• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

God Day's?

J

johnth78

New Member
The transfer of Earth's rotational momentum to the Moon's orbital momentum as tidal friction slows the Earth's rotation. That increase in the Moon's speed is causing it to slowly recede from Earth (about 4 cm per year), increasing its orbital period and the length of a month as well.
To picture what is happening, imagine yourself riding a bicycle on a track built around a Merry-go-Round. You are riding in the same direction that it is turning. If you have a lasso and rope one of the horses, you would gain speed and the Merry-Go-Round would lose some. In this analogy, you and your bike represent the Moon, the Merry-Go-Round is the rotating Earth, and your lasso is gravity. In orbital mechanics, a gain in speed results in a higher orbit.

The slowing rotation of the Earth results in a longer day as well as a longer month. Once the length of a day equals the length of a month, the tidal friction mechanism will cease. (ie. Once your speed on the track matches the speed of the horses, you can't gain any more speed with your lasso trick.) That's been projected to happen once the day and month both equal about 47 (current) days, at the current rate billions of years in the future. If the Earth and Moon still exist, the Moon's distance will have increased to about 135% of its current value.

Therefor it is concivable that days at an early point in history were tremendously shorter than they are currently. This allows for the ages in Gensis to be accurate and still not disrupt the number of years given to all men. This however brings into my mind a dellima. God stands outside of our ever changing concept of time. That being said what constitutes a day to God? How then considering the fluidity of time are we able to definitivly state that the earth is not billions of years old?

Just some food for thought and discussion
 
i will let some of you triga-mom-etry experts do the math, but a 4 hr day would still make a 900 yr lifespan pretty long.

a 4 hr day would be simply annoying :D
watching the sun would make me dizzy and the gravitational pull at that speed would probably have us slithering on the ground like snakes, unable to even get up on all fours and crawl.
people killed by falling apples
flys would be called walks
 
First of all, even in the 'millions of years' scheme of things this is not really very important, in the young earth scheme we're talking about fractions of seconds, not minutes or hours of difference. It isn't conceivable that there was a point that days where tremendously shorter unless you already believe in billions of years are are talking about primordial soup era (actually, pre-primordial soup era) or you believe in some undocumented cataclysm that slowed the earth tremendously. Even that doesn't give much leeway as shorter days means much faster spin which means radically different forces applied to everything on the earth. That goes to pretty much what Steve said, Falling Apples of Doom :)

Second,
A day in Hebrew is defined by a span of night and a span of day, as we approach the winter solstice night hours got longer and day hours got shorter. Specifically a day was defined as a period of time between sunset and sunset. The 24 hours in the day where divisions of time for watches and duties and things. Defining an hour as a constant calculated by machines rather than natural events is a relatively new Anglo-Saxon thing. In the same way our arbitrary months are a Julian\Gregorian thing and not really related to an actual lunar month. Just because our time spans are regular doesn't mean a day can be defined as 24 of our hours though, should a day become longer or shorter it is our reckoning that would be changed, a day would still be the natural night\day pattern.

Our concept of time hasn't changed, only our methods of measuring it has. Pretty safe to say God's definition is the same as ours, the same as the Hebrews, since, as has been said many times, its a very exact language.

Third,
The length of a day has very little to do with the length of a year. Days, Months, and Years are all independent cycles that are very loosely related and only coincidentally correlated. If a year had 365,000 days it would still be one rotation around the sun, same deal if a day took three years to complete, it would still be three years. Other planets have calculations for their days and years and if you believe those calculations to be accurate at all you see that days and years have no correlation. It is possible for a planet to have a huge number of days per year, and possible for a planet to have several years per day. This discussion does nothing whatsoever for a discussion of the age of the earth in years. The ante-delugian patriarchs had their lives measured in years, not days. Their lifespans are still the only factor for calculating time spans. No matter how long days where the number of years is still the same.


Steve,
4 hours meaning 1/6th the time or 150 years if you want to calculate it like that :)
 
flys would be called walks
Click to expand...
And here, I always thought a walk was a fly with no wings... :lol:

I was composing a reply when, for some unknown reason, the Bib Fam website would no longer load. Other websites were working OK, but I took a break anyway. In the meantime, Tlaloc beat me to the punch 8-) , but since I was able to copy my nearly-completed reply to Notepad before taking that break, I'll put it here anyway:

The orbital mechanics as discussed by johnth78 could not result in enough slowing of Earth's rotation and the increase in orbital velocity of Luna to make an appreciable difference in the 6,000 to 10,000 years that the Solar system has been existence. (As was said in a different way by Tlaloc...)

A more likely cause of any difference between then and now (and this can only be conjecture, since no human on Earth was alive both then and now to make comparative measurements) is that the events associated with the curse in Genesis ch. 3 and/or the Deluge in chs. 6-9 affected both the rotational speed of the Earth and the orbit of Luna. IMHO, the Solar system is approximately 6,115 years old (using the date of Creation from Ussher's Annals of the World; the 10,000 year figure might allow for large gaps in the genealogical tables that are claimed by some, but which the Biblical text does not warrant) and both the curse and the events that are associated with the Deluge affected the entire universe, not just Earth.

Genesis 1:14 NKJV Then God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years;
Click to expand...
I believe it is possible, since the astronomical bodies were given to us to measure days and years, that before the fall and the resultant curse, everything was in perfect sync - the orbit of the moon was an exact integral multiple number of weeks, the year was an exact integral multiple number of "moons," etc., but the curse and/or events associated with the Deluge messed up the cosmic timepiece. Again, this is only conjecture.

Also IMHO, when the Bible talks of "ages," it refers to something we could loosely compare with the dispensations of Dispensationalist theology, not "the age of dinosaurs" or "the age of a pre-Adamic race" or any other such nonsense.

Good answer, Tlaloc! :)
 
I believe it is possible, since the astronomical bodies were given to us to measure days and years, that before the fall and the resultant curse, everything was in perfect sync - the orbit of the moon was an exact integral multiple number of weeks, the year was an exact integral multiple number of "moons," etc., but the curse and/or events associated with the Deluge messed up the cosmic timepiece. Again, this is only conjecture.
Click to expand...

That's a very interesting conjecture, I'd never thought of it like that. Do you conjecture that it would be 336 day years in 12 28 day lunar cycles, or 420 day years in 35 day cycles? I suppose the former is more likely if its a cataclysm that slowed everything down. Perhaps it should have been be an even 28 days a month 13 months a year for a 364 day year, that would only be about .2% different than the current year. The decay of the curse making years .2% longer seems pretty reasonable to me in that time span.


I should have noted before that a year, scripturally and historically, is the change of seasons, not solar rotations. Current scientific theory puts the change of seasons in the hands of relative axis tilt, not solar rotations, so defining a year as 'a rotation around the sun' is just a heliocentracists folly that caught on due to the popularity of the heliocentric theory in the last few hundred years.

Defining how long a rotation around the sun is is harder than it sounds when there are so many things in relative motion to each other, and the early heliocentric idea that we get closer to the sun in summer and farther in winter is generally denied in current astronomy (they believe something very close to the opposite) so, I think its safe to say a year is still the complete change and transformation in seasons. I misspoke when I said a year is a rotation around the sun, sorry.
 
johnth78 said:
God stands outside of our ever changing concept of time. That being said what constitutes a day to God? How then considering the fluidity of time are we able to definitivly state that the earth is not billions of years old?

Just some food for thought and discussion
Click to expand...

"Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." 2 Peter 3:8

Great analogy given about the merry-go-round and the bicycle. Don't know if I would have been able to express it better.

Presently speaking, I believe the days are shortening for our sake. "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." Matt 24:22 It has been scientifically proven that the Earth, as man, has a heart. At this time, the Earth's heartbeat is speeding up, which is giving the feeling that we are experiencing shorter days...scientifically proven 16 hours.
 
Tlaloc said:
That's a very interesting conjecture, I'd never thought of it like that. Do you conjecture that it would be 336 day years in 12 28 day lunar cycles, or 420 day years in 35 day cycles? I suppose the former is more likely if its a cataclysm that slowed everything down. Perhaps it should have been be an even 28 days a month 13 months a year for a 364 day year, that would only be about .2% different than the current year. The decay of the curse making years .2% longer seems pretty reasonable to me in that time span.
Click to expand...

I think maybe the 28 day month, 13 month 364 day year is most plausible, but that can only be conjecture. Also, I vaguely remember reading somewhere that man's natural biological cycles are more suited for a day slightly longer than the 24 hour day we now have.

If true, that would mean that the Earth's rotation has actually sped up since before the fall in Genesis 3, and possibly since before the Deluge. That could have been caused by an asteroid striking the Earth, which would impart some rotational energy if it hit in the right latitude and at the right angle. That would also have cracked the Earth's crust, which would cause this:
Genesis 7:11 NKJV In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
Click to expand...

Somewhere, buried under a bunch of other stuff that is being stored in the hogan my wife's parents lived in before she was born, I have a research paper written by a Creation scientist who calculated exactly when Gen. 7:11 occurred, how large the asteroid was, how fast it was traveling, exactly where it hit and at what angle. He based his calculations on a comparison of astronomical observations kept by every ancient civilization with computer projections into the past that showed when certain events actually observed should have occurred. If I can locate that paper, I will post as much of the information as might be relevant.

Dr. Gentry also has a very interesting video showing, among other things, how the fountains of the deep might have opened up:

http://www.halos.com/videos/index.htm and look for The Young Age of the Earth.

It is possible that an asteroid triggered the crustal breakup that Dr. Gentry's video shows as the probable cause of the fountains of the deep breaking open.

2 Peter 3:8, quoted by Nicola, is not some mathematical formula showing that the day-age theory might be true, but rather, shows that God is not bound by time as we finite humans are. After all, He created time when He spoke into existence the space-time-matter that makes up our universe.
Isaiah 46:10-11 NKJV Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying, 'My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure,' (11) Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it.
Click to expand...
{emphasis added}
 
Ah, but if we define year by seasons and axis tilt rather than by solar rotation the shorter year means the earth is getting 'wobblier' over time and its balance is decaying, and we don't need any further explanation. I've tended to believe the breaking up of the fountains of the deep was a purely geological event, but I have no reason to discount asteroids either. I'm quite intrigued by the paper.

For the fun of speculation, the biggest change in the 13\28 scheme is the lunar month. If we're going the asteroid route what about something striking the moon rather hard causing a change in forces on the earth leading to catastrophic geological activity causing part of the flood? Moving from 28 day rotations to 30 day rotations is fairly large, it would seem like something like that would have a lot of force on the earth.


I enjoy recess :)
 
I enjoy recess :)
Click to expand...
It was my favorite subject in school. :lol:

As I remember that paper (and it's been about 12 years since I last read it) the author discovered that the temple of the sun god, Ra, in Egypt, would not "work" during the time frame that archeologists said it was in use. At the Spring Equinox, the Pharaoh would put on his sun god costume and stand at the head of the tunnel down which the rising sun would shine, making it appear that he and the sun were one.

So he checked astronomical records from as many ancient civilizations as he could find to determine if the Spring Equinox was "off" in other locations, or maybe the archeologists were off in their dating. What he found was that there was a consistent error between what was recorded by the ancient astronomers and what the computers said should be, and the error, when plotted on a graph, looked like the wobble recovery of a spinning body that had been bumped. He compared it to a spinning top that you would hit to make it wobble.

From that, he was able to extrapolate backward in time and found that the fountains of the deep burst open in 2345 BC. He even gave the exact date and time, as well as the size, velocity, latitude, longitude, and angle at which it hit. Somewhere in what is now the Pacific, if I remember right, near Baja California.

Sure hope I can find that paper among all the stuff I have stored. There's also a bunch of other papers by other Creation scientists, including one about the decay of the speed of light. I acquired those when I was able to attend a Creation Science Seminar, where I heard Creation geologist Dr. Austin's lecture about Mt. St. Helens. He was the first professional geologist to go in to the area after it erupted.
 
johnth78 said:
The transfer of Earth's rotational momentum to the Moon's orbital momentum as tidal friction slows the Earth's rotation. That increase in the Moon's speed is causing it to slowly recede from Earth (about 4 cm per year), increasing its orbital period and the length of a month as well.

How then considering the fluidity of time are we able to definitivly state that the earth is not billions of years old?

Just some food for thought and discussion
Click to expand...

Here is something to chew on then, as the first two sentences PROVE beyond a shadow of turning that the earth is NOT billions of years old and we can definitively state this as a truth.

How about we take the 4cm a year and reverse that and see how long it takes for us to realize that the moon would be not only getting closer to the earths surface, but it would be sitting on the surface of the earth, having run into the earth in MUCH less than billions, or even multiple millions of years. Scientists have calculated this many times, and comment no further because based on the moon's retreat from the surface of the earth, the earth and moon are not billions of years old.
 
http://www.icr.org/

This group has done extensive research and posts most of its stuff for free on this website. I attended a conference in Dallas that was presented by these scientists and was completely fascinated by their science. Give it a look.

SweetLissa
 
It was an ICR conference where I obtained all those Creation science research papers that are in what was supposed to be temporary storage. :shock: One of my favorite authors was the late Dr. Morris, founder of ICR. For some reason, his books, also obtained at the conference, did not go into storage with the papers. The current issue of ICR's Acts & Facts magazine is a tribute to Dr. Morris.

Here's more food for thought. NASA wasted several million dollars on the Apollo 11 Moon lander because of their belief in evolution and the vast billions of years evolutionists preach about. They calculated that there would be cosmic dust on the Moon's surface that had accumulated for millions of years, and so made the feet of the lunar lander large enough to prevent it sinking out of sight.

Neil Armstrong's first words, which I heard live on the radio, were something like, "That's one small step for man, a giant leap for mankind." That one small step was into 6,000 years of cosmic dust - barely enough to make a footprint, not the real deep dust they had calculated would be there at the current rate of accumulation over millions of years. I'm not sure how they explained the discrepancy, if they ever did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top