Can 15 billion yrs = 6 days?

[Guest]

Today scientists look at time going backward and see 15 billion years. But when the universe was created it may have been billions of times smaller then it is now since we know the universe is and has been expanding.
Recently as computers have become more sophisticated scientists have been quantifying the relationship of the size of the universe at creation to it's size now and how it affects the measurement of time.
The relationship has been quantified at 1= 1millionx1million and this directly impacts the "measurement of time" which is related to the speed of light.
The rate of expansion has been quantified at 10 to the 12th power.
Applying this rate of universe expansion to the 6 creation days then the time of each creation day would be
Day 1 = 8 billion years
Day 2 = 4 billion yrs
Day 3 = 2 billion yrs
Day 4 = 1 billion yrs
Day 5 = 500 mill yrs
Day 6 = 250 mill yrs

Total = 15 3/4 billion years.

[Guest]

This sounds like a theory I read in a YECist book by Dr. Russell Humphrey's years ago. His theory involved some type of white hole cosmology where 6 days passed from earth's perspective while enormous durations passed for the expanding universe. The theory was created to solve the 'starlight' problem

[Guest]

Hi Steve7150,

I'm not sure I follow you here. Though I do believe that the speed of light is a variable, I'm not sure how it would effect the measuring of days. Also if man was created on the sixth day, just how old was Adam? The Bible says that Adam lived 930 years (a far cry from 250 mil. years). Did God create Adam on the last day of the 6th creation day? Maybe you could help me connect the dots.

by the way, I linked an intresting artical on the speed of light below. Apparently these students at harvard were able to slow the speed of light down to 38 MPH.

http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/199 ... light.html


Thank you,
Robin

[Guest]

Hi Mattrose,

This sounds like a theory I read in a YECist book by Dr. Russell Humphrey's years ago. His theory involved some type of white hole cosmology where 6 days passed from earth's perspective while enormous durations passed for the expanding universe. The theory was created to solve the 'starlight' problem

I have read on this theory before. It is quite interesting, but it has its flaws. This theory would result in blue shift do to the light being stretched with the slowing of time as it reached earth. And the blue shift would be greater and greater as the light source was further from the earth. This obviously is not observed.

John G. Hartnett has a theory that is similar to Humphries but without this complication. Rather than trying to detail it out myself I will link his article.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/ar ... mology.pdf

Thank you,
Robin

[Guest]

I'm not sure I follow you here. Though I do believe that the speed of light is a variable, I'm not sure how it would effect the measuring of days. Also if man was created on the sixth day, just how old was Adam? The Bible says that Adam lived 930 years (a far cry from 250 mil. years). Did God create Adam on the last day of the 6th creation day? Maybe you could help me connect the dots.


The theory is that there are two biblical clocks, the universe clock and the earth clock. Once Adam was born the bible uses the earth clock and time is described from man's perspective and that is how jewish scholars measure the jewish calender which begins from Adam's birth on Rosh Hashanna going forward. In the jewish calender now at about 5768 , it leaves out the creation days because they knew that "evening and morning" were not earth clock days.
We know our weight varies if we compare it here verses what we weigh on the moon yet we have the same mass but it's perception is affected by gravity. Time is also a creation and it's perception is affected by gravity and light velocity so as the universe kept doubling in size millions of times it's perception of time speeds up. Yet even now on the sun, time actually moves slower then on earth and in a black hole it almost stands still.
When the universe was smaller gravity was more intense and lightwave speed was different.
From our perspective on earth as we measure the speed of lightwaves reaching us the universe is about 16 billion years old because we are looking back in time.
But the bible begins with the universe clock and looks forward until Adam and that universe clock has a measurable ratio to the earth clock and they reconcile.

[Guest]

Steve7150,

Where did you get your resources? Did you get it on the net cause I want to read it aslo.

[Guest]

Where did you get your resources? Did you get it on the net cause I want to read it aslo.


Hi Paul, I'm reading "The Science of God" by Gerald L. Schroeder which i highly recommend.
And i heard some of this at this site aishaudio.com
If you google it you can read some of it online.

[Guest]

My thoughts on the issue as a whole. While I do think that math and science are very important subjects to pursue, I do contend that God doesn't need to explain himself and condescend to an intellectual plane sufficient enough to interface with what our feeble minds can conjecture in the form of modern science. In my opinion, the wisdom of God doesn’t need to cerebrally “make sense” in our fallible minds. While I do believe that math and science are important for “contending for the faith once delivered” and for other apologetics, we also need to be cautious of pounding the proverbial square peg into the round hole, in order to satiate the otherwise finger-pointing scholars of our day, and wave an ever-changing theory under God’s nose as an aid to His purposes.

I will also say that the real issue is not one of the relation of light, time, and the expansion of the universe. The deeper issue is one of our relationship with God. Our views about science stem from an inner subconscious of how we imagine God. How do we use science? What are our feelings towards it? What is the impetus? Am I using it to construct of road block or a comfortable amount of padding between myself and God? Is it to protect some closely guarded presuppositions?

Tozer said this in the “Man: The Dwelling Place of God,” I believe:

“As long as science can make us so cozy in this present world it is hard to work up much pleasurable anticipation of a new world order … But affluence is only one cause of the decline of the apocalyptic hope. There are other and more important ones. The whole problem is a big one, a theological one, a moral one. An inadequate view of Christ may be the chief trouble. Christ has been explained, humanized, demoted. Many professed Christians no longer expect Him to usher in a new order; they are not at all sure that He is able to do so; or if He does, it will be with the help of art, education, science and technology; that is, with the help of man. This revised expectation amounts to disillusionment for many. And of course no one can become too radiantly happy over a King of kings who has been stripped of His crown or a Lord of lords who has lost His sovereignty … But one little thing has been overlooked in their preoccupation with our wonderful new ability to take the forces of nature and harness them: our scientific and intellectual advances were not accompanied by similar moral strides. Some people say they are helped in their faith through the offerings of science and the answers of education. I have a little book in my study (I use it for a window prop when I want to get more air) that has chapters entitled, “Finding God through Science,” “Finding God through Nature,” “Finding God through Art.” Why should we be trying to find God through a back door? Why should we always be peering out of some cellar window looking for God when the whole top side of the building is made of sheer crystal and God is shining down — revealed?”

Whether I agree with all of those words or not—I do know that they are profound in this era that places such importance on being scientifically accurate. In other words, science is valid only when dealing with material things and can, by definition, know nothing about God and the spiritual realm. Since the physical world is ultimately controlled by the spiritual, we must conclude that science is restricted exclusively to what consistencies we as mere humans can observe. Therefore, science is inherently fallible. We shouldn’t rely too heavily on it. The Bible claims that the natural man cannot understand the ways and the workings of God. We must simply come to Him as little children. If it rains, it is God watering His hills from His chambers. Do we really need to know the why’s are how’s and all of the other hidden dynamics?

My views on the specific topic of time-light relationships are a little clouded, I must say. I have a couple of beefs. 1) There is this assumption that time is based intrinsically upon what we refer to as “light.” 2) We also presuppose that the universe as a whole is expanding. Both of those assumptions may be true, but they have never been proven, and are still therefore assumptions. I have seen mathematical evidence on both sides of the fence, so I hesitate to jump to any conclusions.

I do agree that the overall issue is perhaps secondary to others. I realize that all believers needed to wade through some tough issues and be reconciled with God. I didn’t say that science or mathematics weren’t important—I believe they are. We need engineers and doctors and others who utilize and employ such knowledge on a daily basis. We simply cannot elevate them higher than the One who created the Earth that we so diligently and meticulously try to crack—and discover it’s secrets. I don’t claim to have all the correct answers. Sorry for the long rant—just my two cents.

Tozer again, from “The Pursuit of God:”

“When God spoke out of heaven to our Lord, self-centered men who heard it explained it by natural causes, saying, “It thundered.” This habit of explaining the Voice by appeals to natural law is at the very root of modern science. In the living, breathing cosmos there is a mysterious Something, too wonderful, too awful for any mind to understand. The believing man does not claim to understand. He falls to his knees and whispers, “God.” The man of earth kneels also, but not to worship. He kneels to examine, to search, to find the cause and the how of things. Just now we happen to be living in a secular age. Our thought habits are those of the scientist, not those of the worshiper. We are more likely to explain than to adore. “It thundered,” we exclaim, and go our earthly way. But still the Voice sounds and searches. The order and life of the world depend upon that Voice, but men are mostly too busy or too stubborn to give attention.”

[Guest]

ya gotta love tozer. awesome.

TK

[Guest]

When God spoke out of heaven to our Lord, self-centered men who heard it explained it by natural causes, saying, “It thundered.” This habit of explaining the Voice by appeals to natural law is at the very root of modern science. In the living, breathing cosmos there is a mysterious Something, too wonderful, too awful for any mind to understand. The believing man does not claim to understand. He falls to his knees and whispers, “God.” The man of earth kneels also, but not to worship. He kneels to examine, to search, to find the cause and the how of things. Just now we happen to be living in a secular age. Our thought habits are those of the scientist, not those of the worshiper. We are more likely to explain than to adore. “It thundered,” we exclaim, and go our earthly way. But still the Voice sounds and searches. The order and life of the world depend upon that Voice, but men are mostly too busy or too stubborn to give attention.”


Everyone is entitled to their opinion but from my vantage point God gave us brains, and he wants us to use them. God created the universe and his glory is revealed in it but he also gave us the ability to learn more and more about his magnificant creation.
The more i understand it, the more breathtaking i realize it is. As it says in Gen 3 "knowing good and evil they have become like us" which is God's intention IMO but the question is if we acquire knowledge, will we use it wisely?