Evolution vs Creation

#121

What would energy “escape” into?

The circular universe theory is essentially the same as the round Earth theory. Keep moving straight along the surface of the Earth and, eventually, you’ll end up exactly where you started. Travel east, and you’ll eventually end up in the west. You’re not moving in a straight line (otherwise, you’d eventually leave the planet).

But, there’s no such thing as a “straight” line. It only looks straight due to our hypermicro inspection of the curved line. Keep moving in what you perceive to be a “straight” line and eventually you’ll end up back where you started. Travel to the east on the Earth and you’ll come in from the west. Travel ‘straight’ out of our galaxy and, eventually, you’ll end up back in our galaxy.

Assuming that the galaxies don’t move, of course, which they do, but for the sake of argument…

#122

What you’re saying doesn’t make sense. Surely the comparison would be “if you went spiral-ward you would end up in the same place”. If you want an equivalent to my argument, it would be to go in a direction perpendicular to the ground. You would end up in space, not on the other side of Earth.

I’m talking about light moving perpendicular to the centre of the universe, not light moving around the universe.

#123

There is no “center” of the universe. You can travel in a ‘straight’ line from a single point in space, sure. But you wouldn’t be traveling straight. You’d be doing a fucking HUGE 360°. You only perceive it to be a “straight” line, just like someone traveling along the surface of the Earth would perceive themselves to be going in a “straight” line.

“Straight” is a mathematical invention. It works in Euclidean geometry.

But physical space isn’t Euclidean. It’s elliptical. At least, with our current understanding.

Euclidean geometry is a very good approximation on the relatively hypermicro scale (Pi = 3?). When you’re talking about such vast bigness as the universe, however, the approximation breaks down…because, like traveling over the surface of the Earth, traveling through space is non-Euclidean.

#124

Dinosaurs never existed, it would have mentioned them in the bible.

#125

Neither Australians. :smiley:

#126

daniel is doing a better job of explaining what I was trying to say. That’s pretty much what it said in A Briefer History of Time (sorry to keep mentioning it, but it’s the only thing I’ve read on this subject).

#127

Then I shall bow to your superior knowledge of astrophysics (see, theists, this is how one debates properly).

Still, the breathing universe theory is shot down by what G.O.A.T. said.

EDIT: where can I read about this elliptical universe stuff?

#128

I don’t really think geekofalltrades did anything of the sort. I read his posts and his claim is that we can know the nature and true mass of ALL dark matter in the universe by extrapolating from how much light has bent on its journey from a star to us. This is, of course, ignoring the VASTNESS of “emptiness” in the universe in which several quadrillion upon quadrillion of unknown pieces of dark matter the light of stars do NOT interact with on their journey to our couple thousand mile wide planet.

You can read about the elliptical universe theory in A Brief History of Time by one Stephen Hawking…though it’s all over the Interwebs as well.

#129

Hm, fair enough. Isn’t it still in the balance as to the fate of the universe though? As far as I can remember from A level physics, it’s still unknown as to whether the universe will carry on expanding infinitely, slow to a stop or retract into a big crunch.

I think I’ll trust Steven Hawking over the internet.

#130

Quite so. Like I said before, it’s the hypothesis I currently ascribe to given my woefully incomplete knowledge of the universe. It could be (and probably is) 100% wrong.

#131

#132

I recommend A Briefer History of Time. I believe it contains more recent data and theories, and the text has been made somewhat more comprehensible.

According to wikipedia, “it is an update and rewrite of Hawking’s 1988 A Brief History of Time.”

#133

:facepalm:

So all those fossils are…what?

#134

I see your sarcasm-o-meter may be broken.

#135

Ah. Not broken, just not compatible with the internet.

#136

all of life evolved from the dumb southern lawyer from inherit the wind

#137

Okay, I’m sorry, but that’s just too fucking funny!

Creationism only exist because some asshole wrote it into the Bible. There is ABSOLUTELY no evidence to support creationism or ANYTHING in the Bible AT ALL!
Show me a 6000 year old bitten apple, a magical snake, or ANY evidence, and MAYBE I’ll believe it. Otherwise, get out of my school system!

Separation of Church and State FTW!

#138

Fun fact. The 6000 year old age of the Earth was actually calculated by a monk in the 14th century. It does not appear at all in any prior religious works, including the Bible itself.

#139

I thought it was from adding up the ages of people in Biblical geneology or something like that.
Anyway, “young-earth creationism” is a relatively small (in terms of believers) sub-branch of creationism, they aren’t the same thing.

#140

I bet there is a whole load of things that are said to be “from the bible” but were actually written long after the deaths of the original authors of it.

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.