The Living-Cell

[ippy]

You could be right...but time-travel isn't so very difficult. You see...if we take our lead from Almighty God we know that in the static dimension a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years are like a day. So there we have it...if we want to slip around time and space all we have to do is become stationary whilst the Milky Way hurtles away from us at the speed of the expanding universe...and, it seems, many observers have witnessed this principle in action.

It's never a good sign if you don't even realise Nick.

Regards ippy.

[Roses]

Maybe NM is hoping to be a stand up comic and practicing his jokes on us. He better not give up the day job!

[NicholasMarks]

I find it impossible to believe that you can't understand how the atom came into existence in their many trillions and in the twinkling of an eye. It would take me longer to explain it than it would for a star to be born...but, here goes. A dense energy field is required first, containing as much dense energy as the star would contain when it is all transposed into atoms...That dense field is travelling at the speed of the expanding universe, and its swirling, crashing forces, internally scratch the static universe that lies  beneath this activity. It would be like the coach-door suddenly swinging open on a high-speed train. Everybody standing too close to that area would be suddenly sucked out of the train...An imploding force has struck again, as many unfortunate people would testify, if they could. Similarly, energy surrounding that atomic friction point within a newly forming star would burst towards that tiny portal from every direction to escape their denseness and compression forces. The tiniest hint of such a portal is all that would be necessary to cause this reaction and when grasped into that portal, or, higgs field, the excess energy would be snatched away causing the hole to pulse and bring in a second tier of energy which would lock on to the first layer. Another pulse would reveal ley-lines of imploding forces, reduced in strength now but which still needed to be stabilised by the powerful imploding forces that now had a multitude of energetic particles attached to its higgs field. Dependant upon how deep within that starfield this action was taking place would determine the type of atom produced and we would finish up with a fully functional star in less time than it has taken me to describe it.

 

[Nearly Sane]

Nice poetry, shame about the science.

[Gordon]

I find it impossible to believe that you can't understand how the atom came into existence in their many trillions and in the twinkling of an eye. It would take me longer to explain it than it would for a star to be born...but, here goes. A dense energy field is required first, containing as much dense energy as the star would contain when it is all transposed into atoms...That dense field is travelling at the speed of the expanding universe, and its swirling, crashing forces, internally scratch the static universe that lies  beneath this activity. It would be like the coach-door suddenly swinging open on a high-speed train. Everybody standing too close to that area would be suddenly sucked out of the train...An imploding force has struck again, as many unfortunate people would testify, if they could. Similarly, energy surrounding that atomic friction point within a newly forming star would burst towards that tiny portal from every direction to escape their denseness and compression forces. The tiniest hint of such a portal is all that would be necessary to cause this reaction and when grasped into that portal, or, higgs field, the excess energy would be snatched away causing the hole to pulse and bring in a second tier of energy which would lock on to the first layer. Another pulse would reveal ley-lines of imploding forces, reduced in strength now but which still needed to be stabilised by the powerful imploding forces that now had a multitude of energetic particles attached to its higgs field. Dependant upon how deep within that starfield this action was taking place would determine the type of atom produced and we would finish up with a fully functional star in less time than it has taken me to describe it.

 

Nick

The bits in the above I've highlighted (in bold) seem to be contradictory, which isn't encouraging.

Update: I may have misread what you said Nick, since on re-reading you are saying the same thing essentially: that a star could form in less time that it took you to explain something via your post. So my apologies for getting that wrong.

Even so, since you suggest a star could have formed in less time than it took for you write your post I'm not sure you are correct - what do cosmologists say about the duration of star formation?

[Sebastian Toe]

I find it impossible to believe that you can't understand how the atom came into existence in their many trillions and in the twinkling of an eye. It would take me longer to explain it than it would for a star to be born...but, here goes. A dense energy field is required first, containing as much dense energy as the star would contain when it is all transposed into atoms...That dense field is travelling at the speed of the expanding universe, and its swirling, crashing forces, internally scratch the static universe that lies  beneath this activity. It would be like the coach-door suddenly swinging open on a high-speed train. Everybody standing too close to that area would be suddenly sucked out of the train...An imploding force has struck again, as many unfortunate people would testify, if they could. Similarly, energy surrounding that atomic friction point within a newly forming star would burst towards that tiny portal from every direction to escape their denseness and compression forces. The tiniest hint of such a portal is all that would be necessary to cause this reaction and when grasped into that portal, or, higgs field, the excess energy would be snatched away causing the hole to pulse and bring in a second tier of energy which would lock on to the first layer. Another pulse would reveal ley-lines of imploding forces, reduced in strength now but which still needed to be stabilised by the powerful imploding forces that now had a multitude of energetic particles attached to its higgs field. Dependant upon how deep within that starfield this action was taking place would determine the type of atom produced and we would finish up with a fully functional star in less time than it has taken me to describe it.

 

Nick, common sense would tell us that the above is the product of an over active imagination, but not science.

[NicholasMarks]

Nick

The bits in the above I've highlighted (in bold) seem to be contradictory, which isn't encouraging.

Update: I may have misread what you said Nick, since on re-reading you are saying the same thing essentially: that a star could form in less time that it took you to explain something via your post. So my apologies for getting that wrong.

Even so, since you suggest a star could have formed in less time than it took for you write your post I'm not sure you are correct - what do cosmologists say about the duration of star formation?

Remember that the field of energy that will become the star already exists and the speed of the expanding universe which fires up all scientific data has already been created. This whole body of star energy is locked upon a black-hole that brought this dense virgin star material into a tight gravitational body. All we need is the swirling, crashing forces, within that star's density, to penetrate down into the static dimension, and in the blink of any eye an atom is born...manifest this a trillion, trillion, times,  and I reckon a fully functioning star could form in an instant and in that same instant, all knowledge within the universe gained its scientific roots which all centre upon Almighty God, just as Jesus Christ taught us...and the two part-atom components that gave birth to the living-cell, having derived from a similar birth pattern, is party to all of this.

[Sebastian Toe]

Remember that the field of energy that will become the star already exists and the speed of the expanding universe which fires up all scientific data has already been created. This whole body of star energy is locked upon a black-hole that brought this dense virgin star material into a tight gravitational body. All we need is the swirling, crashing forces, within that star's density, to penetrate down into the static dimension, and in the blink of any eye an atom is born...manifest this a trillion, trillion, times,  and I reckon a fully functioning star could form in an instant and in that same instant, all knowledge within the universe gained its scientific roots which all centre upon Almighty God, just as Jesus Christ taught us...and the two part-atom components that gave birth to the living-cell, having derived from a similar birth pattern, is party to all of this.

Nick, common sense tells us that the above is a) fantasy and b) not science.

[Anchorman]

Remember that the field of energy that will become the star already exists and the speed of the expanding universe which fires up all scientific data has already been created. This whole body of star energy is locked upon a black-hole that brought this dense virgin star material into a tight gravitational body. All we need is the swirling, crashing forces, within that star's density, to penetrate down into the static dimension, and in the blink of any eye an atom is born...manifest this a trillion, trillion, times,  and I reckon a fully functioning star could form in an instant and in that same instant, all knowledge within the universe gained its scientific roots which all centre upon Almighty God, just as Jesus Christ taught us...and the two part-atom components that gave birth to the living-cell, having derived from a similar birth pattern, is party to all of this.

 



Nicely put.
Pity it has no connection to science, cosmology, theology or, for that matter, theology.
Is it poetry?

[Shaker]

Surrealist poetry, perhaps 

[NicholasMarks]

My question would have been...look...the universe is filled with stars and the vast majority all came into existence all at once so how could that happen, within the scientific context of our observations??...and I would have told you...remember...stepping-stone logic...everything supports the scientific facts of what went on before, and what happens after the stepping-stone, scientific point under observation.

[torridon]

My question would have been...look...the universe is filled with stars and the vast majority all came into existence all at once so how could that happen, within the scientific context of our observations??...and I would have told you...remember...stepping-stone logic...everything supports the scientific facts of what went on before, and what happens after the stepping-stone, scientific point under observation.

That's wrong though.  Stellar birth and death in an ongoing process.  In the beginning the universe was utterly dark and remained that way for several hundred million years before stars started to ignite.  They didn't all ignite in one go, star formation is an ongoing process

[Anchorman]

My question would have been...look...the universe is filled with stars and the vast majority all came into existence all at once so how could that happen, within the scientific context of our observations??...and I would have told you...remember...stepping-stone logic...everything supports the scientific facts of what went on before, and what happens after the stepping-stone, scientific point under observation.

My question would have been:
"What evidence do you have that 'all came into existance all at once' "?
If you believe this, you're a YEC.
Are you a YEC?

[NicholasMarks]

My question would have been:
"What evidence do you have that 'all came into existance all at once' "?
If you believe this, you're a YEC.
Are you a YEC?

Yes and no....The Holy Bible is quite clear...In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth but the Earth proved to be void...which...because this statement is based upon absolute truth, means precisely that. No time period is specified for this beginning. This means that millions of years could have existed before the Earth became void...plenty of time for raw life to have evolved...just as  the evidence suggests. What is clear from the Holy Bible is that, then, the Earth became void. A terrific force was needed to render the planet lifeless with all water converging upon the dark side, facing the great abyss...no wonder the side facing the sun is now a blistering, sand-swept, and desolate place. But Almighty God restored the planet...not by evolution but with refined scientific deliberation...especially in his special genetic refinement to improve on monkey life, in the form of Adam and Eve, themselves designed to be compatible with the Earth's environment, signified by the reaching into the dust of the Earth for his new creation.

If we follow the pattern of his seven day project whereby all the chemistry, all climate and all health  restored the planet to a life supporting place it is small wonder that remnant life from the planets previous era jumped back into existence.

   

[Anchorman]

Yes and no....The Holy Bible is quite clear...In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth but the Earth proved to be void...which...because this statement is based upon absolute truth, means precisely that. No time period is specified for this beginning. This means that millions of years could have existed before the Earth became void...plenty of time for raw life to have evolved...just as  the evidence suggests. What is clear from the Holy Bible is that, then, the Earth became void. A terrific force was needed to render the planet lifeless with all water converging upon the dark side, facing the great abyss...no wonder the side facing the sun is now a blistering, sand-swept, and desolate place. But Almighty God restored the planet...not by evolution but with refined scientific deliberation...especially in his special genetic refinement to improve on monkey life, in the form of Adam and Eve, themselves designed to be compatible with the Earth's environment, signified by the reaching into the dust of the Earth for his new creation.

If we follow the pattern of his seven day project whereby all the chemistry, all climate and all health  restored the planet to a life supporting place it is small wonder that remnant life from the planets previous era jumped back into existence.

   

NM:
"Void" is not a term used in modern - accurate - translations.
Try "empty".
And there is no suggestion whatsoever in those words that earth 'became' anything. The Hebrew used in the Pentateuch and its' Greek equivalent in the Septuagint suggest that the "Empty" was the state envisaged at its' creation - whenever that was.
Even if you take the Genesis account literally - and, like most Christians, I do not, the sense of the statement  is that the earth was created shapeless and empty.
It did not become empty.

[NicholasMarks]

NM:
"Void" is not a term used in modern - accurate - translations.
Try "empty".
And there is no suggestion whatsoever in those words that earth 'became' anything. The Hebrew used in the Pentateuch and its' Greek equivalent in the Septuagint suggest that the "Empty" was the state envisaged at its' creation - whenever that was.
Even if you take the Genesis account literally - and, like most Christians, I do not, the sense of the statement  is that the earth was created shapeless and empty.
It did not become empty.

In actual fact the planet Earth was spewed out of the newly forming sun when the sun was in its infancy and much larger than it is today...and the newly forming planet was indeed void, or rather, empty, just as you describe it. It is a tale told by the workings of the universe that when a star erupts into life it is dominated by the excessive production of hydrogen atoms which cause heavier atoms to be spewed out as slag every so often, and our sun is currently on an eleven year cycle for such events. But we know that a little more is involved in this creation of Almighty God's because he tells us in John that in the beginning was the 'word' and that 'word' by the very nature of how it is described to us is a science...a wonderful science...The Science of Everything, and the whole Holy Bible goes to great lengths to bring this knowledge to us righteously, and in a loving, caring manner, to save us from all tribulations, whilst those who know they have offended God, and who refuse to repent...have only Revelation 21:8 to look forward to.

[Sebastian Toe]

It is a tale told by the workings of the universe that when a star erupts into life it is dominated by the excessive production of hydrogen atoms which cause heavier atoms to be spewed out as slag every so often, and our sun is currently on an eleven year cycle for such events.

I'm intrigued. Tell me what happens exactly in those such events?

[Anchorman]

In actual fact the planet Earth was spewed out of the newly forming sun when the sun was in its infancy and much larger than it is today...and the newly forming planet was indeed void, or rather, empty, just as you describe it. It is a tale told by the workings of the universe that when a star erupts into life it is dominated by the excessive production of hydrogen atoms which cause heavier atoms to be spewed out as slag every so often, and our sun is currently on an eleven year cycle for such events. But we know that a little more is involved in this creation of Almighty God's because he tells us in John that in the beginning was the 'word' and that 'word' by the very nature of how it is described to us is a science...a wonderful science...The Science of Everything, and the whole Holy Bible goes to great lengths to bring this knowledge to us righteously, and in a loving, caring manner, to save us from all tribulations, whilst those who know they have offended God, and who refuse to repent...have only Revelation 21:8 to look forward to.

I thought I was trying to point out - using Scripture - that 'void' was innacurate and incorrect, and "empty" was the correct rendition of both Hebrew and Greek, and that "empty" was the original state described in the Pentateuch as we have it.
Never mind the pseudoscience; do you accept Genesis' account of a 'shaprless, empty' earth right at the start....yes or no?
Nowhere does Scripture say earth became, or evolved into, 'empty'.
Again, do you accept this as an accurate interpretation of Genesis - whether you actually accept what Genesis say as fact or not, please?

[torridon]

In actual fact the planet Earth was spewed out of the newly forming sun when the sun was in its infancy and much larger than it is today....

That is incorrect, and I'm pretty sure this has been pointed out before.  The Earth was not 'spewed out' by the Sun, rather it formed from a slow process of accretion acting under gravity from the interstellar dust cloud in orbit around the Sun.

[torridon]

It is a tale told by the workings of the universe that when a star erupts into life it is dominated by the excessive production of hydrogen atoms which cause heavier atoms to be spewed out as slag every so often, and our sun is currently on an eleven year cycle for such events.

Incorrect. Stars do not produce hydrogen, rather they burn hydrogen as fuel.  Heavier atoms are produced continuously, not periodically, it is an ongoing process with some variability in its cycles.

[torridon]

Yes and no....The Holy Bible is quite clear...In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth but the Earth proved to be void...which...because this statement is based upon absolute truth, means precisely that. No time period is specified for this beginning. This means that millions of years could have existed before the Earth became void...plenty of time for raw life to have evolved...just as  the evidence suggests. What is clear from the Holy Bible is that, then, the Earth became void. A terrific force was needed to render the planet lifeless with all water converging upon the dark side, facing the great abyss...no wonder the side facing the sun is now a blistering, sand-swept, and desolate place. But Almighty God restored the planet...not by evolution but with refined scientific deliberation...especially in his special genetic refinement to improve on monkey life, in the form of Adam and Eve, themselves designed to be compatible with the Earth's environment, signified by the reaching into the dust of the Earth for his new creation.

Incorrect.  Whilst there have been several mass extinction events,none have succeeded in wiping life on this planet out completely.  There has never been a situation where all the water converged on one side of the planet.  There is no 'side facing the Sun' other than at any particular moment in time.  The planet rotates daily and is in a yearly orbit around the Sun, this averages out such that all 'sides' of the planet receive the same amount of sunlight although polar regions receive less than equatorial regions.

[NicholasMarks]

That is the problem when you have no mental agility. You are unable to look round corners or see what is inferred by facts. The facts are that The Holy Bible exists...it tells us of a wonderful dynamic energy that is at the root of all science and how to implement that science to bring us into peace, harmony, good health, and into a strong mental agility and that we have until the next chaotic global disturbance to get it right and Jesus Christ cannot be ignored if we want salvation from all that chaos.

Because we can't see this dynamic energy doesn't mean it doesn't exist...it means we should listen to those who, by their resurrection, say it exists and proved to us it does.

[Roses]

That is the problem when you have no mental agility. You are unable to look round corners or see what is inferred by facts. The facts are that The Holy Bible exists...it tells us of a wonderful dynamic energy that is at the root of all science and how to implement that science to bring us into peace, harmony, good health, and into a strong mental agility and that we have until the next chaotic global disturbance to get it right and Jesus Christ cannot be ignored if we want salvation from all that chaos.

Because we can't see this dynamic energy doesn't mean it doesn't exist...it means we should listen to those who, by their resurrection, say it exists and proved to us it does.

The problem is we don't have your overactive imagination, which tries to make your weird fantasies reality.

[Anchorman]

In many of your posts, NM, you talk of 'millions of Christians'. Whilst I do not accept argumentum ad populum, I'd say those 'millions of Christians' were on my side of the argument when it comes to your interpretation of John. THe word - as any REAL translation from the Greek has it, is not an 'it' - not a science, or a 'thing', dynamic or otherwise. He is God - as John states - right through His Gospel - enforcing it with his "Ego eimi" ("I am"( statements of Christ. Who arte these 'millions of Christians' who do not accespt Christ as God? If so they, and you, are not in accordance with the teaching of Scripture. I had a pleasant argument with JWs on this yesterday, after I told them to leave their NWT in their bags or preferrably, the bin. We spent forty five minutes comparing translations of John. I'm Happy to say I left one of them with serious doubts over what his cult told him.

[NicholasMarks]

That is incorrect, and I'm pretty sure this has been pointed out before.  The Earth was not 'spewed out' by the Sun, rather it formed from a slow process of accretion acting under gravity from the interstellar dust cloud in orbit around the Sun.

You introduce about three mythical beasts in your argument torri. Gravity is one of them. It isn't just a word it is a science...it has mechanics...I offer these mechanics in my understanding of the subject, you just accept it exists without any definition because science doesn't have a coherent definition. Accretion can only exist if atoms already exist...Your mythical beast just describes it as interstellar dust, mine gives you a ready and willing furnace to do the atom producing work, en masse, for you. Also, no one said that the planet Earth erupted perfectly formed as it is today...it obviously went through secondary stages and accretion played its part...and via these stages, trillions of part-atoms...'would be' hydrogen atoms, not fully formed, were snatched from our sun as the Earth ploughed through the sun's outer layer. That is how we know it all happened so very fast and how the living-cell later developed.