Change and Time in Genesis

Faith & Science Conversation
84

I was thinking of Heidegger, whose prose is so dense even the professors often can’t agree on its meaning.

Just taking a stab at this, but the vocabulary of “differentiation” and “undifferentiation” sows the seeds of confusion. If we talk about undifferentiation between contingent (created) beings and God, who is neither contingent nor created, we are making a category mistake and wandering into nonsense, in my opinion. God certainly is intimately involved with his creation, and when he “withdraws his Spirit,” the creature returns to dust, but when you blur the line between creature and Creator, all sorts of philosophical shenanigans will ensue.

85

On the foundation of elementary assumptions, everything else depends. Scientists circularly measure the billions of years with their assumptions (1) that a time continuum exists and (2) that atoms are perpetual motion engines.

The first assumption came from the pagan Greeks, that they could divide orbital periods and rotations into tiny segments of a time continuum.

The second assumption (that matter is not changing relationally) came from the medieval scholastics. The Catholics wrote in Latin, instead of Greek. The Latin language had a noun form of the verb to be (esse): essentia. The present of the Greek verb to be (einai) could not be static. The Greeks did not have the grammatical tools for imagining matter as having fixed, unchanging properties. The religious notion that the essence of substance is changeless originated in the Catholic West, which is why science matured in the West.

The billions of years are not observations. They are circular reasoning and circular measuring.

The Bible repeatedly states that the Old Testament era is the eons. Not one verse in the Bible states that the Earth is young. However, we live in the era when the predicted events (kairos) are short (1 Cor 7:29). Jacob, who lived in the era before the invention of the philosophical time, claimed that the days and years of the son are shorter and worse than the days and years of the fathers (Genesis 47:9). Job describes the vast, slowly accumulating geological phenomena that corresponded to a lifetime during the dinosaur era (Job 14).

All old people remember how much slower live was in their youth. Indeed, the optical parallax to the Sun and planets continues to decrease even since scientists defined the AU canonically with their clocks.

We confirm the vast age of the universe with telescopes. However, the orbits accelerate outwards, not closing, opening outwards as billions of galaxies grew out from the unformed matter God created first.

A Western person might insist on a causal reason why days and years should continue to accelerate. The visible history of galaxies is your fried. The atomic clocks and the orbits accelerate together.

  1. Evidently gravity is NOT a perpetual motion effect as in Newton and Einstein. It evidently is what emerges from matter as it keeps on changing its visible clock frequencies.

  2. Gravimeter and paraconical pendulum experiments show that the pull of the Sun on the Earth has an aberration. It propagates at light speed. This means the Earth pulls more on the sunrise than the sunset. This slight imbalance steadily accelerates days and years together while opening orbits outward into logarithmic spacings. The solar system, exoplanets and spiral galaxy arms have logarithmic spacings becasue clocks and orbits continually accelerate together. Evidently a single year, a few thousand years ago, was a geological age, as Job so plainly describes in the Bible. By the way, the ancients never mentioned a blue sky. The Egyptians painted the sky tan and the Sun red as they worked their fields without hats or coats. Evidently the Sun in that era was a nearby infrared star.

Change and time are opposite worldviews.

Victor

86

Sorry. I meant the “Sun” pulls more on Earth’s dawn than its sunset. This tangential pull decreases with the square root of the distance, unlike the straight pull that decreases with the square of the distance. This is why orbits get pushed outward, the farthest have a greater outward pushing imbalance than the nearest. I suggest that this why orbits migrate into logarithmic spacings as we observe at all ranges, local orbits and galactic orbits.
Victor

87

Assuming the earth is round, the distance from the point on the earth’s surface at dawn to the sun would be the same distance as the point on the earth’s surface at sunset. Since the distances are the same wouldn’t the forces be the same? And wouldn’t these forces work to decrease the oribital distance? Or are you saying that the velocity of the surface is also a factor?

88

Victor, I hope you don’t mind me saying this, but I can’t help getting the impression on reading your very erudite but at the same time rather opaque contributions to this thread, that you’re talking at us rather than interacting with us here. You don’t seem to respond to specific criticisms or questions, for example – or if you are, it’s not clear which points you’re responding to, or how.

It’s making me wonder what you’re doing. Are you running a chatbot or something? Or are you setting some kind of riddle for us to solve, as your user name suggests?

1 Like
89

Today, the pull of the Sun arrives from about 20 seconds in front - towards Earth’s bow. Why? The Earth moves as the the sun’s gravity transits. Light does the same thing. Think of a long barreled refractor telescope. The telescope is moving as the light travels down the barrel so that its position is offset slightly when it arrives at the eyepiece. You compensate for the aberration of light by adjusting the pointing of the telescope. There are several kinds of light aberration, such as diurnal that in which the latitude and the rotation of the Earth both affect the apparent position of a star.

Experiments show that the Sun and Moon’s pull on the Earth also has an aberration (it propagates at light speed). The bow of the Earth is the dawn. If gravity has an aberration, as experiments suggest, that the Sun must pull more on the dawn than the sunset, incrementally accelerating days and years throughout Earth history. Perhaps this is why Jacob, who doubtless never heard of gravity, said the days and years of the son are shorter and worse than the days and years of the fathers. He didn’t need theories of gravity to detect this. He had the accounts of genealogies, that recorded how much longer his ancestors lived than later generations did.

wikipedia on aberration

Days and years accelerate relative to what? Not to clocks, because the visible history of galaxies shows that the atomic clocks and the orbits accelerate together as galaxies intrinsically grow in defiance of the laws of physics.

In response to James McKay, I am sorry I do not necessarily respond to all suggestions. What I am suggesting is the first principle of Western science is false. It is upon that principle that we invent notions of what is evidence and what is not.

You cannot examine a different first principle while remaining in the castle built on another arche. You have to first question the fundamentalist assumption of science itself. Why? Because the Bible predicted it and clearly denies it. To test a first principle you must examine the evidence with different rules of evidence, change instead of time. The two systems are not compatible.

The Biblical authors could not talk about time because the worldview of ordinary people, even in the New Testament era, was change, not science.

Victor

90

Like 5 o’clock, it is always dawn somewhere, as well as always sunset somewhere. Light from the sun actually hits the earth first at noon since that part of the Earth is the closest to the sun, as light travels much faster than the earth travels through space, though I question why I am responding, as I cannot make sense of what you are saying.

91

I think you’re on to something, James. I teach physics (even if only at the high school level), and the following makes no sense to me at all and seems like it could have been produced by a partially focused but still random text generator.

Still, Victor (or whatever you are --okay, I know …you are a “changing earth creationist”), – you had me ever-so-slightly intrigued! [I originally said here that a Google search reveals nothing of ‘paraconical pendulums’ --but I must have mistyped it … I see it now. I’ll take that as egg on my face.]

So how about it, Victor? Can you pass the ‘reply to this with a straight-face emoji’ chatbot test?

92

@godsriddle

I strongly encourage you to invest in a few geology books… they were the first ones to use a Variety of scientific methods to arrive at the same answer: that the Earth is billions of years old, and the age of dinosaurs is much, much older than anything described in the Bible.

You still seem to want to have it both ways: you say the Bible allows for a very old Earth… and then you put dinosaurs with humans…

Let me know when you find a YEC who agrees that life on Earth arrived millions of years ago…

YEC estimates for the Flood put it around the 5th Egyptian dynasty … and yet we find not a peep in any of the Egyptian writings about such a big, big flood!

93

I didn’t bother to mention this in the thread at all, but I did google “godsriddle” last week, and I found the website in the first result. The website has pretty odd information. Today I tried to access the website again, but all I got is “Parse error…”

In the same Google search page, there are also user profiles in some websites named “godsriddle”. Judging from the comments, it appears to be the same person.

94

The noble lauriate Maurice Allias was perhaps the first physicist to invent a paraconical pendulum. His pendulum varied its precession relative to the positiion (overhead) of the Sun, Moon and perhaps the planets. He ran two experiments during solar eclipses in which the precession of his pendulum suddenly altered during the eclipse and then returned to the changes it was recording before the eclipses.

Recently Chinese physicists recorded, using precision gravimeters, the changes in tilt of the solid ground during solar eclipses. I believe it was conducted in Manchuria). The results were similar to experiments with distant quasars passing near Jupiter as detected by VLBI. In both cases the propagation of gravity seems to move at about the speed of light. If gravity is like light, then the solar gravity must pull more on Earth dawn than the sunset.

These are short term experiments, changes observed during an eclipse or with pendulum precessions over the course of a month. No one has ever actually detected gravity. As Einstein noted, it involves reasoning in a circle. We only know about gravity because we see something change how it moves. To precisely “measure” gravity requires assumptions about the existence of a time continuum and a theory that clocks measure time.

This is why galactic history is so important. Billions of galaxies spread out from point-like cores, the star streams moving outward in violation of the laws of gravity. The atomic clocks and the orbits accelerate together.

As a teacher of physics, it is important to investigate the fundamental medieval assumption upon which the laws of physics depends. The visible history of the universe shows that the assumption is false, as one should understand from the Bible.

Victor

Gravity , simply becuse our motion in orbits causes us to plow into the SUns gravity.

have an aberration. ed d

95

Prune juice and asteroids are different world views.

96

Asteroids? Aren’t those what constipated astronauts get? Thus I suppose the prune juice.

3 Likes
97

Look out for a big bang!

1 Like
98

Neither is a worldview. A worldview is a philosophical principle for interpreting the world.

The Western worldview is radically different from the worldview of the biblical prophets. NOT one single verse could have been interpreted with a western worldview by a contemporary. Why not? They accepted fundamental change as real and we deny it.

The foundations for the Western worldview originated with the Greeks. They were the first to interpret nature with philosophical ideas like a “time continuum”. However, the Greeks failed to invent an empirical science because they did not have grammatical tools to get around the ancient worldview about change.

1500 years later, the scholastics discovered Aristotle. The Dominican Thomas wrote volumes trying to make Catholic doctrines fit Aristotle. He did not know he was inventing the foundation for science. In Catholic theology, God is absolutely changeless, not in time. God therefore, could create changeless substances. The notion that an atom today is the same as one yesterday is the basis for almost everything scientists do, measure and mathematicate with.

Yet when we compare the speed of an atomic clock today with its speed yesterday (as reflected through the transponders of distant spacecraft) local atomic clocks evidently accelerate just like the atomic clocks in billions of galaxies (their speed is inversely related to distance).

That is not allowed in the scientific system. Science was founded on the law like principle (arche ktisis in Greek, 2 Peter 3:3-6) that all things remain the same.

That is why visible evidence trumps measuring. We can see how billions of galaxies spread out from primordial cores as the visible properties of all matter keep shifting. The clocks, the orbits and matter’s volume all change together.
required a Western worldview.

Paul commands us in the imperative:

1 Corinthians 3:18-20 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, he must become foolish, so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world (the orderly system) is foolishness before God. For it is written, “He is THE ONE WHO CATCHES THE WISE IN THEIR CRAFTINESS”; and again, “THE LORD KNOWS THE REASONINGS of the wise, THAT THEY ARE USELESS.”

The triumph of the Bible over science will bring great glory to the all wise Creator.

Victor

99

Prune juice will triumph over asteroids.

100

@godsriddle,

Thank you for bringing us up to date on some fringe science from the 1950’s/1960s…

I’m not sure what you are trying to prove. Did you know that the orbiting satellites that process GPS triangulation require the tiniest adjustments in time-keeping … in proportion to the theoretically predicted increase in clock speed for clocks orbiting high above the gravity field of Earth (vs. all of us who are living on the Earth’s service)?

If these tiny adjustments were not made, we would not arrive at the correct addresses we plug into the GPS systems?

I think that’s a little more impressive than un-repeatable pendulum experiments more than half a century ago…

101

It’s prune juice, George! Prune juice!!!

1 Like
102

Actually, a number of paraconical experiments continue. A book that relates some of the experimental data is [Table of contents for the book here] (http://www.webalice.it/a.iovane/toc.htm) “Should the Laws of Gravity be Reconsidered.” Some experiments detect an anomalous change in pendulum periods that even correlates with an alignment with the center of the galaxy.

Gravitational research for external effects is rarely repeatable. In fact, the measurement of the “Gravitational Constant” is imprecise probably because all sorts of motions and even distant objects can affect such a measurement even when they use torsion balances. Although a physicist can “correct” for some error estimates, the external gravity factor is a variable that rarely repeats.

The notion that clocks measure time, even when the Cesium clocks reside on a GPS satellite, does not prove the relativity of time. Tracking stations have fixed coordinates and “correct” the signals to make the triangulation work. Spacecraft navigators make several burns to correct the speed and direction of the approaching craft to fit position of the planet relative to background stars. Despite these corrections, all landings on Mars are long, even for MSL that used complex corrections even during atmospheric entry.

Cesium clocks do not measure time. They merely define it. All cesium clocks are two clocks (an input radiator and an output counter). The two clocks are linked with a feedback circuit. If atoms change relationally, all atomic clocks would keep tuning themselves to the changing atoms.

The glory of the universe is that it probably contains upwards of 5 trillion galaxies at many ranges. The speed of light is minuscule, relative to these vast distance. This is why cosmic history is the only history that is Visible as it happened long ago.

The earliest galaxies, bright enough to analyze, clock much less than 10% of the frequencies of modern atoms. Even local atomic clocks, when compared to their own reflections through the transponders of distant spinning spacecraft, also appear to accelerate in the same direction and “distance rate” as the clocks in billions of ancient galaxies.

It is not just the atoms that change. The orbits also accelerate outwards as billions of galaxies (and galaxy clusters) spread out in defiance of the laws of gravity. To prevent what is visible scientists fill the universe up with undetectable magic: the 99% invisible universe. In the biblical Creation text, God continues to command the lights in the plural heavens (that include the Sun and Moon) to become spreading things (noun raqiya). This is the most powerful evidence for the grammatical creation account.

Victor

103

The table of content is there but it doesn’t appear that the publisher is still in business. I wonder why.