various galaxies. These galaxies, as well as our own, appeared to be spinning too fast to hold together. Evidently, then, some form of matter must be giving them the necessary gravitational cohesion. But what kind of matter? Because scientists have no idea, they have called the stuff dark matter, since it does not absorb, emit, or reflect detectable amounts of radiation. How much dark matter is out there? Calculations indicate that it could make up 22 percent or more of the mass of the universe.



Consider this: According to current estimates, normal matter accounts for about 4 percent of the mass of the universe. The two big unknowns—dark matter and dark energy—appear to make up the balance." - "Awake!," 8/09, p. 18



"Dark matter was postulated in the 1930’s and confirmed in the 1980’s. Today astronomers measure how much dark matter a cluster of galaxies may have by observing how the cluster bends light from more distant objects." - Ibid., p. 18.



The latter bending of light is called "gravitational lensing" btw.   Big Rip and Heat Death scenarios emphasize dark energy but ignore the fact that dark matter has caused galazies, and  likely other attractors, to form.   Isaiah 40:22 is true, God is stretching out the heavens - however God is not thus destroying the universe - far from it!   Rather, we are in store fo untold googols (10^100's - 10 followed by 100 zeros) of years of exciting events in our universe!



As for galaxies, it is true that generally galaxies are receding away from each other - for the roughly 100 billion + galaxies. And dark energy is causing this somehow.


However, what many astronomers fail to point out when discussing "Big Rip" scenarios is that there are galactic superclusters which are NOT receding away from each other. In fact, for Milky Way, we will actually merge with Andromeda galaxy - yes, Andromeda and other galaxies in our galactic supercluster are Blue shifted, not red shifted.


"Astronomer Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) realized that a red shift in light from distant galaxies showed that our universe is expanding and thus had a beginning." - "Is There a Creator Who Cares About You?," chapter entitled "How Did Our Universe Get Here?—The Controversy," p. 14. 



Also ignored by those putting forth the heat death scenario is that there are thousands of galaxies - not just our local supercluster, that are all being attracted to a Great Attractor!


And many of these galaxies, over future trillions of years and quadrillions of years will merge/collide - and it is known by actual observation that galactic mergers/collisions cause stellar nurseries to form and many new stars to form as a result.


2.  Further showing the folly of Heat death scenarios is the assumption that our universe is a closed system that is not and never will interact with other universes. Just last night I watched an episode of "Through the Wormhole" on the science channel which discussed evidence from WMAP - the recently compiled map of the microwave background radiation of our universe (left over from the "Big Bang") which shows that all galaxies are being slightly pulled to one side. The cause was put forth that they are being pulled by another universe which is already interacting with our universe.


Obviously, if our universe is indeed currently interacting with another universe, this will add still more energy to our universe - quite the opposite of heat death scenarios.


3.  And, finally, heat death scenarios ignore the cause of the big bang itself - they fail to explain how our universe at its creation got so hot in the first place! The cause, as Genesis 1:1 states, is ultimately our Creator - but how He did this is a matter of scientific study. However the "Big Bang" was caused - it introduced an incredible amount of heat and all sorts of forms of energy to that tiny area our universe was created in (not necessarily a true singularity - perhaps simply smaller in diameter than Planck length - or perhaps a true singularity if the cause was the collision of two dimension branes - which could have collided at a singularity point).


Of course, all this involves how God created the heavens and the earth; and also Isaiah 40:22 and cross references- how God is stretching out the heavens (e.g. dark energy). God fine tuned our universe in the first place to allow for stars and life to exist - He certainly will continue to 'work' at making our universe and earth in harmony with His purpose - which we know for this earth is to be inhabited forever.  {Note: Earth is like a space-ship travelling through space at very high speed - both  around and with our sun and with our galaxy - eventually we will be visiting Andromeda galaxy!}


In short, astronomers have many doomsday prophecies which the Bible shows are false alarms - but few realize that God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth! (Revelation 11:18}


Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 01, 2012 - 9:00AM #2
cherubino
Posts: 7,277

May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


Cherubino had brought up thermodynamics - of course, heat simply distributes - it doesn't die - and that also involves the law of conservation of matter and energy.


 




Gadzooks, my good man, did you not read the article? It's satire.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 01, 2012 - 1:53PM #3
Knowsnothing
Posts: 1,150

May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


All this structure is baffling. Cosmologists say the blast from the big bang was extremely smooth and uniform, according to the background radiation it allegedly left behind. How could such a smooth start have led to such massive and complex structures? "The latest crop of walls and attractors intensifies the mystery of how so much structure could have formed within the 15-billion-year age of the universe," admits Scientific American—a problem that only gets worse as Freedman and others roll back the estimated age of the cosmos still more." - "Awake!," 1/22/96, p. 5.



Newtonian, unfortunately our ability to verify the age of the universe is constrained.  We can only measure that which we see, and if there is anything beyond 15 billion light years, whose light has not yet arrived on earth, then there is no way to know if the universe is indeed older.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


Note the evidence for these "Great Attractors" has been known for over 20 years -  granted the most recent Great Attractor (postulated cause: interaction with another universe)  deduced from WMAP studies is very recent - but notice this in our literature over 20 years ago!



"A COMPLEX UNIVERSE



The discovery of vast structures in space may force scientists to reevaluate their theories. One such structure, referred to as "the great wall," is described as an immense, flat expanse of galaxies spread out over a thousand million light-years. Another structure is termed "the great attractor" because it is pulling so many galaxies, including our own, toward itself. The New York Times notes that such structures, which "are not simply galaxies or clusters of them, but huge ‘continents of galaxies,’" confirm theories that "the basic objects in the universe are far larger and more complicated than astronomers had imagined." One astrophysicist told the Times that many theorists were hoping that the great attractor would go away. Why? "We just don’t understand how such a large structure can be formed," he said."



So, next time you here a report, such as on a recent episode of  "Through the Wormhole," that all galaxies are receding from each other, remember the above!



The generalization is true, however, Newtonian.  Galaxies, in the long run, will all recede from each other or suffer heat death.  You have to look at the bigger picture.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


 Cherubino had brought up thermodynamics - of course, heat simply distributes - it doesn't die - and that also involves the law of conservation of matter and energy.



Once all the heat is distrubuted from our sun, it will no longer provide the energy required for living things on earth.  Sorry, but all stars die out eventually.  Since that is the case, it doesn't matter how many mergers occur.  There is a net loss, or at least a dispersal of heat, in the whole system.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


 Heat death makes a number of assumptions, most simply unlikely - others actually false - I'll start with an obvious false assertion:


1. Many popular astronomy programs (TV), etc., falsely state that all galaxies are receding from each other and from Milky Way. Thus they teach our skies will ultimately become darker as dark energy forces apart galaxies and stars. Actual observation disproves this false assertion.



Actually, I saw on tv the same thing you are claiming, re: we will collide with the Andromeda galaxy.  This does not negate dispersal/loss of heat over time.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


For example, most galaxies, including ours, have a large proportion of dark matter that actually causes more distant stars to revolve around galactic centers at roughly the same velocity (speed) as stars closer to galactic centers - quite different from planets revolving around stars, like in our solar system - where further planets revolve more slowly that closer planets. Dark matter exerts gravity and has, in fact, caused the formation of galaxies in our universe - and it is not going anywhere, to our knowledge - so galaxies will remain mostly in tact.


Our literature notes concerning this: (gradually as science has experienced progressive enlightenment, as has our literature):



"Has Anybody Seen My Missing Mass?



  The Andromeda galaxy, like all spiral galaxies, rotates majestically in space as if it were a giant hurricane. Astronomers can calculate the rate of rotation for many galaxies from the light spectra, and when they do, they discover something puzzling. The rotation rates seem to be impossible! All spiral galaxies seem to rotate too fast. They behave as if the visible stars of the galaxy were embedded in a much larger halo of dark matter, invisible to the telescope. "We do not know the forms of the dark matter," admits astronomer James Kaler. Cosmologists estimate that 90 percent of the missing mass is unaccounted for. They are frantic to find it, either in the form of massive neutrinos or some unknown but superabundant type of matter." 



Ever hear of super-massive blackholes at the center of galaxies, including ours?  Maybe that has something to do with maintaining the galaxies together?


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


2.  Further showing the folly of Heat death scenarios is the assumption that our universe is a closed system that is not and never will interact with other universes. Just last night I watched an episode of "Through the Wormhole" on the science channel which discussed evidence from WMAP - the recently compiled map of the microwave background radiation of our universe (left over from the "Big Bang") which shows that all galaxies are being slightly pulled to one side. The cause was put forth that they are being pulled by another universe which is already interacting with our universe.



Another possibility is that we are simply not the center of the universe, and thefore what we perceive as being uniformly pulled towards one direction is actually our dispersal from the center of our own.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


Obviously, if our universe is indeed currently interacting with another universe, this will add still more energy to our universe - quite the opposite of heat death scenarios.


3.  And, finally, heat death scenarios ignore the cause of the big bang itself - they fail to explain how our universe at its creation got so hot in the first place! The cause, as Genesis 1:1 states, is ultimately our Creator - but how He did this is a matter of scientific study. However the "Big Bang" was caused - it introduced an incredible amount of heat and all sorts of forms of energy to that tiny area our universe was created in (not necessarily a true singularity - perhaps simply smaller in diameter than Planck length - or perhaps a true singularity if the cause was the collision of two dimension branes - which could have collided at a singularity point).



Well, don't hold my word at it, but wouldn't friction from such a densely packed particle produce such heat?  Now that I think about it, it is clear that the universe indeed has already suffered heat-loss, for it was so hot at one point, and now it has cooled down and stabilized.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


Of course, all this involves how God created the heavens and the earth; and also Isaiah 40:22 and cross references- how God is stretching out the heavens (e.g. dark energy). God fine tuned our universe in the first place to allow for stars and life to exist - He certainly will continue to 'work' at making our universe and earth in harmony with His purpose - which we know for this earth is to be inhabited forever.  {Note: Earth is like a space-ship travelling through space at very high speed - both  around and with our sun and with our galaxy - eventually we will be visiting Andromeda galaxy!}


In short, astronomers have many doomsday prophecies which the Bible shows are false alarms - but few realize that God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth! (Revelation 11:18}




Newtonian, do you believe plate-techtonics, which is essentially one big convection system, can continue indefinitely?  How will earth renew it's crust, via volcanic activity, if there is no plate movement/renewal?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 01, 2012 - 3:30PM #4
matica
Posts: 3,063

When since did astronomers become prophets? Or is this a new watchtower lie, misrepresentation or a jw derogatory term for astronomers?


Astronomers give dooms day scenario's, hypothesis, theories, not prophecies about what is going to happen on what exact date.....like the watchtower did with 1975 being the end of human/mans existence.


But in all reality, you have a better chance of being killed by a jw than you do a comet or any other celetial event.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 01, 2012 - 5:12PM #5
cherubino
Posts: 7,277

Someone who can't tell the difference between science and satire has no teaching credentials with me, that's for sure.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 01, 2012 - 6:52PM #6
Kemmer
Posts: 16,265

Seems to me that this is all theortical scientific  jargon on a massive scale by an immanent doomsday/Armageddon enthusiast.


If I needed or wanted to read about astrophysics I rather doubt I'd go after anything offered by a JW who hopes and believes the 4 Horseman of the Apocolypse are at the very gates.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 02, 2012 - 7:01AM #7
Newtonian
Posts: 11,972

Knowsnothing - Heat death scenarios are false for the reasons I gave.   I will also comment in blue:


May 1, 2012 -- 1:53PM, Knowsnothing wrote:


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


All this structure is baffling. Cosmologists say the blast from the big bang was extremely smooth and uniform, according to the background radiation it allegedly left behind. How could such a smooth start have led to such massive and complex structures? "The latest crop of walls and attractors intensifies the mystery of how so much structure could have formed within the 15-billion-year age of the universe," admits Scientific American—a problem that only gets worse as Freedman and others roll back the estimated age of the cosmos still more." - "Awake!," 1/22/96, p. 5.



Newtonian, unfortunately our ability to verify the age of the universe is constrained.  We can only measure that which we see, and if there is anything beyond 15 billion light years, whose light has not yet arrived on earth, then there is no way to know if the universe is indeed older.


Not according to the recent airing of "Through the Wormhole" - the recent evidence from WMAP - I suggest you check on the current research in this field.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


Note the evidence for these "Great Attractors" has been known for over 20 years -  granted the most recent Great Attractor (postulated cause: interaction with another universe)  deduced from WMAP studies is very recent - but notice this in our literature over 20 years ago!



"A COMPLEX UNIVERSE



The discovery of vast structures in space may force scientists to reevaluate their theories. One such structure, referred to as "the great wall," is described as an immense, flat expanse of galaxies spread out over a thousand million light-years. Another structure is termed "the great attractor" because it is pulling so many galaxies, including our own, toward itself. The New York Times notes that such structures, which "are not simply galaxies or clusters of them, but huge ‘continents of galaxies,’" confirm theories that "the basic objects in the universe are far larger and more complicated than astronomers had imagined." One astrophysicist told the Times that many theorists were hoping that the great attractor would go away. Why? "We just don’t understand how such a large structure can be formed," he said."



So, next time you here a report, such as on a recent episode of  "Through the Wormhole," that all galaxies are receding from each other, remember the above!



The generalization is true, however, Newtonian.  Galaxies, in the long run, will all recede from each other or suffer heat death.  You have to look at the bigger picture.


Knowsnothing - and you have to look at the local section of thousands of galaxies streaming on a "river" in space towards a great attractor.   It may be true that the other hundreds of billions of galaxies will recede - but then recede into what?   Again, there is some evidence that another universe is interacting with ours.


The thousands of galaxies attracted to the Great Attractor are NOT ultimately receeding from each other.  


Did you know Milky Way will merge with Andromeda, for example?


Also, is our universe cooling off or heating up?   What is the evidence from the IGM (= intergalactic medium) - or do you even know???


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


 Cherubino had brought up thermodynamics - of course, heat simply distributes - it doesn't die - and that also involves the law of conservation of matter and energy.



Once all the heat is distrubuted from our sun, it will no longer provide the energy required for living things on earth.  Sorry, but all stars die out eventually.  Since that is the case, it doesn't matter how many mergers occur.  There is a net loss, or at least a dispersal of heat, in the whole system.


Is there really?  Is the IGM cooling off?   Sorry, but there are likely thousands of galactic mergers we will be affected by as we approach the Great Attractor and likely become gravitationally bound with thousands of other galaxies.  


Galactic mergers, such as the upcoming one with Andromeda and Milky Way, cause the formation of stellar nurseries and the formation of new stars.


Also, our sun can be rejuvenated back to early main sequence at that merger if Jehovah fine tunes a collision of a brown dwarf with our sun - see Scientific American article "When stars collide" for the evidence.


Those who accept various doomsday prophecies of astronomers generally reject the plethora of evidence our universe has been fine tuned by our Creator.    And so they naturally assume our Creator will do not more "work" after his sabbath day ends - but such is not the case!


Are you aware of the many ways our universe was fine tuned by our Creator - such as the fine tuned ratios of the 4 forces of physics, or the complex fine tuning of the expansion rate of our universe?


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


 Heat death makes a number of assumptions, most simply unlikely - others actually false - I'll start with an obvious false assertion:


1. Many popular astronomy programs (TV), etc., falsely state that all galaxies are receding from each other and from Milky Way. Thus they teach our skies will ultimately become darker as dark energy forces apart galaxies and stars. Actual observation disproves this false assertion.



Actually, I saw on tv the same thing you are claiming, re: we will collide with the Andromeda galaxy.  This does not negate dispersal/loss of heat over time.


OK, you knew that!   But what of the other thousands of galaxies heading for the great attractor during the upcoming quadrillion years?    And what of the interaction of our universe with other universes in the upcoming googol years?


And where is God is these heat death models?   Where is the cause of the initial heating of our universe at its creation actually addressed?    Do you realize how much energy was fine tuned into a very small space (perhaps even a singularity) some 12 billion years ago (one age estimate for our universe - see astronomer Wendy Friedman's calculations) at the time of the "Big Bang?"   Where is the cause of that effect addressed in heat death models?


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


For example, most galaxies, including ours, have a large proportion of dark matter that actually causes more distant stars to revolve around galactic centers at roughly the same velocity (speed) as stars closer to galactic centers - quite different from planets revolving around stars, like in our solar system - where further planets revolve more slowly that closer planets. Dark matter exerts gravity and has, in fact, caused the formation of galaxies in our universe - and it is not going anywhere, to our knowledge - so galaxies will remain mostly in tact.


Our literature notes concerning this: (gradually as science has experienced progressive enlightenment, as has our literature):



"Has Anybody Seen My Missing Mass?



  The Andromeda galaxy, like all spiral galaxies, rotates majestically in space as if it were a giant hurricane. Astronomers can calculate the rate of rotation for many galaxies from the light spectra, and when they do, they discover something puzzling. The rotation rates seem to be impossible! All spiral galaxies seem to rotate too fast. They behave as if the visible stars of the galaxy were embedded in a much larger halo of dark matter, invisible to the telescope. "We do not know the forms of the dark matter," admits astronomer James Kaler. Cosmologists estimate that 90 percent of the missing mass is unaccounted for. They are frantic to find it, either in the form of massive neutrinos or some unknown but superabundant type of matter." 



Ever hear of super-massive blackholes at the center of galaxies, including ours?  Maybe that has something to do with maintaining the galaxies together?


Yes, it has something to do with it, but actual computer models shown on a recent TV episode of "Through the Wormhole" on the science channel show galaxies will not form without about 5 times the amount of dark matter in ratio to normal matter - super-massive black holes account for the center of gravity, but only dark matter accounts for the high speed orbits of stars distant from galactic centers.  


As an independent researcher, I postulate that dark energy is not actually increasing - rather, I postulate that its effect is opposite to that of gravity - that while gravity decreases with distance, dark energy increases with distance.  Just a my own theory, btw.  Try disproving it!


If so, then dark energy will have a decreasing effect on the local thousands of galaxies as they approach the great attractor in future trillions of years - while granted dark energy will have an overall increasing effect in the much bigger picture - but then there is also the Great Wall!


Of course, Isaiah 40:22 says God is stretching out the heavens - and now we know God is using dark energy.   Any prophecy of the future of our universe requires we know how God will infuse dark energy into our universe in the future.


However, up til now our universe's expansion rate is incredibly fine tuned - nearly exactly omega=1!   All the more remarkable now that we know it is not simply gravity that is involved!


Just slighty faster and our universe would have dissipated by now and just slightly slower and our universe would have collapsed by now!   Why would God stop fine tuning our universe in the future?   Why wouldn't God fine tune a merger of a brown dwarf with our sun before its entry into red giant phase and thus return our sun to early main sequence?   In fact, btw, man may by then be able to fine tune such a merger!


I should add that some astronomers have not joined the prophets of doom and advocate various ways us mere humans could avert the various future hazards.


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


2.  Further showing the folly of Heat death scenarios is the assumption that our universe is a closed system that is not and never will interact with other universes. Just last night I watched an episode of "Through the Wormhole" on the science channel which discussed evidence from WMAP - the recently compiled map of the microwave background radiation of our universe (left over from the "Big Bang") which shows that all galaxies are being slightly pulled to one side. The cause was put forth that they are being pulled by another universe which is already interacting with our universe.



Another possibility is that we are simply not the center of the universe, and thefore what we perceive as being uniformly pulled towards one direction is actually our dispersal from the center of our own.


We are not the center of the universe!   Isaiah 40:22 context shows we are insignificant - as a mere unreality - compared with our universe.   Expansion is not simply from a center - the big picture is like the balloon model (though we do not know the actual shape of the universe) where each point on the surface (fabric of space/time) expands from each other point and more distant points expand away faster.   I simply added that this is the overall picture - we are in a specific section that is not expanding but rather contracting towards a Great Attractor - one must consider both the local and the big picture - not one or the other, but both!


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


Obviously, if our universe is indeed currently interacting with another universe, this will add still more energy to our universe - quite the opposite of heat death scenarios.


3.  And, finally, heat death scenarios ignore the cause of the big bang itself - they fail to explain how our universe at its creation got so hot in the first place! The cause, as Genesis 1:1 states, is ultimately our Creator - but how He did this is a matter of scientific study. However the "Big Bang" was caused - it introduced an incredible amount of heat and all sorts of forms of energy to that tiny area our universe was created in (not necessarily a true singularity - perhaps simply smaller in diameter than Planck length - or perhaps a true singularity if the cause was the collision of two dimension branes - which could have collided at a singularity point).



Well, don't hold my word at it, but wouldn't friction from such a densely packed particle produce such heat? 


It cooled down, yes. However, if I remember correctly, the IGM is currently heating up again! I will have to re-research that unless someone else beats me to it! 


There were no particles at the creation of our universe - it was too hot for matter to exist - only energy existed. This is appropriate, since God created the universe, and God is a spirit - which, by definition, involves invisible active force.


Actually Isaiah 40:26 shows plural forms of God's dynamic energy (Hebrew plural ohnim) as well as power (Hebrew koach) were involved with the existence of stars - astro-physicists merely add detail to this, such as the newly discovered invisible energy (aka active force) called 'dark energy.'


Not only were there no particles at the origin of our universe (just energy) but some astronomers propose a singularity - hence no distance involved for friction to occur! Two dimensional branes that collide will do so at a point/singularity - do you understand this? Don't feel bad - I have yet to read any astronomer taking note of this simple fact!



 


May 1, 2012 -- 6:43AM, Newtonian wrote:


Of course, all this involves how God created the heavens and the earth; and also Isaiah 40:22 and cross references- how God is stretching out the heavens (e.g. dark energy). God fine tuned our universe in the first place to allow for stars and life to exist - He certainly will continue to 'work' at making our universe and earth in harmony with His purpose - which we know for this earth is to be inhabited forever.  {Note: Earth is like a space-ship travelling through space at very high speed - both  around and with our sun and with our galaxy - eventually we will be visiting Andromeda galaxy!}


In short, astronomers have many doomsday prophecies which the Bible shows are false alarms - but few realize that God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth! (Revelation 11:18}




Newtonian, do you believe plate-techtonics, which is essentially one big convection system, can continue indefinitely?  How will earth renew it's crust, via volcanic activity, if there is no plate movement/renewal?




Knowsnothing - Plate tectonics produced catastrophic effects at the Noachian flood and have been slowing ever since.  Likely they will stop moving, as has happenned on other planets.   That would be a result of the thickening of the crust, and may be why we will have no destructive earthquakes on the paradise earth - if I am correct.


Btw, that is another reason heat death is unlikely.   Our planet is like a spaceship - we are not simply shielded from solar radiation by our Creator's fine tuning of the earth!   Did you know that earth's core is about as hot as the sun's surface!    There are many reasons for this - and motion is one of them.    Will motion ever end in our universe?   I doubt that!  


And do you know how long earth could retain heat if we deliberately insulated its surface from the cold of space should we decide to travel away from our sun as it loses mass and gravity - or should God decide - or perhaps should God allow man to decide (I'm talking about future trillions of years, btw!).   Did you know that simply the moon's tidal forces on earth's core, not to mention radioactive decay, heat earth's core?


Do you think some day we could use neclear fusion as fuel for heat?   How long would such fuel last?   I digress.   My point is that you can believe doomsday prophets - or you can look for ways to avoid the problems that are foreseen.    Frankly, given technological advances of man on his own would solve many of the foreseen problems  - man blessed with Jehovah's help is, frankly, mind-boggling to try to conceive of what can be accomplished in the future.


So you can wallow in doomsday prophecies or enjoy the good news of God's Kingdom!

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 02, 2012 - 7:08AM #8
Newtonian
Posts: 11,972

May 1, 2012 -- 5:12PM, cherubino wrote:


Someone who can't tell the difference between science and satire has no teaching credentials with me, that's for sure.




Cherubino - Do you have any actual scientific evidence you feel I ignored, or that contradict what I posted?


I suggest you do some actual research.   Try Scientific American, for example.   I will be posting quotes from that source soon - after I take care of other responsibilities.


I did not read your link - and I am not interested in satire on this thread.   If you want to post seriously about thermodynamics, I welcome that!


While your at it, how did the universe get so hot in the first place - i.e. at the creation of our universe?


And why does life exist despite entropy?   How does entropy help identify life vs. death?   In fact, what are the various scientific definitions of entropy, starting with thermodynamics and then extending to other fields of science?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 02, 2012 - 9:02AM #9
cherubino
Posts: 7,277

May 2, 2012 -- 7:08AM, Newtonian wrote:


May 1, 2012 -- 5:12PM, cherubino wrote:


Someone who can't tell the difference between science and satire has no teaching credentials with me, that's for sure.




Cherubino - Do you have any actual scientific evidence you feel I ignored, or that contradict what I posted?


I suggest you do some actual research.   Try Scientific American, for example.   I will be posting quotes from that source soon - after I take care of other responsibilities.


I did not read your link - and I am not interested in satire on this thread.   If you want to post seriously about thermodynamics, I welcome that!


While your at it, how did the universe get so hot in the first place - i.e. at the creation of our universe?


And why does life exist despite entropy?   How does entropy help identify life vs. death?   In fact, what are the various scientific definitions of entropy, starting with thermodynamics and then extending to other fields of science?




Newtonian,


These are metaphyshical and theological questions which are not, in and of themselves, scientific hypotheses. Consequently they are neither verifiable nor falsifiable with scientific evidence, because scientifc findings cannot be used to support or rebut metaphysical & theological speculations. Amassing scientific citations may satisfy the theologian, but they remain just as meaningless to a scientist as would a defendant's horoscope be to a jury in a court of law. You can't take one interpretive framework's epistemology and apply it in other frameworks that reject that method of inquiry as invalid. One simply can't govern free inquiry with the authority of revelation and still call it free inquiry. This is a crucial point. Do you see it?


As Michael Polanyi put it in this book on epistemology and the philospohy of science:


"Nobody knows more than a tiny fragment of science well enough to judge its validity and value at first hand. For the rest he has to rely on views accepted at second hand on the authority of a community of people accredited as scientists. But this accrediting depends in its turn on a complex organization. For each member of the community can judge at first hand only a small number of his fellow members, and yet eventually each is accredited by all. What happens is that each recognizes as scientists a number of others by whom he is recognized as such in return, and these relations form chains which transmit these mutual recognitions at second hand through the whole community. This is how each member becomes directly or indirectly accredited by all. The system extends into the past. Its members recognize the same set of persons as their masters and derive from this allegiance a common tradition, of which each carries on a particular strand." (Emphasis mine.)

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 02, 2012 - 9:17AM #10
AnnOMaly
Posts: 3,198

Also, our sun can be rejuvenated back to early main sequence at that merger if Jehovah fine tunes a collision of a brown dwarf with our sun - see Scientific American article "When stars collide" for the evidence.



Why the heck would Jehovah need to use any collision to rejuvenate the sun (which, according to the article, would further reduce its lifespan long-term and nuke the earth's atmosphere and water)? He could use his abundance of 'dynamic energy' instead. Why make a simple solution complicated, Newt


Wink


Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 8  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook