Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Starlight in a Young Earth Model

A lot of this does assume that light has traveled at a constant speed of 300,00 km/s. Now, this is a good assumption, but the ramifications could be somewhat devastating. Depending on which view you take of time, space-time, and metaphysical time, light may not have always traveled at a constant speed.

The reason this becomes relevant is because it pertains to stars and light. I happen to believe in a young earth, young universe. However, the evidence of stars and light are pitted against this belief. Why? Because whether or not the light I see is present light, it still originated from some source *in space* and at some point *in time.* If light travels at 300,000 km/s, then working backwards using the distance of stars, we can determine the exact point *in time* that the source *in space* emitted its light. If a star were to say be born at some point *in space and time,* then the light (traveling at the assumed finite speed of light, 300,000 km/s) would take however long it takes for light to travel to get here. If this star were 11 million light-years away (one light-year being however far it takes for light to travel in a year), then it would take light 11 million years to travel to earth (assuming that light travels at a finite speed of 300,000 km/s). This is the problem that anyone who holds to a young earth-young universe must deal with.


How do we usually deal with it? Well, we say that the light was created on its way to earth. Okay. Plausible and no doubt a solution. But is it the best answer? Well, consider how it looks: it would be like God creating fossils in the ground that do not actually represent animals that actually existed. God would've created light from objects that do not exist (because, let's just say that the earth is 10,000 years old; this would mean that anything beyond 10,000 light-years away is non-existent; instead, it's just light carrying information which God created as light and which represents nothing other than light). People often appeal to this argument because they say that God created Adam as a full grown man. I would say however, that God creating Adam as a full grown man and creating light that does not actually represent anything are two very different things.


So what can we offer as a solution? Well, so far, all of this has been based off of principles of time, speed, and distance. I won't offer a full explanation of how the equation works (I probably wouldn't be able to offer it in an understandable sort of way). But I will leave you with one comment on what appears to be a faulty assumption, and I will leave you with a link that provides more information. One bit of advice: everything that you think is sure (i.e. science, astronomy, euclidian mathematics) has been proven wrong at some point. This goes for the explanation that evolutionists have used (above) and this goes for the explanation that the link provides (below). The only sure thing that we can cling to is Scripture. And if we cannot fully understand things now, we will when we see Him (1 John 3:2).


Distance equals speed multiplied by time. For the time, we will assume that the distances stars and other objects in the sky both near and far that we have measured are accurate (and there is good reason to believe that they are). If the distances are correct, then there can only be a discrepancy in either the speed or the time. If we believe that the speed (of light, i.e. 300,000 km/s) is accurate, then the time is what is incorrect (young-earth, young-universe). But if the speed of light is not constant, that is, finite, then perhaps there is no discrepancy in the time.


http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c005.html

3 comments:

Grafted said...

I moved your post to a new topic, since you don't address time travel, but you present an interesting topic concerning "old" starlight in a young earth model.

Grafted said...

The way I have always seen it is that it if at creation, God produced light from stars which is already well on its way to earth, it does not necessarily have to be representing something which does not exist. It would not have to be comparable to fossils representing no animals.

The light could be emanating from an actual star, but God could have just jump-started its travel to our eyes on earth. I know this is great speculation, just a simple appeal to "God could have done such and such" that I don't have to prove scientifically, but this really is the luxury the Christian has.

This is not to say that Christians can just come up with any fanciful, ridiculous idea and say "oh well, God could have done such and such, so there." This mindset could be used quite irresponsibly. However, since God did create everything out of nothing, He really could have set it up in any way He desired. If He saw that it would take eleven million years for starlight to reach the people that He wants to behold it, He simply has the authority to make it happen sooner.

After all, it is pretty silly to say that the process was jump-started just to fit it in our model - it is not how starlight normally works. However, is it not just as ridiculous to say that a human man was formed from dust of the ground? That is not how it normally works.

Since we do hold that it was done that way originally because God revealed it to us, we do have the right to theorize in any fanciful way we can to make the travel-time of starlight fit the model of the young earth model God also revealed to us. (Let no honest Christian who understands Hebrew deny that Moses certainly thought each creation stage was one 24 hour period when he wrote Genesis. Was Moses wrong and today's old earth creationist right? Did God allow Moses to misunderstand and record a falsity?)

To me, it is no problem to theorize that God made starlight, emanating from actual stars, closer to our eyes than would normally be required.

Without being considered a Deist, I can say that in regards to creation, God started it and then took a step back, allowing the scientific laws He created to "babysit the universe." Miracles are His working against the laws of nature that He Himself set in place.

De Mentor said...

Well said. God trumps science, speculation and everything by virtue of his omnipotent and sovereign being. However, certain theories in science do allow light to travel at a speed greater than 300,000 km/s. So by using this model of light and time, we can conclude (through inference) that the universe (and starlight from stars millions of light-years away) is a young universe. God created it in 6 days. Now, it's still a model. A model prone to err. But no more so than any other theory.

But whatever model of science, theory, speculation we use, God will always come out on top. Whether He used natural laws of speeding up light, or whether it was a miracle that He caused, they are still both caused by God.