Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

But such a force must be generated by MAN! This force must come from an outside agent--in this case, it MUST be God. Who else could have created such a force?
Why would such "minor" discontinuities create such huge clusters all over the place? We see millions of huge ones all over the place every time we look! Matter doesn't just do that to itself--it MUST have been God.

Which is what drives the expansion and collapse of certain stars, most notable in protostars (which is where the majority of their heat comes from, IIRC). However, in virtually no star system that has ever been observed outside of our own have we found a SINGLE orbiting planet in any radius similar to our own--much less nine in various non-eccentric elliptical orbits (though I know that all planetary orbits are ellipitical--the Solar System's happen to have low-eccentricity--very close to 1). The only rational explanation for this is some power set it up this way.

Further, Jupiter and Saturn have such large gravity wells they are capable of sucking in and destroying potentially lethal comets that are earth bound. A GREAT design feature.

A real problem for the non-creationist is the content of Deuterium oxide in our oceans. In every planetary mass save our own, the ration of D to H is low--around 2 (I forget the units on this--something like per million). On comets, the ratio is much higher, close to 30. Earth has 6. Clearly the water came from some place else--comuet impacts over the early course of the solary system would tend to hit large planets or their moons, meaning that there should be heavier water in and around Jupiter, rather than earth. Further, while the evaporation rates are different, light water tends to go faster--meaning that the heavier water would tend to stick around planets longer, so we should observe on thin-atmosphered planetoids a higher D/H ratio. iF we say that over time, we had more comets impact, I respond that a SINGLE comet is believed to once wipe out 99.9% of all life on earth in one go. Multiple strikes later on would make life impossible--without GOD helping out.

All this points to a sudden creation of water on earth that was largely Deuterium Oxide--dare I say flood?

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

Naturally, it does--but to be directed n a single direction, there must be means of changing the direction of the force to be in that single direction. In the Big Bang, the gravity would have quickly recompressed everything--the density of the initial state was so high that not even light would have been able to get out--since nothing can go faster than light, the initial state MUST have been contracting--but if it was contracting, there never would have been a big bang. Looks like the evolutionist has a huuuuge problem here. A God-Shaped problem.

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

Bah! We still haven't seen an Oak turn into Wheat, have we? We've seen wheat not be able to breed with...wheat. Looks an awful lot like certain people being unable to have children with each other due to genetic problems with an individual. Yet we don't consider either of those two people seperate species, do we?

We have not once seen a species develop from another, baring the occasional break in fertility of an individual (and plants often can clone themselves and interbreed with their own self, leading to "species" that really are just a single cloned individual).

SULPHUR

when you explain what happens in a nuclear explosion[tapping ,dancing] man then differenciate beween a clean and dirty explosion and throw in a bit of quantom mechanics I will start to take you seriously.But keep having fun

Hayden

What's more, bullocks are exclusively male! How can they mate?

Obviously God makes each and every one of them, by hand.

</in joke>

HR

Arthwollipot

Yes, matter can and does do exactly that to itself. After the initial Inflation phase of the Big Bang, gravity started to overcome whatever force it was pushing matter apart. Minor discontinuities in a background of a force that is always attractive would cause those discontinuities to be magnified, producing the state we see today of very concentrated lumps of matter floating in a vast void of almost nothing. Gravity can do that all on its own.

BTW - Inflationary cosmology is a whole nother subject which introduces discontinuities all on its own.

Oh, and by the way, why MUST it have been God? Why can't it have been Brahma?

Our current level of technology prevents us from detecting them at this time. We can only detect the largest planets. Most of them we have found are several times the mass of Jupiter. We detect them by observing the effect they have on their parent star, not by direct observation.

Then why do we have any comets at all? Answer: because the gravity wells of Jupiter and Saturn are not sufficient to suck in and destroy comets. Comets fly past them like everything else. As a design feature, they are pretty inefficient. Anyway, if it was all designed to destroy the comets, why include the comets in the design at all?

Not being a chemist, I cannot answer this claim. I must pass the baton to me learned colleagues...

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

In a nuclear explosion, a chain reaction amongst 99.99% pure U-235 occurs. This is caused by the amount of U-235 reaching a critical mass. This is important because this ensures enough neutrons necessary to start the fision reaction begin. Each fissioning releases two to three neutrons, each of which is absorbed by U-235, causing it to fission. The fission reaction releases a large amount of energy, equal to the difference in the binding energy of a U-236 nucleus and the binding energies of the resultant particles--a very large amount, considering the large mass used. This entire reaction takes place in a fraction of a second.

The difference between a "clean" and dirty bomb is entirely semantic. A dirty bomb uses a different isotope mix to release more radioactive particles into the area, but usually at the expense of the power of the blast. There really is no such thing as a clean nuclear detonation.


As for quantum mechanics:.

-h^2/(2m(pi^2)*d^2/dx^2 (Psi)+V(x)=E(Psi).

All information on a particle that can be known can be gleaned from this equation through the intergartion and normalization of Psi and the use of various operators (the x, the p (momentum), and the Hamiltonian (energy), for instance). These operators must be Hermitian to make give a real result, and therefore a useful, measurable result.

Quantum mechanics allows for a probability of penetration of a particle into a region where the potential is greater than that of the particle--i.e, a cart with velocity x can go higher than h, where h=.5x^2/mg.

Before measuring a particle, it is not really anywhere--your act of measurement forced it into taking a stand, forces it into having the values you measure. This is a probablistic measurement, with the standard deviation of posistion times the standard deviation of momentum being greater than or equal to h/2Pi.

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

Where exactly do these discontinuites come from? There is no real reason for them to occur in the first place, especially during the Big Bang, when the laws of physics simply do not hold.

While gravity can on its own create vast empty stretches followed by extrememly desnse clumps, there must be discontinuities for this to occur. Ther cannot have been discontinuities during the big bang. In fact, it is that it appears that there were discontinuites that puzzles physicists the most. Why matter instead of antimatter? Equal portions should have been created, yet all we see is matter.
Because Brahma is just a made-up deity, who was created by Satan to decieve both the Hindus and the atheists into believing there no Saviour.
See!! In fact, we can NEVER detect anything better than this, because of the diffraction of light through a circular aperature. It is impossible. And, as the atheist is fond of saying, if we cannot detect it, it doesn't really exist. Mighty peculiar of you to be saying that "Planets must exist, but we can't directly observe them, and often can't see them at all" while saying that "God exists, but we can't direclty observe him, only infer through observation" is ludicrous.

[/creationist]
This is fun!
[creationist]

Then why do we have any comets at all? Answer: because the gravity wells of Jupiter and Saturn are not sufficient to suck in and destroy comets. Comets fly past them like everything else. As a design feature, they are pretty inefficient. Anyway, if it was all designed to destroy the comets, why include the comets in the design at all?

[/quote]
Most comets only survive long enough to make a few passes--the vast majority are in the Oort Cloud, waiting to rain down upon us on armageddon. The comets we observe are "rouge" comets, sent by Satan to try and destroy humans before the second coming. God then put in planets to break them up before reaching us.

It's all so simple!
SEE!! God explains EVERYTHING!

caravelair

no, as i stated before, the conservation of angular momentum acts in opposition to gravity, which is why galaxies and solar systems are most often "disk-like". gravity is counteracted by the same mechanisms which prevent the planets from falling into the sun. we know quite a fair amount about galaxy formation, partly from running n-body simulations.

actually, matter DOES just do that to itself. as matter begins the process of gravitational collapse, the inhomogeneities become more intense.

the reason we have found no such planet is because we cannot observe planets directly, only their gravitational effect on the star that they orbit. planets are too dim and small in comparison to the star they orbit be observed directly using modern equiptment. instead we find planets by observing the star to see if an orbiting planet is affecting the motion of the star by orbiting it. only large planets with small radius of orbit would create a noticeable effect on the star, which is why we have not been able to observe other types of planets. fortunately, JWST will be up in a few years, and this new telescope should allow us the opportunity to observe planets directly.

gravity doesn't suck things in. the only thing that would cause a comet to be destroyed by one of those planets is if the planet lay directly in their path. otherwise the comet would merely orbit the planet in an elliptical or hyperbolic path.

caravelair

the discontinuities are caused by quantum fluctuations. as the universe expanded, these infinitessimal fluctuations were stretched out to a larger scale, and then "frozen out" after recombination. quantum fluctuations occuring at different times would be stretched out to different sizes, which is why we see different scales of "clumping".