Difference between revisions of "Starlight problem"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Add mention of logical fallacy and one explanation)
(Move sections. Otherwise no alterations or additions except for adding two headings.)
Line 22: Line 22:
 
However, most creationists reject this explanation, as the light contains images of events that would therefore never have actually happened, including [[super nova]], meaning that we are seeing an image of a start exploding, but a star that never existed.
 
However, most creationists reject this explanation, as the light contains images of events that would therefore never have actually happened, including [[super nova]], meaning that we are seeing an image of a start exploding, but a star that never existed.
 
This would make the creator a deceiver.
 
This would make the creator a deceiver.
 +
 +
=== Decrease in the speed of light ===
 +
 +
* Creationist [[Barry Setterfield]] has proposed that the speed of light was faster in the past. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0809_cdk_davies.asp</ref> This idea is widely accepted by creationists. In 1999, John Webb, a professor at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia,  and his colleagues reported astronomical observations suggesting that the value of the fine-structure constant (which is related to the speed of light) may have changed which they subsequently published in 2001 in ''[[Physical Review Letters]]''.<ref>http://www.nature.com/physics/highlights/6849-3.html#ref1</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp</ref>  If correct, then various theories that constants have always may need to be changed.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp</ref> When Barry Setterfield took the position that the speed of light was much faster in the past the main objection was the purported constancy of fundamental laws.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp</ref> 
 +
 +
=== Time dilation field ===
 +
 +
* The work of young earth creation scientist Dr. John Hartnett proposes an alternative creationist view, by theorizing the Earth was trapped in a time-dilation field caused by extremely strong gravitation during the first few days of creation, from Earth's point of view, while billions of years passed for the rest of the universe. He attributes the field, its removal and the continued balance in our solar system (after the field was removed) to divine intervention. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i2/cosmology.asp</ref> This theory is not widely accepted by creationists.
 +
* The starlight problem applies only to a young universe. Some young-earth creationists interpret Genesis as describing only the creation of the Earth in six days, not the entire universe.
  
 
==Starlight Problem for the Big Bang Theory==
 
==Starlight Problem for the Big Bang Theory==
Line 30: Line 39:
 
[[Image:Barry_setterfield.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Barry Setterfield]]]]
 
[[Image:Barry_setterfield.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Barry Setterfield]]]]
 
In regards to the question of how one can see [[star|starlight]] from millions of light years away, [[Young Earth Creationism|young earth creation]] [[scientist]]s commonly mention several things.  
 
In regards to the question of how one can see [[star|starlight]] from millions of light years away, [[Young Earth Creationism|young earth creation]] [[scientist]]s commonly mention several things.  
−
 
−
* Creationist [[Barry Setterfield]] has proposed that the speed of light was faster in the past. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0809_cdk_davies.asp</ref> This idea is widely accepted by creationists. In 1999, John Webb, a professor at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia,  and his colleagues reported astronomical observations suggesting that the value of the fine-structure constant (which is related to the speed of light) may have changed which they subsequently published in 2001 in ''[[Physical Review Letters]]''.<ref>http://www.nature.com/physics/highlights/6849-3.html#ref1</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp</ref>  If correct, then various theories that constants have always may need to be changed.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp</ref> When Barry Setterfield took the position that the speed of light was much faster in the past the main objection was the purported constancy of fundamental laws.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp</ref> 
 
−
* The work of young earth creation scientist Dr. John Hartnett proposes an alternative creationist view, by theorizing the Earth was trapped in a time-dilation field caused by extremely strong gravitation during the first few days of creation, from Earth's point of view, while billions of years passed for the rest of the universe. He attributes the field, its removal and the continued balance in our solar system (after the field was removed) to divine intervention. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i2/cosmology.asp</ref> This theory is not widely accepted by creationists.
 
−
* The starlight problem applies only to a young universe. Some young-earth creationists interpret Genesis as describing only the creation of the Earth in six days, not the entire universe.
 
  
 
== Bibliography ==
 
== Bibliography ==

Revision as of 07:27, November 10, 2007

The so-called "starlight problem", or "starlight travel-time problem" is an apparent problem for the young-Earth creationist argument that the universe is only 6,000 years old, which age is based primarily on the Genesis narrative. The problem is that if the universe is only 6,000 years old, there has not been enough time for light from stars in the distant reaches of the universe to reach Earth.

However, light travel time is also a problem for the Big Bang Theory.


The size of the universe

Using parallax calculations, the Milky Way galaxy alone can be directly observed to have a diameter of approximately 80-100,000 light years. Calculations based on the observed brightness of supernovas of known energy output can determine the distance to more distant objects. The most distant object known is a star cluster approximately thirteen billion light-years away from Earth, observed by the Hubble telescope using gravitational lensing[1].

Although creationists have at times disputed the size of the universe, none propose that it is less than 12,000 light years across.

Solutions to the problem

Several solutions have been proposed by creationists to explain how a young universe may be reconciled with these observations.

They also point out that there is a logical fallacy in the argument, as the observation that many stars are millions of light years away is one of distance, not time. No matter how reasonable, it is a deduction, not an 'observation, that the starlight from stars millions of light years away would have required millions of years to reach Earth.

Light created in transit

Some creationists have proposed that the light we see from stars more than 6,000 light years away was not emitted by those stars, but was created 'in transit' by God. However, most creationists reject this explanation, as the light contains images of events that would therefore never have actually happened, including super nova, meaning that we are seeing an image of a start exploding, but a star that never existed. This would make the creator a deceiver.

Decrease in the speed of light

  • Creationist Barry Setterfield has proposed that the speed of light was faster in the past. [2] This idea is widely accepted by creationists. In 1999, John Webb, a professor at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, and his colleagues reported astronomical observations suggesting that the value of the fine-structure constant (which is related to the speed of light) may have changed which they subsequently published in 2001 in Physical Review Letters.[3][4] If correct, then various theories that constants have always may need to be changed.[5] When Barry Setterfield took the position that the speed of light was much faster in the past the main objection was the purported constancy of fundamental laws.[6]

Time dilation field

  • The work of young earth creation scientist Dr. John Hartnett proposes an alternative creationist view, by theorizing the Earth was trapped in a time-dilation field caused by extremely strong gravitation during the first few days of creation, from Earth's point of view, while billions of years passed for the rest of the universe. He attributes the field, its removal and the continued balance in our solar system (after the field was removed) to divine intervention. [7] This theory is not widely accepted by creationists.
  • The starlight problem applies only to a young universe. Some young-earth creationists interpret Genesis as describing only the creation of the Earth in six days, not the entire universe.

Starlight Problem for the Big Bang Theory

The starlight problem is an argument against the Big Bang Theory which theorizes a universe of billions of years old. [8] The creation science organization Answers in Genesis has stated the following regarding the starlight problem for the Big Bang Theory and the work of Charles W. Misner is cited who published his work in Physical Review Letters:

“ The problem is this: even assuming the big bang timescale, there has not been enough time for light to travel between widely separated regions of space. So, how can the different regions of the current [cosmic microwave background] CMB have such precisely uniform temperatures if they have never communicated with each other? This is a light-travel–time problem.[9] ”

Young Earth Creationist Views Regarding Starlight

Barry Setterfield

In regards to the question of how one can see starlight from millions of light years away, young earth creation scientists commonly mention several things.

Bibliography

Notes

  1. ↑ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3490657.stm
  2. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0809_cdk_davies.asp
  3. ↑ http://www.nature.com/physics/highlights/6849-3.html#ref1
  4. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp
  5. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp
  6. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/fine_structure.asp
  7. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i2/cosmology.asp
  8. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v25/i4/lighttravel.asp
  9. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v25/i4/lighttravel.asp
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Starlight_problem&oldid=330964"