Do you believe in God?
AspE wrote:
NoahYates wrote:
AspE wrote:
NoahYates wrote:
...I do not think the standard evolutionary model is in anyway in contradiction to the idea that God created the universe and also knew how the program would run...
But you said atheists were wrong to point to...
Quote:
...the concept of natural selection working on time+chance/mutation being sufficient to engender the proliferation of diverse life in the delicate symphony it constitutes in the biosphere...
So which is it?
The "chance multiplier" would be accounted for by God's fine tuning/special intervention/embedding of potencies/Leibniz-ian Monads.
Except there is no evidence for any of that.
This is not correct. As I have mentioned prior, the fact that we have stars and galaxies in a balance of more than thirty known cosmological constants which if altered by even the most marginal aberration, enables the odds of our universe to be around 1 in 10^500.
_________________
Sebastian
"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck
Here is a spiritual buzz:
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8)
Time Dilation Formula= Δtime=(Rest Time)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
The speed of light is c, given as 299792458 m/s
1000*365= 365,000 days (given as a thousan years)
Given Rest Time= 1 day
365,000=(1)/(Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000=(1)/(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1
sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1/(365,000)
1-v^2/c^2=sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2/c^2=1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2=c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v=sqrt[c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)]
v=sqrt[(299792458)^2(0.998344)]
v=299792457 m/s
Consequently, this biblical verse, if taken literally, would give the speed of light with a minimal margin of error. 
Indeed.
_________________
Sebastian
"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck
Deltaville wrote:
Here is a spiritual buzz:
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8)
Time Dilation Formula= Δtime=(Rest Time)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
The speed of light is c, given as 299792458 m/s
1000*365= 365,000 days (given as a thousan years)
Given Rest Time= 1 day
365,000=(1)/(Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000=(1)/(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1
sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1/(365,000)
1-v^2/c^2=sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2/c^2=1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2=c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v=sqrt[c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)]
v=sqrt[(299792458)^2(0.998344)]
v=299792457 m/s
Consequently, this biblical verse, if taken literally, would give the speed of light with a minimal margin of error.
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8)
Time Dilation Formula= Δtime=(Rest Time)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
The speed of light is c, given as 299792458 m/s
1000*365= 365,000 days (given as a thousan years)
Given Rest Time= 1 day
365,000=(1)/(Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000=(1)/(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1
sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1/(365,000)
1-v^2/c^2=sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2/c^2=1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2=c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v=sqrt[c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)]
v=sqrt[(299792458)^2(0.998344)]
v=299792457 m/s
Consequently, this biblical verse, if taken literally, would give the speed of light with a minimal margin of error.
If you rearrange the equation before plugging in numbers, you can write it as v=c√(1-1/t^2 ).
That means, the speed of light multiplied by a number that's going to be very close to 1. Any big number plugged into that equation will get you "the speed of light with a minimal margin of error".
So, if that verse was rewritten as "Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as two thousand years, and two thousand years as one day."
or
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as five hundred years, and five hundred years as one day."
or even
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a million years, and a million years as one day."
You'd still end up with "the speed of light with a minimal margin of error". That verse doesn't really seem significant if you ask me.
Sabreclaw wrote:
Deltaville wrote:
Here is a spiritual buzz:
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8)
Time Dilation Formula= Δtime=(Rest Time)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
The speed of light is c, given as 299792458 m/s
1000*365= 365,000 days (given as a thousan years)
Given Rest Time= 1 day
365,000=(1)/(Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000=(1)/(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1
sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1/(365,000)
1-v^2/c^2=sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2/c^2=1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2=c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v=sqrt[c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)]
v=sqrt[(299792458)^2(0.998344)]
v=299792457 m/s
Consequently, this biblical verse, if taken literally, would give the speed of light with a minimal margin of error.
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8)
Time Dilation Formula= Δtime=(Rest Time)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
The speed of light is c, given as 299792458 m/s
1000*365= 365,000 days (given as a thousan years)
Given Rest Time= 1 day
365,000=(1)/(Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000=(1)/(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1
sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1/(365,000)
1-v^2/c^2=sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2/c^2=1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2=c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v=sqrt[c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)]
v=sqrt[(299792458)^2(0.998344)]
v=299792457 m/s
Consequently, this biblical verse, if taken literally, would give the speed of light with a minimal margin of error.
If you rearrange the equation before plugging in numbers, you can write it as v=c√(1-1/t^2 ).
That means, the speed of light multiplied by a number that's going to be very close to 1. Any big number plugged into that equation will get you "the speed of light with a minimal margin of error".
So, if that verse was rewritten as "Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as two thousand years, and two thousand years as one day."
or
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as five hundred years, and five hundred years as one day."
or even
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a million years, and a million years as one day."
You'd still end up with "the speed of light with a minimal margin of error". That verse doesn't really seem significant if you ask me.
Your rearranged version is incorrect as it negates the change in time. Examine your formula.
Better not argue math with the DELTAville.
_________________
Sebastian
"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck
Last edited by Deltaville on 09 Mar 2016, 5:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Deltaville wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
Deltaville wrote:
Here is a spiritual buzz:
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8)
Time Dilation Formula= Δtime=(Rest Time)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
The speed of light is c, given as 299792458 m/s
1000*365= 365,000 days (given as a thousan years)
Given Rest Time= 1 day
365,000=(1)/(Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000=(1)/(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1
sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1/(365,000)
1-v^2/c^2=sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2/c^2=1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2=c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v=sqrt[c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)]
v=sqrt[(299792458)^2(0.998344)]
v=299792457 m/s
Consequently, this biblical verse, if taken literally, would give the speed of light with a minimal margin of error.
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8)
Time Dilation Formula= Δtime=(Rest Time)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
The speed of light is c, given as 299792458 m/s
1000*365= 365,000 days (given as a thousan years)
Given Rest Time= 1 day
365,000=(1)/(Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000=(1)/(1-v^2/c^2)
365,000*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1
sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)=1/(365,000)
1-v^2/c^2=sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2/c^2=1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v^2=c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)
v=sqrt[c^2(1-sqrt(1/365,000)]
v=sqrt[(299792458)^2(0.998344)]
v=299792457 m/s
Consequently, this biblical verse, if taken literally, would give the speed of light with a minimal margin of error.
If you rearrange the equation before plugging in numbers, you can write it as v=c√(1-1/t^2 ).
That means, the speed of light multiplied by a number that's going to be very close to 1. Any big number plugged into that equation will get you "the speed of light with a minimal margin of error".
So, if that verse was rewritten as "Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as two thousand years, and two thousand years as one day."
or
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as five hundred years, and five hundred years as one day."
or even
"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a million years, and a million years as one day."
You'd still end up with "the speed of light with a minimal margin of error". That verse doesn't really seem significant if you ask me.
The rearranged version is incorrect as it negates the change in time. Examine your formula.
Yeah, I figured that out on my own while drawing up my working in full on Word. It hasn't changed the outcome of what I was doing, since you substituted the rest time with 1 and it just ends up being a multiplier. I'll get my working up in a moment.
Sabreclaw wrote:
Okay, so here it is:

So, c = speed of light, t = 1, and T = 365000. Plug those in, and you get v = 299792457.
In the form I've arranged it to, you can see that all you're doing is multiplying the speed of light by a number a tiny bit smaller than one.

So, c = speed of light, t = 1, and T = 365000. Plug those in, and you get v = 299792457.
In the form I've arranged it to, you can see that all you're doing is multiplying the speed of light by a number a tiny bit smaller than one.
Remember you are dilating time. And if you plug in a different number, like a billion, the answer clearly indicates that this is not a multiplier function.
_________________
Sebastian
"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck
Deltaville wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
Okay, so here it is:

So, c = speed of light, t = 1, and T = 365000. Plug those in, and you get v = 299792457.
In the form I've arranged it to, you can see that all you're doing is multiplying the speed of light by a number a tiny bit smaller than one.

So, c = speed of light, t = 1, and T = 365000. Plug those in, and you get v = 299792457.
In the form I've arranged it to, you can see that all you're doing is multiplying the speed of light by a number a tiny bit smaller than one.
Remember you are dilating time.
Yes, one day to a thousand years. But the meaning behind the equation is meaningless. What matters is what the numbers are doing, and all I see you doing is multiplying c by a number very close to one and then acting as though it should be considered a big deal that the outcome of that is a number very close to c.
Unless I'm misunderstanding something, in which case I'd be happy for you to explain it to me. Sometimes I misunderstand things.
Sabreclaw wrote:
Deltaville wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
Okay, so here it is:

So, c = speed of light, t = 1, and T = 365000. Plug those in, and you get v = 299792457.
In the form I've arranged it to, you can see that all you're doing is multiplying the speed of light by a number a tiny bit smaller than one.

So, c = speed of light, t = 1, and T = 365000. Plug those in, and you get v = 299792457.
In the form I've arranged it to, you can see that all you're doing is multiplying the speed of light by a number a tiny bit smaller than one.
Remember you are dilating time.
Yes, one day to a thousand years. But the meaning behind the equation is meaningless. What matters is what the numbers are doing, and all I see you doing is multiplying c by a number very close to one and then acting as though it should be considered a big deal that the outcome of that is a number very close to c.
Unless I'm misunderstanding something, in which case I'd be happy for you to explain it to me. Sometimes I misunderstand things.
It is however, not a multiplier function even 1 is considered to be the rest.
This is significant, in my opinion. However, your view, that is your perspective and decision.
I confess, I may have made a little mistake. A too large value would indeed make it closer to c, but this because of relativity. Anyways, as such, the time dilation in this biblical verse does indeed correspond to the Einstenian field equations.
_________________
Sebastian
"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck
Last edited by Deltaville on 09 Mar 2016, 5:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Deltaville wrote:
It is however, not a multiplier function even 1 is considered to be the rest.
It's how you look at it. When you plug in the numbers, you end up with v = c * 0.9999999999962469506473939706336, according to my handy-dandy calculator.
Deltaville wrote:
This is significant, in my opinion. However, your view, that is your perspective and decision.
I feel like you're finding meaning where there is none. But if you want to stick with that view then I guess we're stuck, because there is no remote significance in that to me.
Sabreclaw wrote:
Deltaville wrote:
It is however, not a multiplier function even 1 is considered to be the rest.
It's how you look at it. When you plug in the numbers, you end up with v = c * 0.9999999999962469506473939706336, according to my handy-dandy calculator.
Deltaville wrote:
This is significant, in my opinion. However, your view, that is your perspective and decision.
I feel like you're finding meaning where there is none. But if you want to stick with that view then I guess we're stuck, because there is no remote significance in that to me.
No, if you take a very small number of deltaT, the picture changes. I apologize, however, I forgot that the larger deltaT, the closer it is to c. My bad.
_________________
Sebastian
"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck
Deltaville wrote:
Sorry, but I cannot help but think that this thread has become a little holy war.
Side 1:
NoahYates
Marcb0t
Deltaville
Side 2:
AspE
Edenthiel
Misery
Side 1:
NoahYates
Marcb0t
Deltaville
Side 2:
AspE
Edenthiel
Misery
Lol... its like we are in one of the debates I enjoy watching. Ill take our team all day, any day!! !
_________________
“In the same way that you see a flower in a field, it’s really the whole field that is flowering, because the flower couldn’t exist in that particular place without the special surroundings of the field; you only find flowers in surroundings that will support them. So in the same way, you only find human beings on a planet of this kind, with an atmosphere of this kind, with a temperature of this kind- supplied by a convenient neighboring star. And so, as the flower is a flowering of the field, I feel myself as a personing- a manning- a peopling of the whole universe. –In other words, I, like everything else in the universe, seem to be a center… a sort of vortex, at which the whole energy of the universe realizes itself- comes alive… an aperture through which the whole universe is conscious of itself. In other words, I go with it as a center to a circumference.”~ Alan Watts

