Science, Creation & EvolutionThe Biochemical Challenge to EvolutionHi! Its Tuppence's husband here. You are doing a good job overall Aineo, but the above is not quite accurate. Do not despair, however. Let me see if we can get this clarified a bit. There is an energy in the vacuum which is intrinsic to the fabric of space called the Zero Point Energy (ZPE). You will recall that when you stretch a rubber band or inflate a balloon, energy is put into the fabric of the rubber band or balloon. We all know this energy is there because, when we were younger, we would sometimes aim the rubber band and hit someone in the room with it! Now upgrade this idea from rubber bands and balloons to the fabric of space. At least 12 times, the Scriptures state that God created the heavens and stretched them out (always in the past tense and in the context of Creation Week). Science largely agrees with this and talks about cosmological inflation during the earliest moments after the inception of the universe. This process put energy into the fabric of space, and this energy ultimately appears as the ZPE. I say ultimately, because the ZPE built up with time, even after the stretching process was complete. There is a physical reason for this which is outlined well in the Journal of Theoretics article entitled "The Redshift and the Zero Point Energy" by Barry Setterfield and Daniel Dzimano, and is found here: http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Link ... Setter.pdf This article points out that when the mathematical features of the process involved are worked through, you end up with a mathematical equation for the behaviour of the ZPE with time that has the same form as the equation of the redshift/distance or equivalently the redshift/time. This shows that the redshift is not due to the expansion of the cosmos, but rather due to the increase in the strength of the ZPE with time. The mechanism and the math are worked through in the above article. As the ZPE increases with time, so, too, does the electric permittivity and magnetic permeability of free space. Since lightspeed is inversely related to both quantities, then it follows that an increase in the ZPE, and consequent increase in the vacuum permittivity and permeability, will necessarily mean that lightspeed drops with time. The mathematical form of that drop will be the inverse of the equation that the ZPE is following for its increase. Thus the form of lightspeed decay is fixed as being the same form as the behaviour of the redshift. Now the redshift of light from distant galaxies has usually been ascribed to the expansion of the cosmos. However, the evidence provided by the quantized redshift indicates that the redshift cannot be due to either the motion of galaxies away from us, or from the expansion of the fabric of space. In both cases the quantization would be wiped out; we see examples of this in the Virgo supercliuster of galaxies. There, galaxies close to the centre of gravity of the cluster are moving fast compared with those further out. This actual motion destroys the quantization. How then does the increase in redshift with distance come about from an increasing ZPE? An important clue was provided in May of 1987 by Hal Puthoff. In an article in Physical Review D, Vol.35:10, pp.3266ff. Puthoff demonstrated that atomic orbits are maintained by the ZPE. Classical physics states that an electron orbiting a proton should be emitting radiation and spiral into the nucleus and the whole structure disappear in a flash of light. Well, we all know this does not happen, and when a quantum physicist is asked why it does not happen, he states that on quantum theory and by quantum laws, electrons do not radiate energy when they are in their stable orbits. When asked why they do not, and what these quantum laws describe as a physical phenomenon to overcome the problem, there is usually no satisfactory answer forthcoming, except an appeal to quantum mechanics. Puthoff took a different approach. He accepted the results of classical physics, but added in the results from the presence of the ZPE. When this was done, it turned out that the energy lost by the elecctron was balanced by the gain of energy from the ZPE. The situation was similar to a child on a swing being given resonant pushes by an adult. Someone else put it this way: If an electron orbits too far out from the nucleus, the energy that it loses is greater than the energy it gains from the ZPE and so it moves inwards. If the electron orbits too close in to the nucleus, it gains more energy from tyhe ZPE than it loses and moves out to a stable position. Puthoff stated that without the ZPE, every atom in the universe would undergo instantaneous collapse. The ZPE therefore supports all atomic structures throughout the cosmos. The next step is a logical one. If the ZPE supports all atomic orbits, and the strength of the ZPE increases with time, then all atomic orbits will also increase in energy with time. But light emitted from those more energetic atoms will be bluer. Therefore, as we look back in time, we look back to a region of space where the ZPE is systematically lower than now, and hence the light emitted from those atoms will be redder than our laboratory standard. The actual relationship is derived in the above URL. Yes Aineo! The curve for the behaviour of the ZPE is related to the curve of the redshift/distance and also the curve of lightspeed/time. It also is related to the curve of atomic clock rates compared with dynamical time. Dynamical time is just orbital time, the time it takes the earth to go around the sun. This is unaffected by the increase in the ZPE. But atomic clock rates, including the dates obtained from carbon 14, or uranium/thorium/lead dates are all affected by this process. Atomic clock rates all effectively have a lightspeed term in their numerator. Thus, if lightspeed is 10 times its current speed, atomic clocks ticked off 10 years in one ordinary year. Back in 1984 Van Flandern of the US Naval Observatory in Washington completed a study of the rate of ticking of atomic clocks compared with the dynamical (orbital) standard. Atomic clocks turned out to be slowing. A report on this can be found in National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 617 for 1984. Since atomic clocks are all ticking at a rate proportional to lightspeed, c, it follows that, knowing the equation that c and the redshift have followed, it is then possible to convert dates on the atomic clock to dates on the orbital clock. When this is done,it turns out that the three major catastrophes in the geological record correspond to the three catastrophes recorded in Genesis, and the patriarchal time scale recorded there is very much in accord with the correction applied by the lightspeed curve. Nevertheless, the subject is still being discussed. In 1999 in Physics Review D, Albrecht and Magueijo wrote a major article pointing out that many astronomical problems would be resolved if lightspeed was higher at the inception of the cosmos than it is now. The figure that they suggested was of the order of 10^60 times higher. The redshift data indicate more of the order of 10^10 or 10^11 higher as a maximum. However, Albrecht and Magueijo porpose that lightspeed then dropped to the current value very shortly afterwards. But John Barrow of Cambridge proposed the drop over the lifetime of the universe in a separate article in the same issue of the journal. This is in line with the proposal discussed above. I had the chance of talking with Dr. Albrecht a couple of years ago, and pointed out that lightspeed did not need to drop so soon after the incpetion of the cosmos if energy was conserved. His response was that if energy was conserved, they could not achieve all that they hoped to achieve theoretically. This raises the question of whether research is being data driven or theory driven. Just a couple of comments here may help Aineo. I give a quote from "Fundamentals of Modern Physics" by R. M. Eisberg, p.137 (John Wiley and Sons, 1967). Eisberg states "...the old [Bohr] theory is still often employed as a first approximation to the more accurate description of quantum phenomena provided by quantum mechanics. The reasons are that the old [Bohr] theory is often capable of giving numerically correct results with mathematical procedures which are considerably less complicated than those used in quantum mechanics, and that the old [Bohr] theory is often helpful in vizualizinmg proceses which are digfficult to vizualize in terms of the somewhat abstract language of the theory of quantum mechanics." This procedure was adopted by Puthoff in his formulation of the work with the ZPE and the stability of the atom, but then he went on to point out that the same result would have been obtained using the Schroedinger model, and he then quantified his statement. It is also a fact that using the Bohr model along with the ZPE allows much simpler calculations, and ease of understanding what is happening. Indeed, SED physics holds the potential to reproduce the results of quantum mechanics using entirely classical concepts provided the Zero Point Energy (ZPE) is included in the modelling. I guess that covers the subject for now. Thanks for wading through this. With best regards Husband of "Tuppence" |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame