Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: To Believe Or Not To Believe

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by John Reyes on February 7, 2001 15:00:14 UTC

Al
You are wise in what you say , these guys however seem reluctant to let others opinions dominate their own which is not the reason why we are here ,they insult a God that cannot be proven to exist with a science that itself is imaginary and conjured from a fluttering idea born out of commonsense that today seems to also try to convince the world that the matter in the universe an amount so huge was situated in a speck of dust .

It is beyond intuitive human comprehension to accept such a fallacy which in itself lacks a genuine scientific backing and understanding for the universe is far bigger than man can observe and if only the HST could be kept in a stationary position then the deep field image will prove a greater universe than that believed today hence making all scientific speculation take a leap out of its theoretical window .

These guys parade their physics feathers up and down these sites yet they cannot catch any attention for their feathers lack colour and cannot attract an audience for however much is discussed the fact will always remain that the great mass of the universe would according to the conservation laws have been equal to energy in the primeval atom as niether can be created or destroyed so such a pin point of a beginning would be a false interpretation even if one were to take away all the electrons from the mass of the universe that is visible today .

Man found a method of calculation which seems to fit the universe which then suggests that if the universe is mathematical then it would be obvios that a grand designer exists .
Man measures a concept of time yet it does not exist because a clock at the bottom of a tower whilst synchronized with a clock at the top of a tower then the clock at the top would to man seem slower , what man does not comprehend is that if the tower was hypothetically extended upwards and half way to the sun then by placing a clock in synchronization with the one at the bottom , then the higher clock would have to read four minutes past noon whilst the clock at the bottom would read noon to allow for the time that light would take to reach earth.
One may then seem to think that time slows down but forget what time it would be again in another twenty four hours and that this would apply for as long as the earth or sun exists whether clocks are situated on towers or satellites or a twin living on a mountain top and one at sea level or even travelling to distant stars at lightspeed .

A measuring rod is supposed to shrink and a clock is supposed to stop yet Hawkings and Einstein never seemed to explain why light itself does not slow down at such speeds yet a clock is supposed to stop and a measuring rod is supposed to shrink , the reason being that they never have been tested with the earth/sun cycle so a twin would return from a star that is four lightyears away the same age as his twin on earth , and as for einstein riding a beam of light then he would have aged at the same rate that the light beam would have in a journey of the same , the tower clocks being substituted for sundials would contradict einsteins hypothetical thought of what todays science and followers believe to be true time slow down .

As for satellites then the occurrance of increased velocities in frequencies differ at varied distances from earth , the velocity of light though remains unaffected hence no time slow down is shown .

Whilst others fail to accept the truth even if it was facing them , then I have had my say on this site hence I shall now continue with my second book for which I shall personally dedicate the back page like my rear end to alexander and bruce who will be kissing my rear end and of which all of you will then know if I understood physics , but until then they are not going to be given the pleasure of knowing , so until it has been published then I shall not return to advise you all of this book and its ISBN .


Good Luck Al


P/s GwynJ if you read this then do not ask yourself for he said go ahead and write it !.


cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins