Time and Starlight

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hope you’ve been struggling with this for a long time. First it was the ND evangelical church. Now the Lutherans.
I’m a convert from evangelicalism to Catholicism. When I approached the local priest at the age of 17, convicted by the Spirit to enter the Catholic Church, the priest asked me to wait. I met with him one on one for a year before I was finally received. Why? He reiterated again and again that entering the Church was like getting married. It’s a life long solemn commitment to Christ. We even make “vows” (our baptismal promises).
When your spouse gets boring or isn’t as sexy as they once were, do we shop around for a new spouse?
 
Ive still been going to the ND church, too, trying to decide. And no, I wouldn’t toss out my husband but if he bored me I’d probably spend more and more time doing things I enjoy.
 
The starlight, or rather the color of the light, the so-called red shift, is not about earth, is about the universe. Yes it is evidence that the universe is very old. The universe can be very old but the earth can be young. There are galaxies and planets being formed all the time.
Disclaimer: I am not a young or old earther I have no position on the matter.
 
Hope1960 said:
Boring, unrelatable homilies, boring outdated music, there’s nothing there for me except Communion.
Click to expand...
Hope, rather than looking to other denominations have you tried other parishes in your area that may be closer to what you want?
 
Hope1960 said:
Boring, unrelatable homilies, boring outdated music, there’s nothing there for me except Communion.
Click to expand...
Hope,

So, then… go to Catholic Mass for communion, and then find other sources for exciting music and lectures!
 
Delphinus said:
Obviously I feel this explanation has a lot of holes in it,
Click to expand...
It does.
not the least of which is the accuracy of measurements taken by telescope hundreds of years ago…
Click to expand...
Correct. The margins of error on those early measurements were huge.
but this was the most scientifically minded explanation I heard.
Click to expand...
It is neither scientifically nor theologically correct. The speed of light has been constant for the last 10 billion years, and very probably for 2 billion years before that, as shown by measurements of the Fine Structure Constant, which includes c (the speed of light) in its definition.

Theologically we have:
“But I, the LORD, make the following promise: I have made a covenant governing the coming of day and night. I have established the fixed laws governing heaven and earth.” – Jeremiah 33:25-26 (emphasis added)
Click to expand...
Those “fixed laws” include the speed of light; see Maxwell’s equations for just one example. Young earthers have to rely on changing laws to try to support their views.
 
Delphinus said:
The Young Earthers I read this from propose that at the creation of the Universe the speed of light was much, much, MUCH faster than it is now, and has been exponentially slowing down. So, light that would appear to be millions or even BILLIONS of years old, would only appear to be that old because the light was originally travelling much faster.
Click to expand...
Umm… hang on a second. For that to be true, wouldn’t that have to mean that the ‘red shift’ of further-away objects would look quantitatively different than the red shift of nearer objects? (No, I’m not a physicist, and no, I didn’t sleep at a Holiday Inn last night, so… little help, please?)
 
Gorgias said:
wouldn’t that have to mean that the ‘red shift’ of further-away objects would look quantitatively different than the red shift of nearer objects?
Click to expand...
The red shift of further way objects is quantitatively different. That is why Hubble suggested the universe is expanding, to explain why the red shift increases with distance from us.

The theorists are presumably taking that data and trying to apply a different explanation, light speeding up rather than space expanding. I doubt they can make a coherent model that way, but they should try.

The difficulty is that it proposes a number of axioms that we cannot imagine, ie light travelling faster than c= the speed of light. C is a foundational constant in our current physics, to the point that it has no real meaning to say “faster than c…” Does time disappear? Mass?

It is like a non-euclidean geometry where parallel lines intersect. It makes no sense, unless you use it on a curved surface. Like our planet. 🌎
 
Dovekin said:
The red shift of further way objects is quantitatively different. That is why Hubble suggested the universe is expanding, to explain why the red shift increases with distance from us.
Click to expand...
Except that, if the light from the objects was slowing over time, as YECs suggest, then the red shift should change in the other direction… right?
 
Gorgias said:
Except that, if the light from the objects was slowing over time, as YECs suggest, then the red shift should change in the other direction… right?
Click to expand...
I have no idea.

Light shifts toward the red because the wavelengths get longer. How does a change in speed affect that? Wouldn’t slowing down also make them longer? Or would slowing make the distance shorter, increasing wavelength? I think it would increase red shift, but dealing with uncertain definitions of speed and distance confuses me. Isn’t it that speed increases with distance, shortening the wavelengths?

Anyway, the data is that there is a shift toward the red. That is caused by several factors iirc. One component is the expanding universe. If decelerating light is another factor, it can increase or decrease the red shift and still figure into it. We only know the sum of all the factors from the data. Maybe they proposed a more rapid expansion to compensate for sped up light? Idk.
 
Don’t have any around here. And I’ve been to all the Catholic Churches nearby and even farther away and they’re all the same.
 
Last edited:
Maybe consider whether it’s possible that you being entertained every waking moment is not the most important thing on Earth.
 
:roll_eyes:

Well now, that’s food for thought. I believe that worship can be both enjoyable and faith filled.
 
Last edited:
Hope1960 said:
I know this video is kind of long, but I thought he brought up some good arguments. No? Yes?
Click to expand...
AiG have as much scientific credibility as their views on the Catholic Church do with Catholics. Their arguments have zero scientific credibility.
 
Delphinus said:
Galileo (I think?) used Jupiter’s moons to calculate it and got a much faster speed than we know it to be now.
Click to expand...
The person to measure the speed of light by using the moons of Jupiter as reference was Ole Rømer, a danish astronomer. Galileo did also propose experiments, but they featured moving lanterns. Ole Rømer was actually surprisingly close considering the crudeness of the instruments he worked with. He measured the speed of light to be 220000 kilometers per second.

This is an artist rendering of his setup. Given that, I wouldn’t consider an error of 26% as too far off.

805d59f3ad36ade6cef2230b58cd108e46657331.jpeg
 
This Jason Lisle is really smart. And the pastor at the LCMS church suggested AiG.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top