Back to Home

God & Science 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 | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: No Time For General Relativity

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by richard david/">richard david on July 22, 1999 12:32:54 UTC

I confess. I have used both my first and middle names in this forum. For you see I was first Anglican, hence Richard, the great English king who never lived in England. Then I converted to Judiaism, hence David, same relationship. My mother was a prophet. But now I'm essentially Hindu, but know of no way to become one formally. I just practice my own mantras, a combination of Hindu, Buddhist and Jewish words. I'm also a PhD in physics from Harvard and so I sometimes use physics concepts without explanation just to save time. And finally, you haven't caught on to my hidden agenda. By the way I've never been a "born again Christian" or a fundamentalist. But I am a creationist in the sense that a something that most of us refer to as God created the world and continues in my opinion to influence that creation. I too think of our universe (there may be many others) as billions of years old. However, what I deduce from the equations of relativity and their many published solutions is that the speed of light (in vacuum) does not have to be constant. Quoting Rovelli was just a convenient source of many to support this view. The hidden agenda is that if we allow the speed of light to vary exponentially, then the fundamentalists faith in a 8,000 year old universe can be consistent with our belief in a universe of billions of years. In short, it amounts to a redefinition of the meaning of the word "year" in the bible. The Anglicans did that years ago when they determined that evolution was consistent with Genesis by claiming that the length of a year in Genesis was variable and somewhat longer than our year. Essentially they decided that a biblical year was really an epic. All I have done is to express the same thing mathematically in a manner that seems to be within the constraints of General Relativity. Perhaps I could enhance my income writing for Creationists magazines expressing proof (in their minds) that the universe could be 8,000 years old. Richard David Ruquist

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 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