Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Big Bang

2»

Comments

  • #32
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,254 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    gkell2, your a day late with your OP. Fools day was the first of April.


  • #33
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    gkell2 wrote: »
    Let me see -

    "Utilizing the Hubble Space Telescope, a team of astronomers have discovered a cluster of developing galaxies an astonishing 13.1 billion light-years from Earth, making the galaxy clusters the oldest and most distant galaxy clusters ever observed."
    http://www.inquisitr.com/179511/hubble-spots-the-most-distant-galaxy-cluster-ever-observed/#4QWxgIxo771QSSMT.99

    The 'big bang' proposal is pretty definite - the oldest galaxies are the most distant so that you believe you are looking out at not only a younger/smaller Universe but can see the whole evolutionary timeline of the Universe directly.The extended conclusion is therefore that the youngest galaxies are the nearest hence the absurdity of the whole thing.

    Christianity does not have a theory of the Infinite,it reveals the Infinite in finite and temporal things.It is not your fault that you have a poor understanding of matters of faith when the Church is seen supporting these misguided idea that you can see the evolutionary timeline of anything directly as 'big bang' does and here I take my stand.

    A Christian should be able to make an immediate determination on 'big bang' and the proposers of that nonsense rather than suffering a runaround by people who can hold two contradictory views.

    gkell, you are completely misunderstanding what is being reported. The further away something is, the older the image of it is, due to the finite speed of light. Furthermore, the Hubble relation is: the further away a galaxy is, the faster it is receding from us.

    Now instead of spouting off, why don't you do a little reading.


  • #34
    gkell2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 147 ✭✭gkell2


    Morbert wrote: »
    gkell, you are completely misunderstanding what is being reported. The further away something is, the older the image[/i] of it is, due to the finite speed of light.

    Let me see again -

    "Astronomers have discovered the oldest and most distant object in the universe - a galaxy so far away that its light has taken 13.2billion years to reach Earth."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350778/Nasa-announcement-Hubble-spots-oldest-distant-galaxy-yet.html#ixzz1qyJSC1Lp

    So the oldest galaxy is the most distant and the youngest galaxy is the nearest seeing 'big bang' insists that the oldest galaxies are seen when the Universe was younger/smaller.Make up your minds what it is that you want as you are now insisting that description is wrong or is it that you can't look at what your own opinions are telling you ?.There are hundreds of articles all trying to describe the same absurdity so if you want to lose your minds then be my guest,the idea is not to drag Christianity into supporting something so unacceptable and unsightly.


  • #35
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    gkell2 wrote: »
    Let me see again -

    "Astronomers have discovered the oldest and most distant object in the universe - a galaxy so far away that its light has taken 13.2billion years to reach Earth."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350778/Nasa-announcement-Hubble-spots-oldest-distant-galaxy-yet.html#ixzz1qyJSC1Lp

    So the oldest galaxy is the most distant and the youngest galaxy is the nearest seeing 'big bang' insists that the oldest galaxies are seen when the Universe was younger/smaller.Make up your minds what it is that you want as you are now insisting that description is wrong or is it that you can't look at what your own opinions are telling you ?.There are hundreds of articles all trying to describe the same absurdity so if you want to lose your minds then be my guest,the idea is not to drag Christianity into supporting something so unacceptable and unsightly.

    I cannot parse your paragraph. So instead I will ask you this:
    Please tender a single source that relates actual galaxy age to distance from us.


  • #36
    gkell2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 147 ✭✭gkell2


    Morbert wrote: »
    I cannot parse your paragraph. So instead I will ask you this:
    Please tender a single source that relates actual galaxy age to distance from us.

    So now you want me to explain your own 'big bang' theory to you which states that the oldest galaxies are the most distant in a younger/smaller Universe and its extended conclusion that the youngest galaxies are the nearest in a older/larger Universe.

    "Spotted in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field infrared image, the latest candidate for oldest galaxy is 13.2 billion light years from Earth."

    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110126/full/news.2011.47.html

    I don't blame you from trying to avoid the extended conclusion of 'big bang' but that nonsensical junk is an enormous distraction from genuine astronomy.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    What has this thread got to with Christianity? Boards.ie has an Astronomy & Space Forum. Is there any reason why this should be discussed here rather than there?


  • #38
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    gkell2 wrote: »
    So now you want me to explain your own 'big bang' theory to you which states that the oldest galaxies are the most distant in a younger/smaller Universe and its extended conclusion that the youngest galaxies are the nearest in a older/larger Universe.

    "Spotted in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field infrared image, the latest candidate for oldest galaxy is 13.2 billion light years from Earth."

    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110126/full/news.2011.47.html

    I don't blame you from trying to avoid the extended conclusion of 'big bang' but that nonsensical junk is an enormous distraction from genuine astronomy.

    You have not done what I have asked. I will ask you again:
    Please tender a single source that relates actual galaxy age to distance from us.

    Not only do you have to tender an article discussing actual galaxy age (as opposed to the age of the image), you must also tender an example of the age/distance relation being presented as a law/consequence of the Big Bang.

    Can I also ask: Is English your first language?


  • #39
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    PDN wrote: »
    What has this thread got to with Christianity? Boards.ie has an Astronomy & Space Forum. Is there any reason why this should be discussed here rather than there?

    It should be set on fire.


  • #40
    lmaopml
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    gkell2 wrote: »
    So now you want me to explain your own 'big bang' theory to you which states that the oldest galaxies are the most distant in a younger/smaller Universe and its extended conclusion that the youngest galaxies are the nearest in a older/larger Universe.

    "Spotted in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field infrared image, the latest candidate for oldest galaxy is 13.2 billion light years from Earth."

    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110126/full/news.2011.47.html

    I don't blame you from trying to avoid the extended conclusion of 'big bang' but that nonsensical junk is an enormous distraction from genuine astronomy.

    If you read the link again, you would see that it says in the headline the 'oldest' galaxy - which it would be one of the oldest known to 'us' in the observable universe, if indeed it still exists, which we don't know because we're seeing a glimpse of it in 'time' - due to the speed of light.

    What we are now seeing through hubble is the state of the galaxy in it's 'youth' - read the article you posted.


    The galaxy is so remote, scientists are observing it at a time when the universe was in its infancy, just 480million years after the Big Bang.


    Why you think that Big Bang theory is unchristian is another matter entirely, and one which seems odd.


  • #41
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,254 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    gkell2 do you get the time frame were talking about? it's nano seconds! The universe or more accurately space time expanded faster than the speed of light.Once matter formed then the speed was constrained by the speed of light and expansion slowed.
    This makes the whole thing easier to grasp.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    nickcave
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 300 ✭✭nickcave


    gkell2 wrote: »
    Let me see again -

    "Astronomers have discovered the oldest and most distant object in the universe - a galaxy so far away that its light has taken 13.2billion years to reach Earth."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350778/Nasa-announcement-Hubble-spots-oldest-distant-galaxy-yet.html#ixzz1qyJSC1Lp

    So the oldest galaxy is the most distant and the youngest galaxy is the nearest seeing 'big bang' insists that the oldest galaxies are seen when the Universe was younger/smaller.Make up your minds what it is that you want as you are now insisting that description is wrong or is it that you can't look at what your own opinions are telling you ?.There are hundreds of articles all trying to describe the same absurdity so if you want to lose your minds then be my guest,the idea is not to drag Christianity into supporting something so unacceptable and unsightly.

    If you want to be this picky, then you could accuse the Daily Mail of poor phrasing on this. The "oldest and most distant object" part could be the source of your confusion.

    The galaxy in question is so far away that it is observed in it's 'old' state. That is, the light we observe from it was emitted 13.2 bn (or whatever) years ago. But the matter in that galaxy is no 'older' than that in our galaxy - we can just see nearer objects more approximate to their current state.

    As a side note, the people who are 'dragging' Christianity into supporting this are Christians. This isn't stuff which appears 'only in the imaginations of mathematicians' as you've mentioned previously. This is all stuff that anybody, regardless of culture or education or religion can seen with their own eyes, given the right tools. Christianity has to support findings such as these if it is to maintain any sort of credibility at all.


  • #43
    Doc Farrell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,880 ✭✭✭Doc Farrell


    PDN wrote: »
    What has this thread got to with Christianity? Boards.ie has an Astronomy & Space Forum. Is there any reason why this should be discussed here rather than there?

    No PDN, I'm fairly sure that there is not, unless one has infinite time to read. Having said that I guess no one is being forced to engage with this thread.


  • #44
    nickcave
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 300 ✭✭nickcave


    Doc Farrell wrote: »
    No PDN, I'm fairly sure that there is not, unless one has infinite time to read. Having said that I guess no one is being forced to engage with this thread.

    Well, the OP did explicitly link his opinions to Christianity on multiple occasions. I think it's better that Christians who disagree with him (as I imagine most would) would call the OP on his error, rather than shooing the issue out as irrelevant or non-Christian.


  • #45
    Doc Farrell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,880 ✭✭✭Doc Farrell


    nickcave wrote: »
    Doc Farrell wrote: »
    No PDN, I'm fairly sure that there is not, unless one has infinite time to read. Having said that I guess no one is being forced to engage with this thread.

    Well, the OP did explicitly link his opinions to Christianity on multiple occasions. I think it's better that Christians who disagree with him (as I imagine most would) would call the OP on his error, rather than shooing the issue out as irrelevant or non-Christian.

    Isn't that what the last three pages are about? If you read my first post the name of George lamaitre is there. That's enough to make my view obvious. Some say that Catholics are too engaged in astronomy, others say that they are not engaged enough. Can't please everyone!


  • #46
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    gkell2 wrote: »
    The idea is not to get caught up in 'big bang' nonsense but to sail through it and get to where genuine astronomy is.If you insist that the oldest galaxies are the most distant then the extended conclusion is that the nearest galaxies are the youngest.

    No one is saying the most distant galaxies are the oldest. All of space is the same age.

    The light that is just reaching Earth from these distant galaxies is old though, because it has had so far to travel. By definition the further something has to travel to reach Earth the older it will be by the time it gets here.
    gkell2 wrote: »
    All evolutionary sciences rely on the observer's ability to appreciate historical continuity between past and present and to endeavor to put the evolutionary puzzle together that way,we see the geological evolutionary past through rock strata and geological formations and the fossil record contains the evolutionary history of life on Earth but 'big bang' asserts that we see the evolutionary timeline of the Universe directly and that should horrify any intelligent individual.You have as much a chance of seeing your own evolutionary history from child to adult directly as you have of seeing any other evolutionary timeline directly.

    Light travels at a finite speed. We do not notice it here on Earth because everything is so close. So you don't notice the few microseconds it takes for light to travel from the object you are observing to your eye. Over the vast distances of space though the effect is much greater. It can take light billions of years to reach us on Earth, and thus the light will represent an image of something that existed billions of years ago.
    gkell2 wrote: »
    So,if students are taught that the oldest galaxies are the furthest
    Students are not taught that, so it is a bit of a moot point.


  • #47
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    What has this thread got to with Christianity? Boards.ie has an Astronomy & Space Forum. Is there any reason why this should be discussed here rather than there?

    By the sounds of it he is a Young Earth Creationist, thread could probably be merged with the mega thread.


  • #48
    Doc Farrell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,880 ✭✭✭Doc Farrell


    Zombrex wrote: »
    PDN wrote: »
    What has this thread got to with Christianity? Boards.ie has an Astronomy & Space Forum. Is there any reason why this should be discussed here rather than there?

    By the sounds of it he is a Young Earth Creationist, thread could probably be merged with the mega thread.

    Megathread this motherlode!

    Ala Fr Ted!


  • #49
    gkell2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 147 ✭✭gkell2


    Zombrex wrote: »
    No one is saying the most distant galaxies are the oldest. All of space is the same age.


    All those poor victims who cut themselves to pieces trying to make sense of the impossible conception of 'big bang',here you say space was created at the 'big bang',others say space is expanding or some other meaningless junk but central to the theme of 'big bang' is that the oldest galaxies are the most distant so the extended conclusion is that the nearest galaxies are the youngest.

    "The Hubble Space Telescope has spotted the oldest known galaxy – a mere 480 million years after the Big Bang – and its tiny size may hold clues to how stars formed during the universe's infancy.

    The tiny smudge of light captured by the orbiting Hubble telescope took 13.2 thousand million years to reach Earth, which means the galaxy was born some 480 million years after the ‘Big Bang’ that created the cosmos."

    http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/3987/oldest-galaxy-ever-seen-caught-camera

    The fictional work 1984 by Orwell is based on Nazi doctrine yet it can be applied to the many anti-faith empiricists and their 'big bang' concept -

    "The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind
    simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies
    while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become
    inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it
    back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the
    existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of
    the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary.
    Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise
    doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering
    with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge;
    and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the
    truth" Orwell

    So,the articles shown to the public are fairly clear even if the extended conclusion exposes an absurdity yet how many here now hold the contradictory view that the oldest galaxies are not the most distant as you just announced.

    The rotten ideologies beneath the outward veneer of intellectual superiority is many,many magnitudes worse than those experienced recently with the financial collapse and that the Christian Church has been playing along with this meaningless charade of limits to time and space has to stop.


  • #50
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    gkell2 wrote: »
    Let me see -

    "Utilizing the Hubble Space Telescope, a team of astronomers have discovered a cluster of developing galaxies an astonishing 13.1 billion light-years from Earth, making the galaxy clusters the oldest and most distant galaxy clusters ever observed."
    http://www.inquisitr.com/179511/hubble-spots-the-most-distant-galaxy-cluster-ever-observed/#4QWxgIxo771QSSMT.99

    The 'big bang' proposal is pretty definite - the oldest galaxies are the most distant so that you believe you are looking out at not only a younger/smaller Universe but can see the whole evolutionary timeline of the Universe directly.The extended conclusion is therefore that the youngest galaxies are the nearest hence the absurdity of the whole thing.

    Christianity does not have a theory of the Infinite,it reveals the Infinite in finite and temporal things.It is not your fault that you have a poor understanding of matters of faith when the Church is seen supporting these misguided ideas that you can see any evolutionary timeline directly as 'big bang' does .

    A Christian should be able to make an immediate determination on 'big bang' and the proposers of that nonsense rather than suffering a runaround by people who can hold two contradictory views.
    Repeating things ad nauseum doesn't make them true.
    Why don't you deal with the point I raised about the view from the "edge" of the Universe looking back here, being the same as what we see looking over there. Something the people you castigate understand perfectly well.
    Since there is no correlation between galaxy age and distance, your issue is meaningless, and just repeating yourself over and over again won't give it any validity whatsoever.

    Though I am not a believer I have no problem understanding that since the Christian God would exist outside of time and space, he would have no problem starting a Universe off with something like the big bang.


  • #51
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Take it to the Creationism thread if you want.

    Thread closed.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement