Cosmology News

There isn’t evidence for gravitational waves, let alone big claims – Nature

Spread the love

Further to “BICEP2: Why it matters if those gravitational waves were just dust,” Nature, now informs us: “No evidence for or against gravitational waves” – Two analyses say they are too weak to be significant:

The astronomers who this spring announced that they had evidence of primordial gravitational waves jumped the gun because they did not take into proper account a confounding effect of galactic dust, two new analyses suggest. Although further observations may yet find the signal to emerge from the noise, independent experts now say they no longer believe that the original data constituted significant evidence.

Well, there’s a multiverse that just won’t fly. A chicken will fly first. In fact, a chicken will fly first class.

See also: The Science Fictions series at your fingertips (cosmology). Why they can’t just give all this multiverse nonsense a rest. By now, we should all wonder.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

42 Replies to “There isn’t evidence for gravitational waves, let alone big claims – Nature

  1. 1
    ppolish says:

    The behind the scenes politics & backbiting over who will get to take credit for the discovery of gravity waves is fun to watch. There are competing teams from Harvard and Princeton and others all searching.

    Is it a slam dunk that the observational evidence is 100% dust? Nope, don’t know that for sure either.

  2. 2
    anthropic says:

    “All we are is dust in the wind”

    Kansas

  3. 3
    Mapou says:

    The only reason for gravitational waves is that Einstein was staunchly against the idea of nonlocal interactions, i.e., “spooky actions at a distance” as he called them. He insisted that nothing can move faster than the speed of light, including gravity and EM waves.

    We all know Einstein was wrong about the spookiness of quantum physics but the political Einstein movement is as powerful as it will ever be. Only a Kuhnian revolution can bring it down. Won’t be long now.

    Prediction: The whole gravitational waves hypothesis is no more valid than the flat earth hypothesis.

  4. 4
    Piotr says:

    Mapou:

    Actually, there is very good empirical evidence of gravitational waves: the orbital decay of binary pulsars (due to the emission of gravitational energy). Its disoverers, Hulse and Taylor, were awarded a Nobel Prize 21 years ago, and I don’t think anyone has questioned their explanation since, or proposed a preferable one. What BICEP2 allegedly detected was not gravitational waves as such, but a particular pattern produced by gravitational waves generated during cosmic inflation.

  5. 5
    bornagain77 says:

    Piotr, since you are a Darwinist, I don’t think you have a clue as to what good empirical evidence really is since you have ZERO empirical evidence for Darwinism, yet you dogmatically defend it as if you did!

    The Law of Physicodynamic Insufficiency – Dr David L. Abel – November 2010
    Excerpt: “If decision-node programming selections are made randomly or by law rather than with purposeful intent, no non-trivial (sophisticated) function will spontaneously arise.”,,, After ten years of continual republication of the null hypothesis with appeals for falsification, no falsification has been provided. The time has come to extend this null hypothesis into a formal scientific prediction: “No non trivial algorithmic/computational utility will ever arise from chance and/or necessity alone.”
    http://www-qa.scitopics.com/Th.....iency.html

  6. 6
    ppolish says:

    If someone calls them “gravity waves” (like I did in my post), you know they are clueless. Hey, at least I know I’m clueless.

  7. 7
    Piotr says:

    BA77, since you are an IDiot, the only thing you can do in a discussion is go off on a tangent, as in the post above.

  8. 8
    bornagain77 says:

    Piotr, ad hominem does not negate your gross empirical deficiency in substantiating your Darwinian claims!

  9. 9
    Mapou says:

    Piotr @4,

    It’s all a bunch of baseless speculations and biased interpretations. IOW, voodoo science.

    BTW, did you know that nothing can move in Einstein’s spacetime by definition? This little known truth always take Einstein’s worshippers by surprise, especially physicists. Try explaining to a student how gravity can curve something that is not only motionless, it cannot exist for this very reason.

  10. 10
    Dionisio says:

    BA77

    #5
    Piotr, since you are a Darwinist, I don’t think you have a clue

    #8
    Piotr, ad hominem does not negate your gross empirical deficiency in substantiating your Darwinian claims!

    Isn’t #5 an ad hominem argument?

    Is it right to accuse someone of doing something we also do?

  11. 11
    Dionisio says:

    BA77

    [OT]

    Christ was accused of doing things He didn’t do, but He took those false accusations quietly, even though He had the power to wipe out His accusers with just a single word.

    We want to imitate Him, not His accusers. We want to be like Him, not like His accusers.

    Those who possess the stronger arguments must be the most magnanimous.

    If we are in Christ, then we have the strongest argument of all. However, that argument only persuades those whom God chose to be persuaded. We don’t know who they are. Only God knows. But we want to reflect Christ’s love for the lost. Whatever we do or say, we treat others with respect, because God loves them as much as He loves us. Constantly I have to remind myself that I was lost, but now I’m found. Was blind, but now I see. By God’s grace.

    Please, note that I don’t consider myself a YEC or OEC or ID proponent. I’m simply a sinner who has been forgiven by God’s amazing grace, through my saving faith in Christ’s redemptive death and His resurrection. There’s nothing I have done or could do that qualifies me for God’s forgiveness. Piotr and you are better persons than I am. This salvation thing is really mysterious. But I believe it’s true. Whoever genuinely believes it, gets saved too. God’s love is totally underserved.

    You may want to carefully read again 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 and 1 Peter 3:8-17 and think about it.

    Rev 22:21

  12. 12
    bornagain77 says:

    No, it is not ad hominem! He is in fact a Darwinist! Though it may come off as derogatory on UD, the name is in fact a proper name for the position that he defends so dogmatically! In fact I could have called him a Neo-Darwinist, and still have been within my rights, since he defends the modern synthesis and that is the proper name for that position. He, on the other hand, called me an IDiot which is certainly a derogatory term meant to attack the man and not the argument. But most importantly, I attacked the main issue of his position in saying that he had no empirical basis. Which is certainly focusing on the argument and not on the man, whereas he refuses to honestly engage the argument and attacked the man instead!

    William Lane Craig and the Meaning of Ad Hominem Attacks – William Lane Craig – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrVGuUsL2PM

  13. 13
    Mung says:

    Please, note that I don’t consider myself a YEC or OEC or ID proponent.

    But you’re obviously a Creationist 🙂

    And that disqualifies you from serious consideration.

    I’m simply a sinner who has been forgiven by God’s amazing grace, through my saving faith in Christ’s redemptive death and His resurrection. There’s nothing I have done or could do that qualifies me for God’s forgiveness.

    You’ve just contradicted yourself. 🙂

    But I understand your sentiment.

  14. 14
    Dionisio says:

    BA77
    I see your point, but if you realize that the discussion is going nowhere, then simply skip it and move on to something else. Remember that your comments could be read by many visitors who don’t post comments. That’s sufficient to justify the effort.

  15. 15
    bornagain77 says:

    Dionisio

    “but if you realize that the discussion is going nowhere, then simply skip it and move on to something else”

    Such as this one??? 🙂 Okie Dokie

    ‘Til Tuesday – Voices Carry
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uejh-bHa4To

  16. 16
    bornagain77 says:

    Dionisio, perhaps this song is more fitting,,,

    2CELLOS – Thunderstruck [OFFICIAL VIDEO]
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT3SBzmDxGk

  17. 17
    Axel says:

    Dionisio, re BA’s’ #5, Piotr:

    ‘…. since you are a Darwinist, I don’t think you have a clue in fact,’

    … while it sounds rancorous, it is merely a bald statement of fact.

    When the palpable nihilistic vacuity of someone’s position is absolute, it is virtually impossible to couch one’s admonitions in normally-agreeable terms, as if there were a moral equivalence between truth and falsehood, each being quite unexceptionable.

    That evolution is a compendium of Just So stories, is even attested by a bedrock of statistical truths exposing even the remotest the possibility of evolution as infinitely(sic) far-fetched.

    In Pauli’s day, to his amazement, they hadn’t even bothered to check statistical probabilities. It is not inconceivable that, if this was not the inspiration for his ‘bon mot’,: ‘It’s not even wrong’, it surely seems highly likely to have been a factor in its eventual formulation. Note that he found it impossible to respond to the student without sounding satirical and completely dismissive.

    Indeed, there is a weariness to its tone, isn’t there? Pauli doesn’t sound to have been an uncharitable man, in the least. Quite the contrary.

    How do you tell a scientifically-trained adult repeatedly that two plus two do not make five, and not get to sound a little tetchy and your rebuttal just a tad satirical?

    This forum is necessarily a political one at bottom, since almost all of the atheists are incorrigible (not a value judgment, but a matter of observed fact), so the effectiveness of the truth is limited.

    Churchill once opined that some truths are so valuable that thy must be protected by a bodyguard of lies. I very much doubt that, however politic it might be with an eye to the common good, to hold back a particular truth. Nevertheless, satire strikes me as both justified and effective.

    Nobody in the history of secular or religious literature ever delivered more virulent, indeed, incandescent diatribes against the purveyors of falsehoods with dire and baneful influences, than Jesus, our ultimate model. So, they are getting off lightly. In fact, Jesus did, in some of his parables, target our habitual foolishness, not without a satirical edge.

  18. 18
    Dr JDD says:

    Axel, I am always reminded of Elijah vs the prophets of Baal. Elijah was a funny, sarcastic man – telling them that “maybe your god is asleep, shout louder!” Etc.

    When people are so blind to the absurdity of their position (nothing x nothing = everything; self assembly from chaos to great order, etc.) then sarcasm is somewhat inevitable.

  19. 19
    Piotr says:

    Thank you, guys, for reminding everybody that ID is a religious movement, notwithstanding its scientific pretences.

    BA77:

    The first paragraph of your post was gratuitously rude. I didn’t provoke you in any way. I’d written about well-known evidence for the existence of gravitational waves (Nobel-Prize-class evidence, in fact, in case you have doubts about my scientific literacy). It’s a completely neutral subject from the point of view of the evolution/ID controversy. What piqued you about it?

    Your second paragraph was off-topic.

    Apparently if you indulge in ad hominem, it’s fine and dandy, because your opponent is the type of person who deserves it (a “purveyor of falsehood”, to quote Axel). If he replies in kind, just echoing your deliberate insult… Ouch! that’s real ad hominem! Mom, it hurts!

    I hope any lurkers reading this appreciate your hypocrisy.

  20. 20
    Mapou says:

    Piotr:

    Thank you, guys, for reminding everybody that ID is a religious movement, notwithstanding its scientific pretences.

    The exact same thing can be said about Darwinism and materialism. And the more you deny it, the more it’s true.

    Speaking of religion, pseudoscience and superstition, you have to admit that, given a choice between “God did it” and “Dirt did it”, most sensible folks will choose the former.

  21. 21
    bornagain77 says:

    Piotr, Hmm so you don’t like being called a Darwinist?

    As to my claim that you have no a clue as to what good empirical evidence really is, I resolutely stick by that charge and challenge you to present empirical evidence that Darwinism can actually do what you claim for it and thus vindicate yourself of that charge!:

    “The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution”: Break or blunt any functional coded element whose loss would yield a net fitness gain – Michael Behe – December 2010
    Excerpt: In its most recent issue The Quarterly Review of Biology has published a review by myself of laboratory evolution experiments of microbes going back four decades.,,, The gist of the paper is that so far the overwhelming number of adaptive (that is, helpful) mutations seen in laboratory evolution experiments are either loss or modification of function. Of course we had already known that the great majority of mutations that have a visible effect on an organism are deleterious. Now, surprisingly, it seems that even the great majority of helpful mutations degrade the genome to a greater or lesser extent.,,, I dub it “The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution”: Break or blunt any functional coded element whose loss would yield a net fitness gain.
    http://behe.uncommondescent.co.....evolution/

    Michael Behe talks about the preceding paper on this podcast:

    Michael Behe: Challenging Darwin, One Peer-Reviewed Paper at a Time – December 2010
    http://intelligentdesign.podom.....3_46-08_00

  22. 22
    Axel says:

    Yes, Dr JDD, I love the sarcasm of the Jews from early times, but a touch of barrack-room humour too, did old Elijah have, didn’t he?

    ‘When people are so blind to the absurdity of their position (nothing x nothing = everything; self assembly from chaos to great order, etc.) then sarcasm is somewhat inevitable.’

    Spot on. And hilariously expressed: 0 x 0 = everything. Even maybe 1 x 0! And the more I look at ‘self assembly from chaos to great order’, the more utterly farcical it sounds. Truly, truth is stranger than fiction.

    No infant would be foolish enough to imagine or believe that nothing could produce anything, never mind everything. In fact, we call it, ‘magic’, don’t we? The conjuring profession depends on the young child being baffled how something could happen, when, to his eyes, it clearly did – but couldn’t have.

    So basically, we are dealing with inadvertent, wannabe conjurors, who don’t even realise what a fatuous area they have strayed into.

  23. 23
    Axel says:

    I used digits instead of the words from laziness. Or tiredness. Or both.

  24. 24
    Axel says:

    I also like it that Christ called Herod, ‘that old fox.’ Not exactly rancorous, but the wisdom of the serpent to the fore, rather than the innocence of the dove.

  25. 25
    Axel says:

    How is it, Piotr, that you are unable to distinguish between an ‘ad hominem’, addressed directly at an individual putatively by way of argument, and a statement of fact (or ‘perceived fact’) addressed to a third person? There is a world of difference.

  26. 26
    Axel says:

    An ‘ad hominem’ is a putative argument, a remark, as irrelevant as it is evasive, and wholly eristic in intent’.

    Nothing like a plain, factual or putatively factual statement, in a uncontentious conversation between two people thinking along similar lines, no matter how disparaging its import might be.

    Technically, we can all invite disparagement by earning it. It doesn’t have to be contentious.

  27. 27
    bornagain77 says:

    Phil Collins – I Dont Care Anymore (Official Music Video)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLpfbcXTeo8

  28. 28
    bornagain77 says:

    You just got to luv the crocodile tears Darwinists shed at the slightest hint of being put down when they themselves are notorious, not only for vicious ad hominem, but for ruining peoples careers (and lives) if they do not toe the Darwinian party line.

    Casey Luskin points out that the following anti-ID philosopher even goes so far as to publish a paper saying that the bullying tactics of neo-Darwinists are justified since many ID proponents are Christian:

    Anti-ID Philosopher: “Ad hominem” Arguments “Justified” When Attacking Intelligent Design Proponents – Casey Luskin – June 4, 2012
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....60381.html

    “In the last few years I have seen a saddening progression at several institutions. I have witnessed unfair treatment upon scientists that do not accept macroevolutionary arguments and for their having signed the above-referenced statement regarding the examination of Darwinism. (Dissent from Darwinism list)(I will comment no further regarding the specifics of the actions taken upon the skeptics; I love and honor my colleagues too much for that.) I never thought that science would have evolved like this. I deeply value the academy; teaching, professing and research in the university are my privileges and joys… ”
    Professor James M. Tour – one of the ten most cited chemists in the world
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....evolution/

    Top Ten Most Cited Chemist in the World Knows That Evolution Doesn’t Work – James Tour, Phd. – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB7t2_Ph-ck

    Darwinists protesting too much (Over “Darwin’s Doubt) – Telling signs of a worldview in trouble – By Subby Szterszky | July 23, 2013
    Excerpt: “Their online followers echo the disrespect in even harsher tones; any rare voice of dissent in support of Meyer is promptly browbeaten into silence. The attitude is not unlike a bunch of insecure schoolyard bullies, closing ranks and reassuring each other by trading insults aimed at the uncool kid across the yard.”
    http://www.focusinsights.org/a.....g-too-much

    Even atheists themselves, who break ranks with the Darwinian ‘consensus’ party line, are severely castigated by Darwinian atheists. There was even a peer-reviewed paper in a philosophy journal by a materialist/atheist that sought to ostracize, and limit the free speech of, a fellow materialist/atheist (Jerry Fodor) who had had the audacity, in public, to dare to question the sufficiency of natural selection to be the true explanation for how all life on earth came to be.

    Darwinian Philosophy: “Darwinian Natural Selection is the Only Process that could Produce the Appearance of Purpose” – Casey Luskin – August, 2012
    Excerpt: In any case, this tarring and feathering of Fodor is just the latest frustrated attempt by hardline Darwinians to discourage people from using design terminology. It’s a hopeless effort, because try as they might to impose speech codes on each another, they can’t change the fact that nature is infused with purpose, which readily lends itself to, as Rosenberg calls it “teleosemantics.”
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....63311.html

    As well, an esteemed Philosophy professor, who is also an atheist, suffered much the same fate as Fodor from the hands of Darwinian atheists for daring to question the sufficiency of the reductive materialism of Darwinism to account for conscious experience (which is his specific specialty of study):

    The Heretic – Who is Thomas Nagel and why are so many of his fellow academics condemning him? – March 25, 2013
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/.....07692.html

    Censor of the Year: Who Will It Be? – David Klinghoffer January 17, 2014
    Excerpt: Charles Darwin himself, whose birthday is commemorated on the day bearing his name, insisted that getting at the truth, sorting true from false, requires an unimpeded airing of views: “A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.” Ironically, it is his latter-day advocates and defenders who are the most eager to muffle dissenting opinions, and the most unashamed about doing so. And again, not just unashamed, but proud. A victory in shutting down a college class, punishing a teacher, thwarting a law intended to protect educators from administrative reprisals, intimidating a publisher into a canceling a book contract, erasing words from the wall of a public museum — such things are not merely done, they are candidly, brazenly bragged about.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....81261.html

    EXPELLED – Starring Ben Stein – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-BDc3wu81U

    Slaughter of Dissidents – Book
    “If folks liked Ben Stein’s movie “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” they will be blown away by “Slaughter of the Dissidents.” – Russ Miller
    – Amazon

    Slaughter of the Dissidents – Dr. Jerry Bergman – June 2013 – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v5nAYU2GD0

  29. 29
    bornagain77 says:

    Of related interest: neo-Darwinists now have a fairly long legal history of trying to suppress free speech in the courts of America of anyone who opposes their view:

    On the Fundamental Difference Between Darwin-Inspired and Intelligent Design-Inspired Lawsuits – September 2011
    Excerpt: *Darwin lobby litigation: In every Darwin-inspired case listed above, the Darwin lobby sought to shut down free speech, stopping people from talking about non-evolutionary views, and seeking to restrict freedom of intellectual inquiry.
    *ID movement litigation: Seeks to expand intellectual inquiry and free speech rights to talk about non-evolutionary views.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....50451.html

    as well,

    Atheism and the Law – Matt Dillahunty
    Excerpt: “… whether atheism is a ‘religion’ for First Amendment purposes is a somewhat different question than whether its adherents believe in a supreme being, or attend regular devotional services, or have a sacred Scripture.” “Without venturing too far into the realm of the philosophical, we have suggested in the past that when a person sincerely holds beliefs dealing with issues of ‘ultimate concern’ that for her occupy a ‘place parallel to that filled by . . . God in traditionally religious persons,’ those beliefs represent her religion.”
    “We have already indicated that atheism may be considered, in this specialized sense, a religion. See Reed v. Great Lakes Cos., 330 F.3d 931, 934 (7th Cir. 2003) (‘If we think of religion as taking a position on divinity, then atheism is indeed a form of religion.’)”
    “The Supreme Court has recognized atheism as equivalent to a ‘religion’ for purposes of the First Amendment on numerous occasions”
    http://www.atheist-community.o.....php?id=742

    Evolution Is Religion–Not Science
    Excerpt: Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality,,, Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.
    Darwinian atheist Michael Ruse – Prominent Atheistic Philosopher

  30. 30
    Axel says:

    If an atheist saw a fakir performing the Indian rope trick, he wouldn’t wonder how the trick was performed, he’d say to himself: ‘One day scientists will understand how those guys are able to actually climb up a rope and vanish.’

  31. 31
    Mung says:

    I hope any lurkers reading this appreciate your hypocrisy.

    I love a good bit of hypocrisy now and then!

  32. 32
    bornagain77 says:

    Piotr, as to gravity waves and 4-D space-time in particular,,, although the evidence that I’ve personally seen for gravity waves, thus far, is not that impressive, with Dr. Sheldon’s position becoming stronger and stronger as far as I can tell, the evidence we have for the time dilation of the 4-D space-time of Special Relativity and General Relativity is far, far, stronger than any tentative evidence for gravity waves thus far:

    “I’ve just developed a new theory of eternity.”
    Albert Einstein – The Einstein Factor – Reader’s Digest – 2005

    Albert Einstein – Special Relativity – Insight Into Eternity – ‘thought experiment’ video
    https://vimeo.com/93101738

    “The laws of relativity have changed timeless existence from a theological claim to a physical reality. Light, you see, is outside of time, a fact of nature proven in thousands of experiments at hundreds of universities. I don’t pretend to know how tomorrow can exist simultaneously with today and yesterday. But at the speed of light they actually and rigorously do. Time does not pass.”
    Richard Swenson – More Than Meets The Eye, Chpt. 12

    Time dilation
    Excerpt: Time dilation: special vs. general theories of relativity:
    In Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity, time dilation in these two circumstances can be summarized:
    1. –In special relativity (or, hypothetically far from all gravitational mass), clocks that are moving with respect to an inertial system of observation are measured to be running slower. (i.e. For any observer accelerating, hypothetically, to the speed of light, time, as we understand it, will come to a complete stop).
    2.–In general relativity, clocks at lower potentials in a gravitational field—such as in closer proximity to a planet—are found to be running slower.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

    Velocity time dilation tests
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.....tion_tests

    This following confirmation of time dilation is my favorite since they have actually caught time dilation on film
    (of note: light travels approx. 1 foot in a nanosecond (billionth of a second) whilst the camera used in the experiment takes a trillion pictures a second):

    Amazing — light filmed at 1,000,000,000,000 Frames/Second! – video (so fast that at 9:00 Minute mark of video the time dilation effect of relativity is caught on film)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA

    And, As with any observer accelerating to the speed of light, it is found that for any ‘hypothetical’ observer falling to the event horizon of a black hole, that time, as we understand it, will come to a complete stop for them. This is because the accelerative force of gravity at black holes is so intense that not even light can escape its grip:

    Einstein – General Relativity – Thought Experiment – video
    https://vimeo.com/95417559

    Gravitational time dilation tests
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.....tion_tests

    Space-Time of a Black hole – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0VOn9r4dq8

    And as with the ‘tunnel curvature’ we see in the space-time of a black hole, there is also tunnel curvature in space-time for any hypothetical observer accelerating to the speed of light. Please note, at the 3:22 minute mark of the following video, when the 3-Dimensional world ‘folds and collapses’ into a tunnel shape as a ‘hypothetical’ observer moves towards the ‘higher dimension’ of the speed of light, (Of note: This following video was made by two Australian University Physics Professors with a supercomputer.).

    Seeing Relativity – Approaching The Speed Of Light – Optical Effects – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQnHTKZBTI4

    It is also very interesting to note that Special Relativity and General Relativity reveal two very different ‘qualities of eternity’ (as predicted in Christian Theism). In particular, Black Holes are found to be ‘timeless’ singularities of destruction and disorder rather than singularities of creation and order such as the extreme order we see at the creation event of the Big Bang.

    Entropy of the Universe – Hugh Ross – May 2010
    Excerpt: Egan and Lineweaver found that supermassive black holes are the largest contributor to the observable universe’s entropy. They showed that these supermassive black holes contribute about 30 times more entropy than what the previous research teams estimated.
    http://www.reasons.org/entropy-universe

    Roger Penrose – How Special Was The Big Bang?
    “But why was the big bang so precisely organized, whereas the big crunch (or the singularities in black holes) would be expected to be totally chaotic? It would appear that this question can be phrased in terms of the behaviour of the WEYL part of the space-time curvature at space-time singularities. What we appear to find is that there is a constraint WEYL = 0 (or something very like this) at initial space-time singularities-but not at final singularities-and this seems to be what confines the Creator’s choice to this very tiny region of phase space.”

    “Einstein’s equation predicts that, as the astronaut reaches the singularity (of the black-hole), the tidal forces grow infinitely strong, and their chaotic oscillations become infinitely rapid. The astronaut dies and the atoms which his body is made become infinitely and chaotically distorted and mixed-and then, at the moment when everything becomes infinite (the tidal strengths, the oscillation frequencies, the distortions, and the mixing), spacetime ceases to exist.”
    Kip S. Thorne – “Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein’s Outrageous Legacy” pg. 476

  33. 33
    bornagain77 says:

    Needless to say, the implications of this ‘eternity of destruction’ should be fairly disturbing for those of us who are of the ‘spiritually minded’ persuasion!

    Moreover, in stark contrast to Darwinian claims of which we have no direct observational evidence, we have actual observational evidence from Near Death Experience testimonies of eternity and of people going through a tunnel to a higher heavenly dimension,,,

    ‘In the ‘spirit world,,, instantly, there was no sense of time. See, everything on earth is related to time. You got up this morning, you are going to go to bed tonight. Something is new, it will get old. Something is born, it’s going to die. Everything on the physical plane is relative to time, but everything in the spiritual plane is relative to eternity. Instantly I was in total consciousness and awareness of eternity, and you and I as we live in this earth cannot even comprehend it, because everything that we have here is filled within the veil of the temporal life. In the spirit life that is more real than anything else and it is awesome. Eternity as a concept is awesome. There is no such thing as time. I knew that whatever happened was going to go on and on.’
    In The Presence Of Almighty God – The NDE of Mickey Robinson – video
    https://vimeo.com/92172680

    “I started to move toward the light. The way I moved, the physics, was completely different than it is here on Earth. It was something I had never felt before and never felt since. It was a whole different sensation of motion. I obviously wasn’t walking or skipping or crawling. I was not floating. I was flowing. I was flowing toward the light. I was accelerating and I knew I was accelerating, but then again, I didn’t really feel the acceleration. I just knew I was accelerating toward the light. Again, the physics was different – the physics of motion of time, space, travel. It was completely different in that tunnel, than it is here on Earth. I came out into the light and when I came out into the light, I realized that I was in heaven.”
    Barbara Springer – Near Death Experience – The Tunnel – video
    https://vimeo.com/79072924

    Life After Life – Raymond Moody – Near Death Experience – The Tunnel, The Light, The Life Review – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z56u4wMxNlg

    As well, A man, at the 7:00 minute mark of this video, gives testimony of falling down a ‘tunnel’ in the transition stage from this world to hell:

    Hell – A Warning! – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HSgH2AHkfkw&list=PLCB5F225ABC1F7330#t=420

    In light of this dilemma that the two very different eternities present to us spiritually minded people, and the fact that Gravity is, in so far as we can tell, completely incompatible with Quantum Mechanics, it is interesting to point out a subtle nuance on the Shroud of Turin. Namely that Gravity was overcome in the resurrection event of Christ:

    Particle Radiation from the Body – July 2012 – M. Antonacci, A. C. Lind
    Excerpt: The Shroud’s frontal and dorsal body images are encoded with the same amount of intensity, independent of any pressure or weight from the body. The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image. Radiation coming from the body would not only explain this feature, but also the left/right and light/dark reversals found on the cloth’s frontal and dorsal body images.
    http://www.academicjournals.or.....onacci.pdf

    A Quantum Hologram of Christ’s Resurrection? by Chuck Missler
    Excerpt: “You can read the science of the Shroud, such as total lack of gravity, lack of entropy (without gravitational collapse), no time, no space—it conforms to no known law of physics.” The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. Dame Piczek created a one-fourth size sculpture of the man in the Shroud. When viewed from the side, it appears as if the man is suspended in mid air (see graphic, below), indicating that the image defies previously accepted science. The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically.
    http://www.khouse.org/articles/2008/847

    THE EVENT HORIZON (Space-Time Singularity) OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN. – Isabel Piczek – Particle Physicist
    Excerpt: We have stated before that the images on the Shroud firmly indicate the total absence of Gravity. Yet they also firmly indicate the presence of the Event Horizon. These two seemingly contradict each other and they necessitate the past presence of something more powerful than Gravity that had the capacity to solve the above paradox.
    http://shroud3d.com/findings/i.....-formation

    Moreover, as would be expected if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics (QED) were truly unified in the resurrection of Christ from death, the image on the shroud is found to be formed by a quantum process. The image was not formed by a ‘classical’ process:

    The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete values – Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio – 2008
    Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the ‘quantum’ is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril.
    http://cab.unime.it/journals/i.....802004/271

    “It is not a continuum or spherical-front radiation that made the image, as visible or UV light. It is not the X-ray radiation that obeys the one over R squared law that we are so accustomed to in medicine. It is more unique. It is suggested that the image was formed when a high-energy particle struck the fiber and released radiation within the fiber at a speed greater that the local speed of light. Since the fiber acts as a light pipe, this energy moved out through the fiber until it encountered an optical discontinuity, then it slowed to the local speed of light and dispersed. The fact that the pixels don’t fluoresce suggests that the conversion to their now brittle dehydrated state occurred instantly and completely so no partial products remain to be activated by the ultraviolet light. This suggests a quantum event where a finite amount of energy transferred abruptly. The fact that there are images front and back suggests the radiating particles were released along the gravity vector. The radiation pressure may also help explain why the blood was “lifted cleanly” from the body as it transformed to a resurrected state.”
    Kevin Moran – optical engineer

    Scientists say Turin Shroud is supernatural – December 2011
    Excerpt: After years of work trying to replicate the colouring on the shroud, a similar image has been created by the scientists.
    However, they only managed the effect by scorching equivalent linen material with high-intensity ultra violet lasers, undermining the arguments of other research, they say, which claims the Turin Shroud is a medieval hoax.
    Such technology, say researchers from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), was far beyond the capability of medieval forgers, whom most experts have credited with making the famous relic.
    “The results show that a short and intense burst of UV directional radiation can colour a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin,” they said.
    And in case there was any doubt about the preternatural degree of energy needed to make such distinct marks, the Enea report spells it out: “This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date.”
    http://www.independent.co.uk/n.....79512.html

  34. 34
    bornagain77 says:

    Personally, considering the extreme difficulty that many brilliant minds have had in trying to reconcile Quantum Mechanics and special relativity(QED), with Gravity,

    A Capella Science – Bohemian Gravity! – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rjbtsX7twc

    Bohemian Gravity – Rob Sheldon – September 19, 2013
    Excerpt: there’s a large contingent of physicists who believe that string theory is the heroin of theoretical physics. It has absorbed not just millions of dollars, but hundreds if not thousands of grad student lifetimes without delivering what it promised–a unified theory of the universe and life. It is hard, in fact, to find a single contribution from string theory despite 25 years of intense effort by thousands of the very brightest and best minds our society can find.
    http://rbsp.info/PROCRUSTES/bohemian-gravity/

    I consider the preceding ‘quantum’ nuance on the Shroud of Turin to be a subtle, but powerful, evidence substantiating Christ’s primary claim as to being our Savior from sin, death, and hell:

    John 8:23-24
    But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.

    G.O.S.P.E.L. – (the grace of propitiation) – poetry slam – video
    https://vimeo.com/20960385

    Matthew 10:28
    “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

    That eternity would be confirmed by both physics and direct ‘observational’ evidence, and that there are two different ‘qualities of eternity’ to be concerned about, should make any normal person who is not right with God shake in their boots. Myself, since I have entrusted my soul to Jesus to be my mediator before the judgement seat of almighty God, I sleep well at night knowing that my sins are atoned for by Christ’s perfect sacrifice! i.e Paid In Full!

    Evanescence – The Other Side (Lyric Video)
    http://www.vevo.com/watch/evan.....tantsearch

  35. 35
    bornagain77 says:

    corrected link:

    Particle Radiation from the Body – July 2012 – M. Antonacci, A. C. Lind
    Excerpt: The Shroud’s frontal and dorsal body images are encoded with the same amount of intensity, independent of any pressure or weight from the body. The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image. Radiation coming from the body would not only explain this feature, but also the left/right and light/dark reversals found on the cloth’s frontal and dorsal body images.
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/19tGkwrdg6cu5mH-RmlKxHv5KPMOL49qEU8MLGL6ojHU/edit

  36. 36
    Mung says:

    Axel:

    If an atheist saw a fakir performing the Indian rope trick, he wouldn’t wonder how the trick was performed, he’d say to himself: ‘One day scientists will understand how those guys are able to actually climb up a rope and vanish.’

    Ah, the irony. I love how in his now classic book on evolutionary theory The Biotic Message, Walter ReMine opens with a discussion of magic tricks and likens evolutionary theory to the misdirection of the magician.

    Simply unforgettable. That and the smorgasbord!

  37. 37
    Axel says:

    Must try and get it if its not to steep, mung.

  38. 38
    Dionisio says:

    Axel,
    Please do me a favor, would you mind taking a quick look at the last comments in this link? Thank you!

    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-502637

  39. 39
    Dionisio says:

    bornagain77
    Please do me a favor, would you mind taking a quick look at the last comments in this link? Thank you!

    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-502637

  40. 40
    Dionisio says:

    Mung
    Please do me a favor, would you mind taking a quick look at the last comments in this link? Thank you!

    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-502637

  41. 41
    Dionisio says:

    Mapou
    Please do me a favor, would you mind taking a quick look at the last comments in this link? Thank you!

    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-502637

  42. 42
    Dionisio says:

    Dr JDD
    Please do me a favor, would you mind taking a quick look at the last comments in this link? Thank you!

    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-502637

Leave a Reply