 |
A friend of mine sent me the video below in favour of young earth theory.
I am not a scientist, but I have as a theologian and philosopher, some considerations in regard to the presentation and the concepts of infinite and infinite speed.
Reasons To Believe By Dr. Jeff Zweerink May 1, 2012
Cited
'Young-earth (YE) and old-earth (OE) creationists disagree on a great number of scientific issues—most prominently the ages of the Earth and universe—but both groups generally agree on the astronomical distances measured with telescopes. The Sun sits just over eight light-minutes away, the center of the Milky Way Galaxy at 25,000 light-years, the Andromeda Galaxy around 2.5 million light-years, and the most distant quasars up to 13 billion light-years away. These distances pose no problems for inflationary, big bang models of the universe (consistent with an OE view), but the YE creationist models have a “distant starlight problem.” How do observers see such distant objects in a few-thousand-year-old universe?'
Cited
'Astronomer Jason Lisle,1 until recently at Answers in Genesis, has proposed a novel solution to the “distant starlight problem.” His article describing the model provides details,2 but here are the salient features of what he calls the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention (ASC).'
Cited
'3. Lisle adopts a different synchrony convention where light travels at infinite speed in one direction and half the speed of light on the return trip.
4. He also introduces a directional dependence such that light travels at infinite speed toward the Earth. Lisle then argues that the Genesis 1 creation account suggests that God used the ASC in His miraculous work during the creation week. For example, all the stars created on the fourth day would need to be visible from Earth’s surface in order to perform their function (to serve as signs for seasons––Gen. 1:14). Choosing the ASC would mean the light from these stars arrived instantaneously on day four.
Cited
'The pressing question becomes: which convention is the correct one to use? Without a doubt, the standard convention provides the easiest framework for calculating a sequential history of the events in the universe as well as for computing how to build particle accelerators, GPS systems, and many other technological instruments. Unfortunately, Lisle’s choice of conventions is untestable, as he acknowledges: The anisotropic synchrony convention is just that—a convention. It is not a scientific model; it does not make testable predictions.It is a convention of measurement and cannot be falsified any more than the metric system can be falsified.'
Cited
'Lisle’s addition of a directionality condition (item 4 above) may prove the most problematic aspect of the ASC. Although the synchrony convention is a genuine choice, the anisotropic nature of the ASC would produce observable consequences. The biggest consequence would be a detectable gravitational field (apart from the one caused by Earth’s mass) and scientists measure no such field.4'
Infinite speed?
'Lisle adopts a different synchrony convention where light travels at infinite speed in one direction and half the speed of light on the return trip.'
Oxford defines light as 'The form of electromagnetic radiation to which the human eye is sensitive and on which our visual awareness of the universe and its contents relies.' (476). Related to colour. (476).
The finite velocity of light was suspected many with experimentation earlier, but was not documented and established until 1676, when Ole Christensen Rømer, measured it. (476). Further progress was made over the years through scientific research, including the development of wave theory. (476-477). Albert Einstein and others worked in the field and there theory developed and evolved into a theory of 'quantum theory and wave mechanics.' (477). Quantum being the minimum amount by which certain properties, such as energy and angular momentum of a system can change. (677).
Based on academic science, light is documented as having a finite velocity.
However, based on Lisle's theory, in fairness, theologically, I reason that theoretically, God could supernaturally, instantaneously illuminate his creation. This view would be understood as supported by the particular interpretation of 'let there by light' from Genesis 1 as infinite and not finite light. It would be the supernatural appearance of light within the nature of the infinite, limitless God. But God could illuminate his creation with created, finite light and it would be also supported by 'let there be light.'
Cited
'Choosing the ASC would mean the light from these stars arrived instantaneously on day four.'
I do not reason the infinite arrives, in the sense of infinite light would not traverse time and space, it simply is and simply would be. It would appear within the finite universe. If this was God as light.
The concept of infinite speed seems problematic. Speed by definition is a rate, it is finite. Light from God that arrives, seems more likely created finite light.
Scientifically, measurable light is not supernatural and is not infinite. Scientifically, philosophically and theologically, concepts of light travelling at infinite speed seem problematic as mentioned, and are also not measurable by finite standards. Finitely created light and the speed of that light would not be measurable by any type of infinitude, but instead would be measured by finitude.
Within my writings I have reasoned philosophically, theologically and biblically that only God is limitless. Only God is eternal and has both no beginning and no end. Only God is infinite. Anything within created matter is finite. Anything created is finite. This includes time and space.
Oxford Dictionary of Science, (2010), Sixth Edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
