Good luck with his book and as a physicist I am impressed with him but
cannot determine whether to agree with him or not. However, his book is
readable and certainly give one something to think about. Bert M.
psiigii wrote:
> Not being a physicist or having a background in cosmology, the
> Humphries' idea sounds plausible on the surface. I appreciate your
> insight as well as the others that were posted continuing this
> discussion. I will have to get Schroeder's book.
>
>
> Howard
>
> Bert Massie wrote:
>
>> Absolutely not. Humphries book is considered scientific nonsense by
>> most Christian and secular scientists inlcuding this one. Humphries
>> argues whatever but offers no connection with observables and some
>> feel that his work fails even in the mathematics much less the
>> conceptual work or the Hebrew scholarship. . Schroeder would
>> consider him beneth contempt.
>> Bert M.
>>
>> psiigii wrote:
>>
>> > Very interested in getting this reference. >From what you're
>> > saying, this idea seems to correspond to A YEC cosmology (Russ
>> > Humphries' Starlight and Time outlines these ideas) which places
>> > the earth at the epicenter of a "white hole" from which the known
>> > universe was produced.
>> >
>> >
>> > Howard Meyer
>> >
>> > Massie wrote:
>> >
>> >> The problem with time is pointed out in detail by a brilliant
>> >> scholar
>> >> named Schroeder (sp?) from Israel.
>> >>
>> >> The problem is that clocks run at rates determined by the local
>> >> gravity
>> >> field. That is, a clock on the surface of a neutron star runs
>> >> slower
>> >> than one on Earth. This is a well verified consequence of the
>> >> General
>> >> Theory of Relatively, and no, it is not a plot against the YEC's.
>> >>
>> >> Where is the clock we use to measure the days of Genesis? This
>> >> is one
>> >> of the reasons that the debate over time makes no reason. Few
>> >> seem to
>> >> be aware of what every physisist knows, what clock where at what
>> >> speed.
>> >>
>> >> What if the clock was one that was placed in the intense gravity
>> >> field
>> >> of the Big Bang? How many days would elapse for that clock
>> >> since the
>> >> Big Bang and now? You should read Schroeders book but he argues
>> >> that it
>> >> would be six days. There are a lot of details, see the book.
>> >>
>> >> Interested? Send me an email and I will look up the ISBN number
>> >> and
>> >> post it.
>> >>
>> >> Bert M
>> >
--------------EA2BEE77508A1316095BBE2C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
Good luck with his book and as a physicist I am impressed with him but
cannot determine whether to agree with him or not. However, his book
is readable and certainly give one something to think about. Bert
M.
psiigii wrote:
Not being a physicist or having a background in cosmology, the Humphries' idea sounds plausible on the surface. I appreciate your insight as well as the others that were posted continuing this discussion. I will have to get Schroeder's book.Howard
Bert Massie wrote:
Absolutely not. Humphries book is considered scientific nonsense by most Christian and secular scientists inlcuding this one. Humphries argues whatever but offers no connection with observables and some feel that his work fails even in the mathematics much less the conceptual work or the Hebrew scholarship. . Schroeder would consider him beneth contempt.
Bert M.psiigii wrote:
Very interested in getting this reference. >From what you're saying, this idea seems to correspond to A YEC cosmology (Russ Humphries' Starlight and Time outlines these ideas) which places the earth at the epicenter of a "white hole" from which the known universe was produced.
Howard MeyerMassie wrote:
The problem with time is pointed out in detail by a brilliant scholar
named Schroeder (sp?) from Israel.The problem is that clocks run at rates determined by the local gravity
field. That is, a clock on the surface of a neutron star runs slower
than one on Earth. This is a well verified consequence of the General
Theory of Relatively, and no, it is not a plot against the YEC's.Where is the clock we use to measure the days of Genesis? This is one
of the reasons that the debate over time makes no reason. Few seem to
be aware of what every physisist knows, what clock where at what speed.What if the clock was one that was placed in the intense gravity field
of the Big Bang? How many days would elapse for that clock since the
Big Bang and now? You should read Schroeders book but he argues that it
would be six days. There are a lot of details, see the book.Interested? Send me an email and I will look up the ISBN number and
post it.Bert M
--------------EA2BEE77508A1316095BBE2C--