4sure said... Regarding the third day. It says God created herbs that had the seed within itself. Could it be that possibly God created all the seed but the seed did not produce vegetation until later? Look at Genesis 2 Vrs 5See Gen 2: 5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth....
I thought this was an interesting point, and Moses is adding some more details to his creation account, he mentions that streams had come up to water the seeds, and then God formed man. So this could have occurred anytime between the 3rd and 6th day. Then, says Moses, God created man from the dust of the ground, so this occurred after the watering of the seeds, it would be safe I think to assume here that it took more than one day, or 12 hours- (if you are literalistic, evening-morning is only 12 hours not 24) -for the trees to grow enough to bear fruit to sustain the life of both the animals and man.
God does everything in real time, he had all the mechanisms for life, growth, and the workings of the universe in place, he would not have any need to do anything outside or above and beyond the mechanisms he already had in place. So I do not think it follows that he would instantly have seeds produce mature trees and plants, or do I think it plausible that God created the Garden of Eden that way, instead he would have seeded it rather than have it instantly and magically appear.
So Gen 2 follows without contradiction Gen 1, and is simply filling in a little more detail to the original account.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Friday, February 4, 2011
More On how Gravity Works
If What I am Saying Is True:
Now if what I am saying is true, then the time it takes a second to pass in outer space would be different than the time it takes a second to pass on earth. This is true, here is an exert from: timezone.com: http://www.timezone.com/library/archives/archives0072
About the difficulty of clock synchronization:
Time could only be "coordinated" for "inertial frame of reference" i.e. for object in translation at constant speed (a postulate of Einstein's relativity is that the speed of light is the same for all inertial frame)
The earth is NOT a inertial frame because it is rotating. Therefore the speed of light is not constant (Sagnac effect)!
A clock moving westward at a slow speed (no relativistic effect) and arriving at it starting point would retard by about 200nS compared to the same clock at rest!
Gravitational field affects time.
A Earth Centered Inertial (ECI) frame is used, and clocks at REST in that frame can be coordinated.
GPS satellites are in motion (eccentric orbit) in the gravitational field. Therefore they broadcast data so that GPS receivers can factor in clock correction (correction not required for GLONASS system)
GPS clocks readings must be corrected to account for motion and gravitation. GPS clocks are slowed to about 5x10**-10 before launch (gravitational effect)!
So here we see the relationship between time, speed and gravity are already well known, so I did not just make that up.
If what I am saying is true, then all the other objects in the universe would also be absorbing time and we would be able to see it because they all would appear to be moving away from us. And they all do appear to be moving away from us.
Check out this link and see how everything I said should occur if gravity was the flow of time, or more accurately the absorption of time by matter, has already been observed
Article found at McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Encyclopedia:
Gravitational Red Shift
A shift toward longer wavelengths of spectral lines emitted by atoms in strong gravitational fields. It is also known as the Einstein shift. One of three famous predictions of the general theory of relativity, this shift results from the slowing down of all periodic processes in a gravitational field.
The amount of the shift is proportional to the difference in gravitational potential between the source and the receiver. For starlight received at the Earth the shift is proportional to the mass of the star divided by its radius. In the solar spectrum the shift amounts to about 0.001nanometer at a wavelength of 500 nm.
In the spectra of white dwarfs, whose ratio of mass to radius is about 30 times that of the Sun, the shift is about 0.03 nm, which can easily be measured if it can be separated from the Doppler effect. This was first done by W. S. Adams for the companion of Sirius, a white dwarf whose true velocity relative to the Earth can be deduced from the observed Doppler effect in the spectrum of Sirius.
The measured shift agreed with the prediction based on Einstein's theory and on independent determinations of the mass and radius of Sirius B. A more accurate measurement was carried out in 1954 by D. M. Popper, who measured the gravitational redshift in the spectrum of the white dwarf 40 Eridani B. Similar measurements, all confirming Einstein's theory, have since been carried out for other white dwarfs.
Attempts to demonstrate the gravitational redshift in the solar spectrum have thus far proved inconclusive, because it is difficult to distinguish the gravitational redshift from so-called pressure shifts resulting from perturbations of the emitting atoms by neighboring atoms. See also White dwarf star.
Gravitational redshift has also been detected as temperature fluctuations in the observed cosmic microwave background. In 1967 R. K. Sachs and A. M. Wolfe showed that large-scale fluctuations in cosmic density should lead to different gravitational redshifts of observed microwave photons; the measurement of angular temperature variations therefore gives direct information about the mass distribution.
This effect was observed in 1992 by the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite, and has become a key tool in measuring the initial density perturbations from which cosmological structures are believed to have formed by gravitational instability. See also Cosmic background radiation; Cosmology; Relativity.
Now the difference between what I have been saying is subtly different, My conclusion from the results of these observations was that time flows and is absorbed by matter, causing gravity, while they claim gravity is a force, and describe gravitational fields.
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/gravitational-redshift#ixzz1D1gTR1dM
Now if what I am saying is true, then the time it takes a second to pass in outer space would be different than the time it takes a second to pass on earth. This is true, here is an exert from: timezone.com: http://www.timezone.com/library/archives/archives0072
About the difficulty of clock synchronization:
Time could only be "coordinated" for "inertial frame of reference" i.e. for object in translation at constant speed (a postulate of Einstein's relativity is that the speed of light is the same for all inertial frame)
The earth is NOT a inertial frame because it is rotating. Therefore the speed of light is not constant (Sagnac effect)!
A clock moving westward at a slow speed (no relativistic effect) and arriving at it starting point would retard by about 200nS compared to the same clock at rest!
Gravitational field affects time.
A Earth Centered Inertial (ECI) frame is used, and clocks at REST in that frame can be coordinated.
GPS satellites are in motion (eccentric orbit) in the gravitational field. Therefore they broadcast data so that GPS receivers can factor in clock correction (correction not required for GLONASS system)
GPS clocks readings must be corrected to account for motion and gravitation. GPS clocks are slowed to about 5x10**-10 before launch (gravitational effect)!
So here we see the relationship between time, speed and gravity are already well known, so I did not just make that up.
If what I am saying is true, then all the other objects in the universe would also be absorbing time and we would be able to see it because they all would appear to be moving away from us. And they all do appear to be moving away from us.
Check out this link and see how everything I said should occur if gravity was the flow of time, or more accurately the absorption of time by matter, has already been observed
Article found at McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Encyclopedia:
Gravitational Red Shift
A shift toward longer wavelengths of spectral lines emitted by atoms in strong gravitational fields. It is also known as the Einstein shift. One of three famous predictions of the general theory of relativity, this shift results from the slowing down of all periodic processes in a gravitational field.
The amount of the shift is proportional to the difference in gravitational potential between the source and the receiver. For starlight received at the Earth the shift is proportional to the mass of the star divided by its radius. In the solar spectrum the shift amounts to about 0.001nanometer at a wavelength of 500 nm.
In the spectra of white dwarfs, whose ratio of mass to radius is about 30 times that of the Sun, the shift is about 0.03 nm, which can easily be measured if it can be separated from the Doppler effect. This was first done by W. S. Adams for the companion of Sirius, a white dwarf whose true velocity relative to the Earth can be deduced from the observed Doppler effect in the spectrum of Sirius.
The measured shift agreed with the prediction based on Einstein's theory and on independent determinations of the mass and radius of Sirius B. A more accurate measurement was carried out in 1954 by D. M. Popper, who measured the gravitational redshift in the spectrum of the white dwarf 40 Eridani B. Similar measurements, all confirming Einstein's theory, have since been carried out for other white dwarfs.
Attempts to demonstrate the gravitational redshift in the solar spectrum have thus far proved inconclusive, because it is difficult to distinguish the gravitational redshift from so-called pressure shifts resulting from perturbations of the emitting atoms by neighboring atoms. See also White dwarf star.
Gravitational redshift has also been detected as temperature fluctuations in the observed cosmic microwave background. In 1967 R. K. Sachs and A. M. Wolfe showed that large-scale fluctuations in cosmic density should lead to different gravitational redshifts of observed microwave photons; the measurement of angular temperature variations therefore gives direct information about the mass distribution.
This effect was observed in 1992 by the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite, and has become a key tool in measuring the initial density perturbations from which cosmological structures are believed to have formed by gravitational instability. See also Cosmic background radiation; Cosmology; Relativity.
Now the difference between what I have been saying is subtly different, My conclusion from the results of these observations was that time flows and is absorbed by matter, causing gravity, while they claim gravity is a force, and describe gravitational fields.
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/gravitational-redshift#ixzz1D1gTR1dM
Understanding The Speed of Time
Understanding the Speed of Time
Suppose that you lived in a world where nothing was longer than 60 feet long, and you had a tape measure that was 60 feet long, and it was impossible to make a tape measure longer than 60 feet long. In this world, nothing was larger in dimension than 60 feet. Around this world are millions of galaxies and worlds, all no farther away than 60 feet.
This puzzled all the great minds and scientists of this world as it seemed impossible for so many things to exist in such a small space. Furthermore, it seemed very strange to them that when they sent their rocket ships to explore these worlds and galaxies that their rocket ships could not reach these stars only 60 feet away.
The rocket ship would seemingly accelerate to enormous speeds yet never could reach the stars. It was then theorized that time must speed up the farther from the center of the earth you got making it impossible to travel a journey of 60 feet from the center of the earth.
It was also theorized that perhaps gravity became so powerful at 60 feet that the rocket ships came to a stop. It seemed that they could send things on a trip of 99.999999% of 60 feet, but no further. This made sense to them all, since the maximum length width or height of anything was 60 feet and this was an accepted constant in their world of physics.
So the scientists got 2- 60’ rods and placed them end to end and measured them and found they only measured 60’. This they theorized meant that each rod had shrunk to 50% of their length, so they tried with 3 rods and found that they were still 60’ long overall combined, so had shrunk to 33.3333% of their length, and so a fourth was added and all with the same result.
So the real puzzle was that when they measured the mass of all the rods, they could account for each rod by weight, so 4 rods were four times as heavy as one rod, but when they measured the density of the rods they found the density had not changed.
They were puzzled; the size of the object remained the same, yet the weight had quadrupled , while the density remained the same. Scientists came up with all kinds of theories that all seemed sound except when dimensions began to reach near to 60 feet, and then they all broke down.
They pondered all kinds of impossible shapes that might describe the universe to explain this phenomenon but as soon as one scientist seemed to have a brilliant theory of this, another scientist would propose another theory that seemed to disprove the latter. So round and round they went.
What they did not know, and could not know is that the laws of physics had limited the length of the measuring device of their world. Often people would go for a walk and it seemed longer than on other days when they had taken the same distance of a walk, but that’s just the way people are, sometimes it seems farther than other days.
What they could not know is if it really was a longer walk or not, they did not know that their measuring capabilities were limited. They all knew that 60 feet plus 60 feet should equal 120 feet, but since the one constant in there universe seemed to be nothing could be longer than 60 feet, and that was accepted fact, unquestionable.
However the truth was that the measuring tape was the problem, it would never measure anything longer than 60 feet, and all measuring devices shared the same characteristic. When the tape was stretched out over the four 60 foot rods, it still read 60 feet, this was because it was actually a very flexible tape measure and literally stretched like a rubber band the entire 240 feet and still only recorded 60 feet.
Another thing the scientists found was that when they stretched the tape out to measure the 240 feet of rod, and it only recorded them to be 60 feet, (not knowing the tape stretched as I just explained) they found it took four times as long to travel each inch of the rod, this seemed to prove to them that time had sped up for the rod, but not for them, and they called this all part of some distance time continuum.
But had they known that their tape measure had the limitations, not the actual length of anything; they may have come up with the right answers.
Sounds silly right?
To live in a world where they have a maximum length width or height that these dimensions are limited and this is the world they are boxed in to?
Well we live in a world where we do the same thing. We have given a maximum to one of our dimensions, and that is speed, we have determined that about 183000 miles per second is as fast as anything can go, nothing can go faster.
But what if that is not true?
If you were in an empty universe, only you, and nothing else existed; how fast are you going? Are you stopped? Or if you constantly accelerated forever would you not exceed the speed of light, and if you did; relative to what? And in this world, our universe and all the galaxies, how fast are they going? And relative to what?
Is there a point in space that is stopped? Is anything going 0 miles per hour? And in what direction? These are the questions that are created in this world because we have a maximum velocity.
But suppose there was no maximum velocity?
Suppose things could travel trillions of miles per second and beyond, why can’t we see that in our universe?
So what I believe to be true is that their measuring device is flawed!
Time must have a limit; it seems to not be able to measure anything traveling faster than about 183000 miles per second before it begins to stretch and distort to give us the same reading just like the tape measure in the other world.
The speed of light is then unknown, but it seems to exceed the speed of time.
God is without beginning or end, so time cannot measure his life span, so God exists before time and after time has ended.
Therefore time being a created thing, must have limitations.
If time had no speed limit, it would race from beginning to end and be over as fast as it was created, so obviously God put a speed limit on time, and light, being the fastest thing we know of; has allowed us to measure its speed, the speed of time is 183000 miles per second
Suppose that you lived in a world where nothing was longer than 60 feet long, and you had a tape measure that was 60 feet long, and it was impossible to make a tape measure longer than 60 feet long. In this world, nothing was larger in dimension than 60 feet. Around this world are millions of galaxies and worlds, all no farther away than 60 feet.
This puzzled all the great minds and scientists of this world as it seemed impossible for so many things to exist in such a small space. Furthermore, it seemed very strange to them that when they sent their rocket ships to explore these worlds and galaxies that their rocket ships could not reach these stars only 60 feet away.
The rocket ship would seemingly accelerate to enormous speeds yet never could reach the stars. It was then theorized that time must speed up the farther from the center of the earth you got making it impossible to travel a journey of 60 feet from the center of the earth.
It was also theorized that perhaps gravity became so powerful at 60 feet that the rocket ships came to a stop. It seemed that they could send things on a trip of 99.999999% of 60 feet, but no further. This made sense to them all, since the maximum length width or height of anything was 60 feet and this was an accepted constant in their world of physics.
So the scientists got 2- 60’ rods and placed them end to end and measured them and found they only measured 60’. This they theorized meant that each rod had shrunk to 50% of their length, so they tried with 3 rods and found that they were still 60’ long overall combined, so had shrunk to 33.3333% of their length, and so a fourth was added and all with the same result.
So the real puzzle was that when they measured the mass of all the rods, they could account for each rod by weight, so 4 rods were four times as heavy as one rod, but when they measured the density of the rods they found the density had not changed.
They were puzzled; the size of the object remained the same, yet the weight had quadrupled , while the density remained the same. Scientists came up with all kinds of theories that all seemed sound except when dimensions began to reach near to 60 feet, and then they all broke down.
They pondered all kinds of impossible shapes that might describe the universe to explain this phenomenon but as soon as one scientist seemed to have a brilliant theory of this, another scientist would propose another theory that seemed to disprove the latter. So round and round they went.
What they did not know, and could not know is that the laws of physics had limited the length of the measuring device of their world. Often people would go for a walk and it seemed longer than on other days when they had taken the same distance of a walk, but that’s just the way people are, sometimes it seems farther than other days.
What they could not know is if it really was a longer walk or not, they did not know that their measuring capabilities were limited. They all knew that 60 feet plus 60 feet should equal 120 feet, but since the one constant in there universe seemed to be nothing could be longer than 60 feet, and that was accepted fact, unquestionable.
However the truth was that the measuring tape was the problem, it would never measure anything longer than 60 feet, and all measuring devices shared the same characteristic. When the tape was stretched out over the four 60 foot rods, it still read 60 feet, this was because it was actually a very flexible tape measure and literally stretched like a rubber band the entire 240 feet and still only recorded 60 feet.
Another thing the scientists found was that when they stretched the tape out to measure the 240 feet of rod, and it only recorded them to be 60 feet, (not knowing the tape stretched as I just explained) they found it took four times as long to travel each inch of the rod, this seemed to prove to them that time had sped up for the rod, but not for them, and they called this all part of some distance time continuum.
But had they known that their tape measure had the limitations, not the actual length of anything; they may have come up with the right answers.
Sounds silly right?
To live in a world where they have a maximum length width or height that these dimensions are limited and this is the world they are boxed in to?
Well we live in a world where we do the same thing. We have given a maximum to one of our dimensions, and that is speed, we have determined that about 183000 miles per second is as fast as anything can go, nothing can go faster.
But what if that is not true?
If you were in an empty universe, only you, and nothing else existed; how fast are you going? Are you stopped? Or if you constantly accelerated forever would you not exceed the speed of light, and if you did; relative to what? And in this world, our universe and all the galaxies, how fast are they going? And relative to what?
Is there a point in space that is stopped? Is anything going 0 miles per hour? And in what direction? These are the questions that are created in this world because we have a maximum velocity.
But suppose there was no maximum velocity?
Suppose things could travel trillions of miles per second and beyond, why can’t we see that in our universe?
So what I believe to be true is that their measuring device is flawed!
Time must have a limit; it seems to not be able to measure anything traveling faster than about 183000 miles per second before it begins to stretch and distort to give us the same reading just like the tape measure in the other world.
The speed of light is then unknown, but it seems to exceed the speed of time.
God is without beginning or end, so time cannot measure his life span, so God exists before time and after time has ended.
Therefore time being a created thing, must have limitations.
If time had no speed limit, it would race from beginning to end and be over as fast as it was created, so obviously God put a speed limit on time, and light, being the fastest thing we know of; has allowed us to measure its speed, the speed of time is 183000 miles per second
How the Universe was Made and How it Works
Recently, Stephen Hawking came up with a theory that states it was imperfection that has given the universe its shape. He came up with this idea because after the Big Bang all matter in the universe should have been evenly distributed and the equilibrium caused by the force we know about and see now, it should have stayed in equilibrium as countless equally distanced and equally sized particles for ever.
He reasoned that there had to be at least 4 spots in the universe that were not conformant to the laws of physics, that for some reason these spots were not equally distanced, or equally charged. This slight imbalance would then cause particles to begin moving together and clumping into stars and planets and asteroids and gas clouds that fill the universe now.
He offered no explanation of what might have caused this imbalance, except that since the universe exists as we know it, it must have occurred. So his only evidence of this event is that the universe is here as we know it. The whole universe is a huge piece of evidence, but this circular logic really does not satisfy what caused the imbalance and puts our understanding of the creation scientifically no closer to being certain than it was.
Stephen Hawking’s has a daunting challenge; he believes that it is necessary to explain creation without the need for a creator. At some point, no matter how clever his theories they will always leave room and come to a point where there is some kind of ambiguity of how it all got started. His and all others of his ilk will continue to produce theories that try to push this ambiguity farther and farther back in time, and closer and closer to the moment of creation, but they will never quite get there.
Many scientists believe it is their job to describe all science, and everything we know about; matter, space, and life, scientifically, which to them means without the need for a creator, or more accurately; God. They are at this point content to call the Big Bang the origin of everything, and see no need for there to be a God or anyone else to ignite that Big Bang, it just happened. So they have successfully pushed this ambiguity to just an instant before the Big Bang. Before that was nothing, and from nothing came everything.
Yet we have not discovered one physical law or example anywhere that shows any possible scenario that can produce anything from nothing. In fact, the opposite is true, from something, we usually get less than we had before, order goes to chaos, unless acted upon by an out side force. This is a fundamental law of energy and everything else.
The Big Bang defies this law at the moment of its origin, something must have been there to organize that explosion from before, if only milliseconds before its start. Contrast that with the simplicity of the creation story, where this ambiguity is replaced with God. At that point, that millisecond before creation, it is God that is that force acting on everything to bring it to order. Whether it was a Big Bang, or a simple blink into existence in the form we now know it, God fulfills this law of thermodynamics, there is no ambiguity.
But was the universes created in the form we now know it? According to science and the bible on this point there is agreement, no it was not. Scientist have written thousands of books trying to describe the creation of the universe, the bible gives only 31 sentences to it. Yet it is so carefully written that in these 31 sentences we can test and try all scientific ideas with it.
Thirty one sentences against millions of sentences, by stating that God created everything, the bible simplified everything to need just 31 sentences, and the writer confidently got on with the rest of the story. Science meanwhile continues to write more and more volumes of books and none of them able to come up with an explanation that removes the ambiguity of that moment slightly before everything suddenly existed.
I don’t have time to go over the millions of sentences written by scientists, and why would I? None of them have been able to remove the ambiguity of the origins of everything; they just push it around and move to different points.
I said Science and the bible agree on one major point, so let’s start there. The universe was not created in the form we know it. “In the beginning the heavens and the earth was void and without form” both the bible and scientists agrees on this point. There is disagreement between them with the bible claim that God created it all.
“And God said let there be light” Scientists agree that light is the ultimate evidence of energy; just not that God has anything to do with it.
Now bible scholars and religious types and scientists have a serious issue dividing all of them from one another, and that is the six days mentioned in the bible that it took God to create everything. Science seems to have evidence to the contrary, scientist use terms like billions of years, and the bible, less than a week.
This where it gets tricky, the word used in the original language for day is the same word used for stage, or step, or order of events within a given topic. Like building a house, stage 1 dig hole, stage 2 build foundation , and so on. So it does not necessarily mean a 24 hour period.
And we will notice that it is not until the fourth day that the sun, moon and stars are created and even states at that moment that they should be used for signs, and to measure days and years. Yet even after the fourth day, it does not need to be a literal day, because Moses, the writer speaks of in Deuteronomy 7 “the days of old” and the “years of many generations” two separate time periods.
But then why does the bible say the evening and the morning were the first day? Why evening, then morning, it seems backwards, that would be the first night, not day, and since the sun was not yet created, so it could not have been a solar day. But to many bible believers a day is a day is a day. I think this position is what causes many people to disregard the Genesis account and take it as not credible.
But still the bible says the evening and morning were the first day, or does it? The Torah word for evening used in Genesis 1: 5 is “Vayechi Erev” which literally means chaos, mixture, disorder, it is where the word for evening comes from, when things get dark, vision is hindered and things loose their order. And the Torah word used for morning is “boker” which means the opposite; things become orderly, able to be discerned. So here we see God as the one acting on disorder to bring it to an organized form, from evening to morning, from chaos to control.
Where science differs on this point is that they say things went from chaos to control without being acted on by an outside force, defying their own laws of thermodynamics. The Biblical account fulfills this law with God and that is the only difference between them.
But there is a difference in the way the first day and the rest of the days are numbered, the first day is actually referred to as “day one” “yom echad” but is often translated as the first day, which is comparative, and day one is absolute. A subtle difference, but does not do justice to the cosmic message that the original text is trying to convey. The rest of the days are referred to as second day and third and so on; correctly translated from the original text.
“And the evening and morning were the second day” and so on. This is actually a comparative statement, things did not flux from order to disorder and then back to order, the simply continued to become more organized. During step one, or day one, things began to organize, then during the second step, or day, identifies where God applied special direction to his creation for that day. The morning of day one was as organized or disorganized as the evening of the second day, it is comparative, or as scientists would say; relative.
A seeming contradiction in the Genesis account is that on the third day God created all vegetation on the earth, while he had not yet created the sun or the moon. But there was light, and this cosmic glow must have been the means by which this vegetation grew, and this day could have been hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years long. Since as yet there was nothing to govern the length of a day in any form; that would not come until the fourth day. But even the fourth day is not necessarily a day as we know it, for it is “the days of old” according to Moses, not the “years of generations” that we live in now.
But back to the third day, this explains why we have evidence of so much vegetation having been present on the earth. The vast amounts of coal, natural gas, top soil, and other byproducts of decaying vegetation that are evidence of this vegetation having been in existence for a lot longer than recorded in biblical history of the “years of generations” talked of by Moses. All that stuff was a product of “the days of old”.
God said “Let there be light” sometime during day one. Before this it says there was darkness. The original word used here for darkness was “chohech” which means black fire, or black energy so powerful it can not be seen, and remains disorganized. It is also used to describe the absence of light, i.e. darkness in verse 4 of Genesis.
“And the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” Now the word used for water was “mayim” which also means the building blocks of everything, this is another ancient meaning for this word. This could mean atoms or even subatomic particles not yet organized into any useful form. Or it could mean water, or it could mean both. Moses was not trying to be a physics professor; he was simply stating the Genesis of everything, but his words were carefully chosen to be all true and accurate.
Remember he only devoted 31 sentences to a subject that today has millions if not billions of sentences devoted to, and yet are unable to describe a theory that does not defy the their own laws of thermodynamics at one point or another. Moses remained faithful to all the laws of thermodynamics and did not need any more words to try to cloud any ambiguity.
Now here is an interesting tidbit, early on the third day God causes all the waters on the earth to be gathered together in one place and to let dry land appear. Why did he have to do that? Does not water naturally find its own level? Well, now it does, but before then, it did not. What was it God did here? It seems like he created gravity, for it is gravity that keeps the water off the dry land. Now you could say it was ice, and that God melted the ice, but Moses had a word for ice, but he chose not to use it, instead he used the word for water, or again the building blocks of everything, but here I think he meant water.
Now this brings us to an interesting point in the development of the universe. Remember the earth was void and without form at the beginning? But here we see in this simple verse that the earth is beginning to take shape. Two things actually occurred at this point, one was either “time” was created, or “time” had reached earth from the point from where “time was created, or originated geographically in the universe.
That’s right, time was created, and it did not exist while the earth was void and without form, for it is time that causes gravity to exist, and it is gravity that gives all matter its form. It was this very problem that Stephen Hawking’s was addressing with his theory of there needing to be an imperfection in the distribution of particles after the Big Bang. Gravity would hold all the particles in a state of equal tension between each other and never could they combine to form stars and planets.
But without the force of gravity the particles would clump together because of their varying static charges. Iron being very sensitive to electromagnetic forces would clump together first, this is probably why most celestial bodies have an iron core. Then all the other forms of matter would build on top of that. But they would be in formless shapes, lob sided and random because all the charges would be of different strengths.
It was not until the crushing force of gravity came along that any equilibrium was developed in these shapes; the orbs we see in the universe to this day.
However gravity we will discover is not a force at all, but rather a product of matter and time interrelating with one another, or rather, matter absorbing time. Scientists know that all matter distorts time, they have not realized that it is absorbing time, and like water over a water fall, it accelerates as it goes over the top of the falls. Time and matter are the same way, and that is how gravity works, we are simply carried by the flow of time towards the huge mass of matter called the earth. Scientists also know that all matter exhibits gravity, which is because all matter absorbs time; in direct proportion to its mass.
This occurs because “time” has a speed limit; time is the limiting factor in the release of energy, and the rate energy return to entropy, not the speed of light. Light may have no measurable speed, it may be either infinitely fast, or have no speed whatsoever and appears one end to its other instantly. However we can only observe it at the speed of time, which appears to be what we call the speed of light. However it may have a speed somewhere in between, and if it does, then time will pass at a different rate while exposed to light. This may be why fruits and vegetables ripen quicker if kept in the dark, if that is true, then light has a significant impact on the speed of time.
However it also shows that time has no effect on the order of events, and more time may have flowed past one person than another, but you would not notice anything unusual. Astronauts for instance, are exposed to great speeds, and are far from the event horizon of the earth’s gravity, which is the absorption of time by the planet, actually live in a slightly different time period then those who have never been to space, but you would never know it because time has no dominion over actual events.
Time is just like water flowing in a river, if you and a friend are standing in the river, the water might flow at different rates past each of you because you are both standing in different spots, but you will not change actual position in relation to each other at all, unless one of you decides to move yourself.
Now why does matter absorb time? Well, it has been observed that speed changes time, (distorts) as described in Einstein’s theory of relativity. When objects approach the speed of light, (which science will soon discover is actually the speed of time) time changes as necessary to satisfy the famous equation E=MC squared. So speed affect the passage rate of time, and most dramatically when that speed reaches or exceeds the speed of time. (At this time known as the speed of light)
Within every atom are subatomic particles, one such particle called a luxon, is said to travel around inside the atom at the speed of light (time) but if the speed of time is the limiting factor on how fast of a speed we can measure, then we have no way of telling if it is travelling any faster than that. Unless we can measure the amount it affects the rate or speed of time, or observe the effects it has on time. It should distort time at a rate that satisfies E=MC squared.
Now what I am claiming is that the luxon particle or other similar behaving particles with in each atom, due to their tremendous speed, acts like little spools that wind time up, absorbing time into every atom. It may be this very thing that gives the atom its power. Now this force from a single atom is very small, and weak, much weaker than the magnetic forces within the atom.
Scientists have been looking for the strong and weak forces in the atom for years, and have a conundrum, the strong force we know, magnetism, and if it was magnetic attraction within each atom that caused gravity, it would smear us out like butter onto the face of the planet, it is way too strong. So they are looking for a weak force, one that will tie all the theories of physics together and satisfy all the laws of thermodynamics and physics that have been proven to be true. So far they have all been very unsuccessful.
This is because gravity is not caused by a force at all. It is simply the effects of the flow of time into matter. Like a huge freighter ship and a dingy floating down the same river, each would travel at the speed of the river current, regardless of size. We have the same effect with gravity; everything falls at the same speed. (in a vacuum)
Another issue scientists have with this weak force is why it is so far reaching and yet so weak? As weak as gravity is compared to the other forces, how does it affect planets millions or even billions, and trillions of miles apart from each other? Well if it is a current, and not an actual force, it explains it perfectly.
Time is like a river current, say a river has a waterfall at one end, if you swim too close to the waterfall you will not be able to overcome the current, it will pull you downstream and over the falls. However a few miles up stream, you are able to swim and overcome the current much easier, and farther upstream still, the effect of the current may be barely noticeable as you swim, yet a leaf flowing very slowly by identifies that the river still has a current. Gravity is the same way, and Gravity is Time, or more accurately the flow of time.
Mathematically this works perfectly, Gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable to the object or person experiencing it. That’s why acceleration is measured in G-force. Now to calculate the G-force of any object you need to know 3 things, the speed change amount, and the amount of time it took to obtain the change in speed, and the rate of speed change that earth’s gravity causes to a falling object.
This calculations assumes that time is a constant thing, that a second is a second is a second. And relatively, a second is a second is a second, but in terms of absolute time, it is not; time ebbs and flows. So therefore it is possible that if you could know the absolute value of a second, and it could be changed since it no longer is a constant value, then we could calculate and find that a motionless object can exhibit acceleration.
That is what we feel everyday, the acceleration of a motionless object; the surface of the earth. The earth surface is not rushing up against us it stays the same size. If it was then in a short time the surface of the earth would be travelling faster than the speed of light/time. Not likely, but possible, everything could be expanding at that rate, you, me, the universe, but God would not do it that way, he rested on the seventh day, he did not stay busy causing the universe and everything in it to keep growing in that manner. Besides he is cleverer than that.
Now on the fourth day we read that God created the sun and the moon. Science and the Bible disagree on this point, Science believes the stars came first, yet the bible says different here. It also states that he made the stars also. Now this statement in Genesis rings true when you consider that on the third day time and gravity were created. Matter began clumping together at a tremendous rate with tremendous force, and the planets and sun and the moon and the stars began to take their shape.
With the creation of time, the original glow of the creation moment would begin to fade and pass, it was this glow that kept all the plants alive on the earth, and as it dimmed, the sun formed, fueled by the tremendous force of gravity-time and the nuclear furnace ignited into the sun that we know. And this happened with the stars also. By the time the third day was over, and on the fourth day the amount of time it took to complete the stars and for the nuclear furnace to ignite to pass and the stars formed.
Then on the fifth day all the creatures in the sea were created in their own image, and filled the seas with life. And all the birds and every living thing that moves. Now Darwin may say different, but I do not want to waste my time on his foolishness. I think I have established the proof of the presence of a creator already, and so I think any intelligent person given the choice to decide who to believe would take the word of the creator rather than Darwin.
Then on the sixth day all the rest of the creatures on the planet were made, including man. Male and Female he made them, and the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Now again how long was this day? It could have been thousands of years long, and so many generations may have passed on this day. Another thing that happens on the sixth day is that it is the last day that has an evening and a morning.
Remember that evening here means chaos, and morning less chaos. Or relatively speaking, evening means some control and order, and morning means more control and order. But the seventh day has no evening and no morning, God rested, he no longer had his hand in his creation organizing it into higher and higher states of organization, but rather it states that he is finished.
The end of the seventh day is not mentioned in the text, it may be continuing to this day, I don’t know. But the “days of old” which refer to the 6 days of creation, can be thought of as the titles of chapters in book, and “years of generations can be thought of as the words written in each chapter of that book. So we maybe living in the seventh day, and we are the words being written in that chapter. Or not.
And that is the genius of Genesis.
This is a difficult concept to grasp, but God is eternal, and so he exists outside of time, yet he does exist and dwells in that environment. Thing still happen there, and he does what he does there, and this is why he describes himself as “I am”. He perhaps exists in a type of absolute time that is beyond our comprehension.
Recently, Stephen Hawking came up with a theory that states it was imperfection that has given the universe its shape. He came up with this idea because after the Big Bang all matter in the universe should have been evenly distributed and the equilibrium caused by the force we know about and see now, it should have stayed in equilibrium as countless equally distanced and equally sized particles for ever.
He reasoned that there had to be at least 4 spots in the universe that were not conformant to the laws of physics, that for some reason these spots were not equally distanced, or equally charged. This slight imbalance would then cause particles to begin moving together and clumping into stars and planets and asteroids and gas clouds that fill the universe now.
He offered no explanation of what might have caused this imbalance, except that since the universe exists as we know it, it must have occurred. So his only evidence of this event is that the universe is here as we know it. The whole universe is a huge piece of evidence, but this circular logic really does not satisfy what caused the imbalance and puts our understanding of the creation scientifically no closer to being certain than it was.
Stephen Hawking’s has a daunting challenge; he believes that it is necessary to explain creation without the need for a creator. At some point, no matter how clever his theories they will always leave room and come to a point where there is some kind of ambiguity of how it all got started. His and all others of his ilk will continue to produce theories that try to push this ambiguity farther and farther back in time, and closer and closer to the moment of creation, but they will never quite get there.
Many scientists believe it is their job to describe all science, and everything we know about; matter, space, and life, scientifically, which to them means without the need for a creator, or more accurately; God. They are at this point content to call the Big Bang the origin of everything, and see no need for there to be a God or anyone else to ignite that Big Bang, it just happened. So they have successfully pushed this ambiguity to just an instant before the Big Bang. Before that was nothing, and from nothing came everything.
Yet we have not discovered one physical law or example anywhere that shows any possible scenario that can produce anything from nothing. In fact, the opposite is true, from something, we usually get less than we had before, order goes to chaos, unless acted upon by an out side force. This is a fundamental law of energy and everything else.
The Big Bang defies this law at the moment of its origin, something must have been there to organize that explosion from before, if only milliseconds before its start. Contrast that with the simplicity of the creation story, where this ambiguity is replaced with God. At that point, that millisecond before creation, it is God that is that force acting on everything to bring it to order. Whether it was a Big Bang, or a simple blink into existence in the form we now know it, God fulfills this law of thermodynamics, there is no ambiguity.
But was the universes created in the form we now know it? According to science and the bible on this point there is agreement, no it was not. Scientist have written thousands of books trying to describe the creation of the universe, the bible gives only 31 sentences to it. Yet it is so carefully written that in these 31 sentences we can test and try all scientific ideas with it.
Thirty one sentences against millions of sentences, by stating that God created everything, the bible simplified everything to need just 31 sentences, and the writer confidently got on with the rest of the story. Science meanwhile continues to write more and more volumes of books and none of them able to come up with an explanation that removes the ambiguity of that moment slightly before everything suddenly existed.
I don’t have time to go over the millions of sentences written by scientists, and why would I? None of them have been able to remove the ambiguity of the origins of everything; they just push it around and move to different points.
I said Science and the bible agree on one major point, so let’s start there. The universe was not created in the form we know it. “In the beginning the heavens and the earth was void and without form” both the bible and scientists agrees on this point. There is disagreement between them with the bible claim that God created it all.
“And God said let there be light” Scientists agree that light is the ultimate evidence of energy; just not that God has anything to do with it.
Now bible scholars and religious types and scientists have a serious issue dividing all of them from one another, and that is the six days mentioned in the bible that it took God to create everything. Science seems to have evidence to the contrary, scientist use terms like billions of years, and the bible, less than a week.
This where it gets tricky, the word used in the original language for day is the same word used for stage, or step, or order of events within a given topic. Like building a house, stage 1 dig hole, stage 2 build foundation , and so on. So it does not necessarily mean a 24 hour period.
And we will notice that it is not until the fourth day that the sun, moon and stars are created and even states at that moment that they should be used for signs, and to measure days and years. Yet even after the fourth day, it does not need to be a literal day, because Moses, the writer speaks of in Deuteronomy 7 “the days of old” and the “years of many generations” two separate time periods.
But then why does the bible say the evening and the morning were the first day? Why evening, then morning, it seems backwards, that would be the first night, not day, and since the sun was not yet created, so it could not have been a solar day. But to many bible believers a day is a day is a day. I think this position is what causes many people to disregard the Genesis account and take it as not credible.
But still the bible says the evening and morning were the first day, or does it? The Torah word for evening used in Genesis 1: 5 is “Vayechi Erev” which literally means chaos, mixture, disorder, it is where the word for evening comes from, when things get dark, vision is hindered and things loose their order. And the Torah word used for morning is “boker” which means the opposite; things become orderly, able to be discerned. So here we see God as the one acting on disorder to bring it to an organized form, from evening to morning, from chaos to control.
Where science differs on this point is that they say things went from chaos to control without being acted on by an outside force, defying their own laws of thermodynamics. The Biblical account fulfills this law with God and that is the only difference between them.
But there is a difference in the way the first day and the rest of the days are numbered, the first day is actually referred to as “day one” “yom echad” but is often translated as the first day, which is comparative, and day one is absolute. A subtle difference, but does not do justice to the cosmic message that the original text is trying to convey. The rest of the days are referred to as second day and third and so on; correctly translated from the original text.
“And the evening and morning were the second day” and so on. This is actually a comparative statement, things did not flux from order to disorder and then back to order, the simply continued to become more organized. During step one, or day one, things began to organize, then during the second step, or day, identifies where God applied special direction to his creation for that day. The morning of day one was as organized or disorganized as the evening of the second day, it is comparative, or as scientists would say; relative.
A seeming contradiction in the Genesis account is that on the third day God created all vegetation on the earth, while he had not yet created the sun or the moon. But there was light, and this cosmic glow must have been the means by which this vegetation grew, and this day could have been hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years long. Since as yet there was nothing to govern the length of a day in any form; that would not come until the fourth day. But even the fourth day is not necessarily a day as we know it, for it is “the days of old” according to Moses, not the “years of generations” that we live in now.
But back to the third day, this explains why we have evidence of so much vegetation having been present on the earth. The vast amounts of coal, natural gas, top soil, and other byproducts of decaying vegetation that are evidence of this vegetation having been in existence for a lot longer than recorded in biblical history of the “years of generations” talked of by Moses. All that stuff was a product of “the days of old”.
God said “Let there be light” sometime during day one. Before this it says there was darkness. The original word used here for darkness was “chohech” which means black fire, or black energy so powerful it can not be seen, and remains disorganized. It is also used to describe the absence of light, i.e. darkness in verse 4 of Genesis.
“And the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” Now the word used for water was “mayim” which also means the building blocks of everything, this is another ancient meaning for this word. This could mean atoms or even subatomic particles not yet organized into any useful form. Or it could mean water, or it could mean both. Moses was not trying to be a physics professor; he was simply stating the Genesis of everything, but his words were carefully chosen to be all true and accurate.
Remember he only devoted 31 sentences to a subject that today has millions if not billions of sentences devoted to, and yet are unable to describe a theory that does not defy the their own laws of thermodynamics at one point or another. Moses remained faithful to all the laws of thermodynamics and did not need any more words to try to cloud any ambiguity.
Now here is an interesting tidbit, early on the third day God causes all the waters on the earth to be gathered together in one place and to let dry land appear. Why did he have to do that? Does not water naturally find its own level? Well, now it does, but before then, it did not. What was it God did here? It seems like he created gravity, for it is gravity that keeps the water off the dry land. Now you could say it was ice, and that God melted the ice, but Moses had a word for ice, but he chose not to use it, instead he used the word for water, or again the building blocks of everything, but here I think he meant water.
Now this brings us to an interesting point in the development of the universe. Remember the earth was void and without form at the beginning? But here we see in this simple verse that the earth is beginning to take shape. Two things actually occurred at this point, one was either “time” was created, or “time” had reached earth from the point from where “time was created, or originated geographically in the universe.
That’s right, time was created, and it did not exist while the earth was void and without form, for it is time that causes gravity to exist, and it is gravity that gives all matter its form. It was this very problem that Stephen Hawking’s was addressing with his theory of there needing to be an imperfection in the distribution of particles after the Big Bang. Gravity would hold all the particles in a state of equal tension between each other and never could they combine to form stars and planets.
But without the force of gravity the particles would clump together because of their varying static charges. Iron being very sensitive to electromagnetic forces would clump together first, this is probably why most celestial bodies have an iron core. Then all the other forms of matter would build on top of that. But they would be in formless shapes, lob sided and random because all the charges would be of different strengths.
It was not until the crushing force of gravity came along that any equilibrium was developed in these shapes; the orbs we see in the universe to this day.
However gravity we will discover is not a force at all, but rather a product of matter and time interrelating with one another, or rather, matter absorbing time. Scientists know that all matter distorts time, they have not realized that it is absorbing time, and like water over a water fall, it accelerates as it goes over the top of the falls. Time and matter are the same way, and that is how gravity works, we are simply carried by the flow of time towards the huge mass of matter called the earth. Scientists also know that all matter exhibits gravity, which is because all matter absorbs time; in direct proportion to its mass.
This occurs because “time” has a speed limit; time is the limiting factor in the release of energy, and the rate energy return to entropy, not the speed of light. Light may have no measurable speed, it may be either infinitely fast, or have no speed whatsoever and appears one end to its other instantly. However we can only observe it at the speed of time, which appears to be what we call the speed of light. However it may have a speed somewhere in between, and if it does, then time will pass at a different rate while exposed to light. This may be why fruits and vegetables ripen quicker if kept in the dark, if that is true, then light has a significant impact on the speed of time.
However it also shows that time has no effect on the order of events, and more time may have flowed past one person than another, but you would not notice anything unusual. Astronauts for instance, are exposed to great speeds, and are far from the event horizon of the earth’s gravity, which is the absorption of time by the planet, actually live in a slightly different time period then those who have never been to space, but you would never know it because time has no dominion over actual events.
Time is just like water flowing in a river, if you and a friend are standing in the river, the water might flow at different rates past each of you because you are both standing in different spots, but you will not change actual position in relation to each other at all, unless one of you decides to move yourself.
Now why does matter absorb time? Well, it has been observed that speed changes time, (distorts) as described in Einstein’s theory of relativity. When objects approach the speed of light, (which science will soon discover is actually the speed of time) time changes as necessary to satisfy the famous equation E=MC squared. So speed affect the passage rate of time, and most dramatically when that speed reaches or exceeds the speed of time. (At this time known as the speed of light)
Within every atom are subatomic particles, one such particle called a luxon, is said to travel around inside the atom at the speed of light (time) but if the speed of time is the limiting factor on how fast of a speed we can measure, then we have no way of telling if it is travelling any faster than that. Unless we can measure the amount it affects the rate or speed of time, or observe the effects it has on time. It should distort time at a rate that satisfies E=MC squared.
Now what I am claiming is that the luxon particle or other similar behaving particles with in each atom, due to their tremendous speed, acts like little spools that wind time up, absorbing time into every atom. It may be this very thing that gives the atom its power. Now this force from a single atom is very small, and weak, much weaker than the magnetic forces within the atom.
Scientists have been looking for the strong and weak forces in the atom for years, and have a conundrum, the strong force we know, magnetism, and if it was magnetic attraction within each atom that caused gravity, it would smear us out like butter onto the face of the planet, it is way too strong. So they are looking for a weak force, one that will tie all the theories of physics together and satisfy all the laws of thermodynamics and physics that have been proven to be true. So far they have all been very unsuccessful.
This is because gravity is not caused by a force at all. It is simply the effects of the flow of time into matter. Like a huge freighter ship and a dingy floating down the same river, each would travel at the speed of the river current, regardless of size. We have the same effect with gravity; everything falls at the same speed. (in a vacuum)
Another issue scientists have with this weak force is why it is so far reaching and yet so weak? As weak as gravity is compared to the other forces, how does it affect planets millions or even billions, and trillions of miles apart from each other? Well if it is a current, and not an actual force, it explains it perfectly.
Time is like a river current, say a river has a waterfall at one end, if you swim too close to the waterfall you will not be able to overcome the current, it will pull you downstream and over the falls. However a few miles up stream, you are able to swim and overcome the current much easier, and farther upstream still, the effect of the current may be barely noticeable as you swim, yet a leaf flowing very slowly by identifies that the river still has a current. Gravity is the same way, and Gravity is Time, or more accurately the flow of time.
Mathematically this works perfectly, Gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable to the object or person experiencing it. That’s why acceleration is measured in G-force. Now to calculate the G-force of any object you need to know 3 things, the speed change amount, and the amount of time it took to obtain the change in speed, and the rate of speed change that earth’s gravity causes to a falling object.
This calculations assumes that time is a constant thing, that a second is a second is a second. And relatively, a second is a second is a second, but in terms of absolute time, it is not; time ebbs and flows. So therefore it is possible that if you could know the absolute value of a second, and it could be changed since it no longer is a constant value, then we could calculate and find that a motionless object can exhibit acceleration.
That is what we feel everyday, the acceleration of a motionless object; the surface of the earth. The earth surface is not rushing up against us it stays the same size. If it was then in a short time the surface of the earth would be travelling faster than the speed of light/time. Not likely, but possible, everything could be expanding at that rate, you, me, the universe, but God would not do it that way, he rested on the seventh day, he did not stay busy causing the universe and everything in it to keep growing in that manner. Besides he is cleverer than that.
Now on the fourth day we read that God created the sun and the moon. Science and the Bible disagree on this point, Science believes the stars came first, yet the bible says different here. It also states that he made the stars also. Now this statement in Genesis rings true when you consider that on the third day time and gravity were created. Matter began clumping together at a tremendous rate with tremendous force, and the planets and sun and the moon and the stars began to take their shape.
With the creation of time, the original glow of the creation moment would begin to fade and pass, it was this glow that kept all the plants alive on the earth, and as it dimmed, the sun formed, fueled by the tremendous force of gravity-time and the nuclear furnace ignited into the sun that we know. And this happened with the stars also. By the time the third day was over, and on the fourth day the amount of time it took to complete the stars and for the nuclear furnace to ignite to pass and the stars formed.
Then on the fifth day all the creatures in the sea were created in their own image, and filled the seas with life. And all the birds and every living thing that moves. Now Darwin may say different, but I do not want to waste my time on his foolishness. I think I have established the proof of the presence of a creator already, and so I think any intelligent person given the choice to decide who to believe would take the word of the creator rather than Darwin.
Then on the sixth day all the rest of the creatures on the planet were made, including man. Male and Female he made them, and the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Now again how long was this day? It could have been thousands of years long, and so many generations may have passed on this day. Another thing that happens on the sixth day is that it is the last day that has an evening and a morning.
Remember that evening here means chaos, and morning less chaos. Or relatively speaking, evening means some control and order, and morning means more control and order. But the seventh day has no evening and no morning, God rested, he no longer had his hand in his creation organizing it into higher and higher states of organization, but rather it states that he is finished.
The end of the seventh day is not mentioned in the text, it may be continuing to this day, I don’t know. But the “days of old” which refer to the 6 days of creation, can be thought of as the titles of chapters in book, and “years of generations can be thought of as the words written in each chapter of that book. So we maybe living in the seventh day, and we are the words being written in that chapter. Or not.
And that is the genius of Genesis.
This is a difficult concept to grasp, but God is eternal, and so he exists outside of time, yet he does exist and dwells in that environment. Thing still happen there, and he does what he does there, and this is why he describes himself as “I am”. He perhaps exists in a type of absolute time that is beyond our comprehension.
The Book Of Dave Chapter One
Welcome to my Blog, I will be updating this as often as I can, I hope to describe in these pages things God has told me in secret yet comanded to shout them from the roof tops! This is my roof top. Hey I should have called this blog that. I hope you all follow along, and find it interesting and entertaining. Also Checkout My Book The Vanquisher of the Umbra at http://www.vanquisheroftheumbra.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)