It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by chizeled
interesting discussion...the Christian perspective suggests that the universe is only 10 thousand or so years old...
I don't consider the Vatican to be Christian but that's another discussion. I don't know what the Vatican bases their propaganda on but I do know that ICR.org bases their theories on the Bible. Like I said, the "Christian perspective" which typically means that it is based on the Bible "suggests that the universe is 10k years old." I don't know if your version of Christianity is based on the Bible or not but ICR.org does base their research on the Bible. I was simply offering the op a different perspective to consider irregardless of your personal beliefs and disbeliefs. I also don't believe that anybody considers your opinion of 'that's not true' to be very scientific, "Small Somebody."
Originally posted by NewAgeMan Small Somebody
That's not true, and not even the Vatican in Rome maintains that.
Originally posted by chizeled
interesting discussion...the Christian perspective suggests that the universe is only 10 thousand or so years old...
That's the Biblical Literalist Evangelical Conservative Christian view, but not the view of most Christians, myself included as an Evolutionary Christian Mystic.
If the Universe is infinite then what is the reason light cannot reach us beyond ~14 billion light years, it would have the time originating from before then. Which is why I reject dispersion also.
I suggest that a finite Universe answers the inadequacy of enough sources to obliterate dark.
Originally posted by nataylor
the very early universe as described by the Big Bang theory was extremely luminous (since all the matter in the universe was condensed into a very hot, bright space). And since looking deeper into space is like looking back in time, it would seem that even with the Big Bang, the sky should be bathed in the early light of the universe.
The source of emitted photon stream and the detection source (us) are receding from each other at a speed greater than c combined, at that point photons emitted never reach us.
Would that mean; red shift ultimate regression is black?
If we assume that energy is lost by gravitational forces, radiation energy transfer, or transfer to particle, we now have a finite distance a photon can traverse. If so, we can define a universal average attenuation length.
Thus a Galaxy that is 11 Billion Light Years away means we are looking at that Galaxy as how it was 11 Billion Years ago.
exactly right, we don't have a clue, especially considering the science behind the light year theory has been proven to be flawed. The light year theory has not been proven, as is indicated by the word theory, but has rather been proven to be flawed. People like to make themselves seem intelligent and superior by saying things like the universe is millions or even billions of years old but, as hard as they try, they just can't prove it. They come up with all kinds of official sounding jargon and documentation in order to make themselves believe that they know what they are talking about but they don't. However, the reasoning behind the light year theory has been proven to be deeply flawed: ICR.org
Originally posted by yourmaker
Thus a Galaxy that is 11 Billion Light Years away means we are looking at that Galaxy as how it was 11 Billion Years ago.
how can we begin to predict anything about what's happening out there if it's happened 11 billion years ago??
there could be a billion different things in the process of affecting us and we would have no clue?
the science behind the light year theory has been proven to be flawed. The light year theory has not been proven, as is indicated by the word theory, but has rather been proven to be flawed.