The Qur'an & The Physics of Judgment Day

This is for members who are searching for the truth. This may be a little long but it's worth the read. Hopefully, this will be the final confirmation the anti-Muslims need to recognize Islam for it's beauty.

The Qur'an & The Physics of Judgment Day

46 views and no replies?

I guess no one that rebut any of this. Exactly what I thought.

Im at work, so cannot research this in a proper way, but I promise to post on this later tonight.

My only thought was that it reminded me of the debate (on another board) when a Christian who was trying to convert us all posted a "Modern Science In The Bible" tract. While this (like the Christian one) is an interesting read, it relies heavily on your going along with their interpretations of some poetic metaphors.

The reply from all the skeptics was, "Well, yes, if you assume it's all poetic, then phrases like 'dividing the wind' could mean just about anything from extracting energy from the solar winds to using wind energy to splitting atoms."

The skeptics (myself included) agreed that it would be far more convincing if there were real scientific statements in there.

As to the pages, I am skeptical of the content. Several statements (One aspect of gravity is minute differences in time at different heights) are simply false. Others show very little understanding of physics and astronomy.

(sigh) It's really sort of on par with "Dr. Dino" in the Christian theology. Surely there's better commentaries available by Muslims who are better educated?

Originally posted by Byrd
As to the pages, I am skeptical of the content. Several statements (One aspect of gravity is minute differences in time at different heights) are simply false. Others show very little understanding of physics and astronomy.

Well, Bryd, please educate us on physics on astronomy. Tell me where the author is wrong in his commentaries, I'm interested...

[Edited on 6-5-2003 by Illmatic67]

This reminded me of a web site I once had the unfortunate luck to stumble across. The author claimed that the bible clearly described and spoke about dinosaurs, and that they were biblical creations prior to Abraham.

Oh course, they didn't live millions of years ago, they existed more like thousands of years ago...the scientists where just "confused".....

Well Pyros there is only one difference between what you read in the Bible and the Qur'an. The difference is: That was the Bible, this is the Qur'an. Need I say more?

Welll, I realize this is an older paper, however...

It is not known if the universe will expand forever, or if one day it will begin to contract. In either case, the future of all the inhabitants of the universe could be rather bleak.

...is not true. It will expand forever. Recent data (upsetting quite a few astronomers) confirms this.

physicists feel that time may reverse when the universe begins contracting.

None that I've ever read, including Hawking. This man (and his followers) seem to be the only ones promoting this. If this was true, then falling down a gravity slope (from less gravity to greater gravity) should rewind time slightly for you. So those who ride roller coasters regularly should get back quite a bit of their lives and their watches should have rewound a bit from what was expected.

You can try that one for yourself. Go to an amusement park, and calibrate your watch exactly. Go on one of those parachute rides 50 times ... or a hundred times. If the batteries are fresh in both timepieces you'll find that there's no difference in them after as many jumps as you care to take.

Time passes at a slightly faster rate at the top of a mountain, as compared to the sea level

If this was true, astronomers could never calibrate the telescopes (which are on top of mountains. The one in Hawaii (Mauna Kei) is so high that you can get altitude sickness) using the Naval Observatory time... which they do.

If time reverses in the contracting phase of the universe, then this time difference will also reverse.

This is where the problems start. He's just stated that the events are supposed to be static and unchangeable. Anything that happens must have had an event that ran in reverse before. This is part of his scenario.

This will cause gravity to reverse so that everything will fall upwards, producing an earthquake of a magnitude never seen before. The earth along with the mountains will be suddenly lifted up from under our feet and subsequently come crashing down.

The "reverse" of an earthquake MUST therefore be "another earthquake that puts things back together." Now, I'll even grant him that this refers to the formation of the earth so that you can say the earth was formed from cosmic debris that came crashing together. But even if I make this concession, the reversal of that The earth along with the mountains will be suddenly lifted up from under our feet and subsequently come crashing down means that the particles smashed into Earth, and then drifted apart (they couldn't come crashing down in a reversed sequence.)

Notice (important point!) that he speaks of mankind as being alive then.

Furthermore, if gravity is reversed and shoving things off the Earth, then the mountains won't come crashing back down. They're being shoved further away.

The reversal of gravity will cause the earth to literally explode and turn inside out. The mountains will fall apart. The red-hot lava will be thrown out lighting up the sky like molten copper.

So we've got the earth flying apart, and according to what we know, the solar system should start disintegrating along with the other planets into a sort of gassy swirl.

Only... he says:

The reversal of gravity will cause earth to expand outwards, throwing out all of its insides. The mass of the earth however, will not disperse, as reversal of time will be directing all the matter to return to its previous position in time.

He's contradicting himself. The Earth did not start out as a hollow shell with an inner sky that was then magically filled up as gravity took over.

Thus, time and gravity will become two opposing forces in the contracting universe. A balance between these two forces will change the earth into a large sphere, empty from inside. The position of the sky will Trans-locate so that it will occupy the center of the hollowed earth.

But it can't unless this was the way it was in the first place. He's contradicting himself.

And then he contradicts himself as though all those cataclysms took place AFTER all life died from the Earth.

. The reversal of gravity will cause the earth to throw out all that was once inside her, thereby becoming, completely empty. The hollowed earth will have the sky towards its center. The people will begin to rise from the graves coming back alive, one after another, "in scattered groups". The history of nations will be played back with the reversal of time.

But we are NOT living inside a hollowed ball. And if you'll remember, he earlier spoke about humans being alive then.

...and so on and so forth.

The thought of the great and final earthquake may instill fear into our hearts, but the real purpose is to make the higher dimensions accessible for escape from the collapsing universe.

He writes as though Earth is the center of the cosmos, when in fact it's as small as a single grain of sand on all the beaches of the world. At this point he hasn't talked about time stopping and going back forward or whatever. Since time is still reversing, then apparently other dimensions dumped life into this universe at one point or another.

...and it gets less logical from there. Really.

There are far better Muslim scholars out there.

I'm sorry, but don't the rule's say something about NOT posting obviouslt false information knowingly? I mean c'mon ... u can't seriously BELIEVE this crap can you?

Well I intended to jump on this subject when I got off work, and Byrd beat me to it

I would point out one little item that would be readily obvious throughout the universe if this "reversability" were fact: Black holes.

Black holes are a singularity, a point in space with no physical dimensions, zero volume, with infinite density. They are points where mass essentially "drops out" of the universe. (Actually, the mass remains, it is just compressed to a point of zero volume, thereby not violating the Law of Conservation of Mass)

If the universe had this "reversibility" there would also be "white holes" that would be constantly replacing the mass that ends up in these singularities. However, we do not observe any such phenomena. Such a structure would indeed violate the Law of Conservation of Mass, as it would be generating mass out of nowhere.

"Black holes are a singularity, a point in space with no physical dimensions, zero volume, with infinite density. They are points where mass essentially "drops out" of the universe"

how do u know this? have u done your research? or are u going by what u and i have been taught regarding the mechanics of black holes.

"be like the flower which gives its fragrance even to hand that crush it" phrophet ali (pbuh)

how do u know this? have u done your research? or are u going by what u and i have been taught regarding the mechanics of black holes. Posted by deffinitelymaybe

Yes I did forget to post the link, sorry about that.

By definition a black hole is a region where matter collapses to infinite density, and where, as a result, the curvature of spacetime is extreme. Moreover, the intense gravitational field of the black hole prevents any light or other electromagnetic radiation from escaping. But where lies the "point of no return" at which any matter or energy is doomed to disappear from the visible universe

archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu...

A massive astrophysical object that is theorized to be created from the collapse of a neutron star. The gravitational forces are so strong in a black hole that they overcome neutron degeneracy pressure and, roughly speaking, collapse to a point (known as a singularity). Even light cannot escape the gravitational pull of a black hole within the black hole's so-called Schwarzschild radius.

Uncharged, zero angular momentum black holes are called Schwarzschild black holes. Uncharged nonzero angular momentum black holes are called Kerr black holes. Nonspinning charged black holes are called Reissner-Nordstr�m black holes. Charged, spinning black holes are called Kerr-Newman black holes. The black hole no hair theorem shows that mass, charge, and angular momentum are the only properties which a black hole can possess.

scienceworld.wolfram.com...

gravity.psu.edu...

Also, a very good book that is very easy to understand to laymans is "Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking.

I never finished reading the Qur'an, but I started from the back. I even went to services with a friend of mine while we were enlisted, funny as I naturally entered with my right and exited with my left. It took me a few times to get the cleansing down, but I found the Muslim services to be best. Btw do you have those leather socks? Those are sweet?

dammit i just wrote a huge reply and the connection was lost.

ok byrd you dont have your ideas of time correct. it does run slower in the presence of a gravitational field as predicted by the general theory.

In my previous post i stated my qualifications to make that statement and i will do so at another time, but for now know that and keep this post up, ill write again later, peace

Originally posted by e-nonymous
I'm sorry, but don't the rule's say something about NOT posting obviouslt false information knowingly? I mean c'mon ... u can't seriously BELIEVE this crap can you?

I should like to point out that it's no stranger that some of the other stuff here (though I think it belongs in the religion forum.) In fact, we've had stuff that was stranger and far less "scientific" than this.

Originally posted by shockerlove
ok byrd you dont have your ideas of time correct. it does run slower in the presence of a gravitational field as predicted by the general theory.

To some degree, yes, but the general theory says that as you approach the speed of light, time slows to a stop. This is not dependant on a gravitational field.

Yes, I'm aware of the formulas and descriptions of black holes, but niether explaination has any formula where time goes backwards. And if you put humans through something like that, they'd be crushed instantly and there would be no time reversal that anyone would see.

Yes, I'm aware of the formulas and descriptions of black holes, but niether explaination has any formula where time goes backwards. And if you put humans through something like that, they'd be crushed instantly and there would be no time reversal that anyone would see Posted by Byrd

Yes, Byrd is correct in this.

(God, Im agreeing with Byrd, the world must really be about to end...)

The general theory postulates that the closer to the event horizon, the slower time passes, assuming you had the point of view of falling into the even horizon (in reality, tidal forces would have torn a human sized object apart far above in the accretion disk, assuming you could survive the massive X Ray emmissions even further out).

In theory, if you are falling into the event horizon, you reach a point where time seems to stop completely... but there is no reversal.

Meanwhile, you are crushed out of existence. I guess your consciousness percieves it as being crushed out of existence for eternity.

i think if all ats member left the arrogant thought and throw away all the different of negative sight among us then we can attains to understands the LIGHT OF ISLAM.

Byrd, read these links. They support the idea of the Big Crunch- a contracting Universe, a time reversed Universe.

www.xs4all.nl...

www.c-parr.freeserve.co.uk/hcp/collapse.htm

www.dhushara.com...

The "big crunch" is indeed a valid theory, however, latest data suggests that there is not enough "dark matter" in the universe to trigger the "rubber band effect" and go back into a universal contraction.