Originally posted by RJHindsObjects moving away will be redshifted and the further away the more redshifted
That's a catchy little song that tells us about the doppler effect.
if the source is moving away (positive velocity) the observed frequency is lower and the observed wavelength is greater (redshifted).
if the source is moving towards (negative velocity) the observed frequency is higher and the wavelength is shorter (blueshifted).
[b]However, this tells us nothing about the age of the universe, stars, or the Earth.
😏[/b]
Manny
The parallax method is a way of measuring distances of far-away objects. Astronomers use parallax to measure the distance to stars.
Parallax is a measurement of the shift of a nearby object compared to distant objects when observed from two different positions.
You can see this effect for yourself. Cover your right eye and look directly at something some distance away, like a tree or house. Hold your hand at arms' length and stick up one finger, and cover the tree with your finger.
Now uncover your right eye and cover the left eye, WITHOUT moving your hand. Your finger is no longer covering the tree. The "parallax shift", the distance that your finger appeared to move (relative to the tree in the background) can be used to measure how far away things are.
For nearby objects in the solar system - for example, a comet or an asteroid - two observatories can observe the same object at the same time, and measure the "parallax angle" between the comet and a distant star. Knowing how far apart the two observatories are will let you calculate the distance to the comet.
For other "nearby" stars, we assume that the stars themselves aren't moving quickly. Take one measurement today, and another measurement exactly six months later. We know the distance between the two observations is 184 million miles (twice the Earth's orbital radius). If our reference star is far enough away, we can use the parallax angle to calculate the nearby star's distance.
For VERY distant objects, this doesn't work, for two reasons.
1. The parallax angle is too tiny to be measured accurately
2. We cannot be sure that the reference star in the background is far enough away from the "nearby" star to accurately calculate the distance.
Taken from Wiki
Manny
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by menace71I completely agree that our observations of reality conflict with the accounts in the bible.
I can flip that around and ask though that why did man suddenly develop so fast in the last 6k 7K 10k years whatever you choose began farming and building cities and keeping track of time and yes farming and written language? Maybe my assumption is faulty because I'm assuming as you say that it was sudden. I'm looking at the evolutionary scale however that ...[text shortened]... nding of it. For those who believe in the God of the bible this is a conflict.
Manny
What baffles me is why, realising that, anyone would continue to worry what the bible said and not just go on the evidence.
Anyhow...
Well again I don't think 'suddenly' is the right word.
Progress seems (is) very rapid today, but we have had the same amount of knowledge + technological/scientific advances
between 1900 and 2000 than in our entire history up till 1900, and we are due to double again by something like 2020.
However for the vast majority of our history there might maybe be one technological/knowledge advance in an entire generation.
The reasons for this are reasonably well known.
First and most simply is population. The more people you have the more ideas generated per unit time.
Second is communication and 'extelligence', because the more we communicate ideas to one another and the more ideas we can
store in written form and thus collectively access and build on the more new ideas we have and the less reinventing the wheel goes on.
Third. free time to think, and the number of people who have it.
Fourth. Freedom of thought and intellectual enquiry. (being burned at the stake for having original thoughts puts a real crimp in our progress)
And finally you have to understand that knowledge snowballs, once you have some knowledge that enables/unlocks other knowledge.
You need a language before you can start passing ideas to the next generation without having to actually demonstrate everything.
You need written language before you can start writing knowledge down so people can see it and build on it.
You need maths before you can quantify the world and do real science.
It took thousands of years from the invention of counting systems (the beginnings of maths) before we invented the zero, hardly sudden.
The evidence we have is that our early ancestors started off in very small groups (families) for thousands of years slowly spreading out over the globe.
All the tools we find made during these tens of thousands of years are very primitive.
Then suddenly they become much more sophisticated and at the same time they suddenly start living in larger groups of around 140 ish people.
The larger groups allowed for specialization, there were a few 'experts' in making tools who made them for everyone else who could do this because
there were 'experts' in hunting and such who provided the food with the tools that the tool experts made.
Specialization and division of labor coupled with larger group sizes kick started everything....
Of course thats a simplification, but it seems to me that it would be fairly obvious that when you have a tiny population of humans (we hit a low/bottleneck
~70k yrs ago of about 1~2k people) that spread out over a huge area you are not going to get much technological progress or buildup of knowledge.
You need the population to get big enough, dense enough, and established enough for progress to really kick off.
It's thus not in the least surprising that it took a long time before we got going as a species.
Originally posted by googlefudgeQne could put ~ whatever k or m years one wishes, because it is just a guess with the evolutionists. The more ~ years, the merrier. 😏
I completely agree that our observations of reality conflict with the accounts in the bible.
What baffles me is why, realising that, anyone would continue to worry what the bible said and not just go on the evidence.
Anyhow...
Well again I don't think 'suddenly' is the right word.
Progress seems (is) very rapid today, but we have had the same ...[text shortened]... not in the least surprising that it took a long time before we got going as a species.
Originally posted by RJHindsSo says you, a veritable fountain of solid knowledge.
Qne could put ~ whatever k or m years one wishes, because it is just a guess with the evolutionists. The more ~ years, the merrier. 😏
Oh, perhaps you don't recognize sarcasm when you see it, so just in case.....
Originally posted by googlefudgeThe bible or faith it is a personal thing I don't expect all to believe it or accept it at all. I'm willing to look at science and facts and have an open mind (unbiased science either way or side is what I would hope for) I'm not sure Genesis was meant to be a scientific account anyway.
I completely agree that our observations of reality conflict with the accounts in the bible.
What baffles me is why, realising that, anyone would continue to worry what the bible said and not just go on the evidence.
Anyhow...
Well again I don't think 'suddenly' is the right word.
Progress seems (is) very rapid today, but we have had the same ...[text shortened]... not in the least surprising that it took a long time before we got going as a species.
Manny
Originally posted by RJHindsNo, what it proves is YOUR strong, extremely strong, delusion. I think I finally realize you do not believe the crap you put out but enjoy just stirring the pot.
To me, this is just another example of the strong delusion mentioned in 2 Thessalonians. 😏
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!
Originally posted by sonhouseYou must be really proud of yourself now. Why don't you tell your buddies at NASA about the crap and how brilliant of a psychologist you are to realize it, even without the degree?
No, what it proves is YOUR strong, extremely strong, delusion. I think I finally realize you do not believe the crap you put out but enjoy just stirring the pot.