What impact does the detection of gravitational waves have on biblical creation?

Creation Ministries International ^ | 2-16-16 | John G. Hartnett

[fishtank]

What impact does the detection of gravitational waves have on biblical creation?

By John G. Hartnett

Summary

Gravitational waves as predicted by Einstein were observed by the LIGO observatories for the first time on September 14, 2015.

The detection strongly supports Einstein’s general theory of relativity published in 1916 where Einstein predicted such a phenomenon. No evidence for violation of general relativity was observed.

A binary pair of black holes were observed to coalesce—the first time their existence confirmed. Their distance, determined from luminosity, is about 1.3 billion light-years.

The black holes had masses of 36 M⊙ (mass of Sun) and 29 M⊙ before coalescence and 62 M⊙ after they combined. An equivalent of 3 M⊙ was radiated away as gravitational waves.

There is very high confidence that the event seen at two widely separated sites must be real. The quality of the detected signals are high and were the same at each site.

This is, in principle, repeatable (with other binary sources) and therefore is operational science. No fudge factors were invoked.

The laws of physics used are the created laws of our God.

The detection provides strong confirmation that the current value of the speed of light has not changed since creation. Therefore the idea of c-decay is ruled out.

There are other more plausible solutions to the biblical creationist starlight-travel-time problem.

Big bang cosmology is not operational science. This observation in no way strengthens claims that the alleged big bang happened. The big bang necessarily still needs many unverifiable fudge factors. It is still unreasonable.

[fishtank]

Figure 1: The gravitational-wave event GW150914 observed by the LIGO Hanford (H1, left column panels) and Livingston (L1, right column panels) detectors. Times are shown relative to September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC. For visualization, all time series are filtered with a 35–350 Hz bandpass filter to suppress large fluctuations outside the detectors’ most sensitive frequency band, and band-reject filters to remove the strong instrumental spectral lines. Top row, left: H1 strain. Top row, right: L1 strain. GW150914 arrived first at L1 and 6.9 ms later at H1; for a visual comparison, the H1 data are also shown, shifted in time by this amount and inverted (to account for the detectors’ relative orientations). Second row: Gravitational-wave strain projected onto each detector in the 35–350 Hz band. Solid lines show a numerical relativity waveform for a system with parameters consistent with those recovered from GW150914 confirmed to 99.9% by an independent calculation (details in original). Shaded areas show 90% credible regions for two independent waveform reconstructions. One (dark gray) models the signal using binary black hole template waveforms. The other (light gray) does not use an astrophysical model, but instead calculates the strain signal as a linear combination of sine-Gaussian wavelets. These reconstructions have a 94% overlap. Third row: Residuals after subtracting the filtered numerical relativity waveform from the filtered detector time series. Bottom row: A time-frequency representation of the strain data, showing the signal frequency increasing over time. (Caption edited from the original, Ref. 6)

THis is the digested caption from the CMI article.

[Da Coyote]

“... It is still unreasonable....”

Really?

You folks are making me a bit ashamed of my Christianity.

Please leave physics to those who actually understand math.

Please.

[bramps]

Can anyone give a practical explanation of this article?

[refermech]

Two subjects I just can’t get my head around. God and physics.
Guess I’m just not very smart.

[stormer]

Indeed.

[Wilhelm Tell]

I agree. This is one of the things that made me abandon some forms of Protestantism. I don’t hear conservative Catholics or conservative Orthodox people add up the genealogies in Genesis turn the number of years they come up with into an odd test of faith. This business of trying to cram billions of years into a 6000 year-old universe to support someone’s idea of a literal reading of a few Bible verses, to make the Bible “scientific,” is what is unreasonable. And then young people are told they must read these verses literally and any discovery in science could be a dangerous thing that will undermine their faith - that is unreasonable. The Big Bang is not unreasonable at all. God is big enough for a big universe.

[Resolute Conservative]

None since God created gravity.

[tumblindice]

[milagro]

Am no physicist, but if life (e) equals mass (created objects) formed through Power (light) that is both material (particles) and motion (wave), then e=mc2 makes sense, not just scientifically, but theologically.
Maybe....

[backwoods-engineer]

And what are these solutions? Please do not cite the thoroughly-discredited Russell Humphreys. His book single-handedly set Christian apologetics back decades.

[Pietro]

I also agree. It seems to me that a search for truth should be the goal of both Christian and science and that the two are not only not mutually exclusive but in fact symbiotic.

[bert]

Science is always wrong, Genesis rules

[rjsimmon]

You folks are making me a bit ashamed of my Christianity.

Please leave physics to those who actually understand math.

Please.

Not discounting your disagreement, but the author is a physicist. He full well understands the math. Should you wish to discuss his findings, his email addresses are:
john.hartnett@adelaide.edu.au
johngideonhartnett@gmail.com

[Yollopoliuhqui]

The latest report on LIGO’s ‘discovery’ of Einstein gravitational waves is no more connected to reality than the fictitious black hole:

Crothers, S.J., The Painlevé-Gullstrand ‘Extension’ - A Black Hole Fallacy, American Journal of Modern Physics, 5, Issue 1-1 , February 2016, Pages:33-39,
http://vixra.org/pdf/1512.0089v1.pdf

no more real than the fictitious Cosmic Microwave Background:

Robitaille P.-M., WMAP: A Radiological Analysis, Progress in Physics, v.1, pp.3-18, (2007), http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2007/PP-08-01.PDF

Robitaille P.-M., COBE: A Radiological Analysis, Progress in Physics, v.4, pp.17-42, (2009), http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2009/PP-19-03.PDF

no more real than the fictitious gaseous Sun:

Robitaille P.-M., Forty Lines of Evidence for Condensed Matter — The Sun on Trial: Liquid Metallic Hydrogen as a Solar Building Block, Progress in Physics, v.4, pp.90-142, 2013, http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2013/PP-35-16.PDF

and no more real than the fictitious Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission:

Robitaille, P.-M., Crothers, S. J., “The Theory of Heat Radiation” Revisited: A Commentary on the Validity of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission and Max Planck’s Claim of Universality, Progress in Physics, v. 11, p.120-132, (2015),
http://vixra.org/pdf/1502.0007v1.pdf

Those who believe in ghosts and goblins see them lurking in the shadows and assign their action to what they don’t understand. Cosmologists likewise see their beliefs lurking in their shadows and assign the action of their beliefs to what they don’t understand.

Mass-media induced mass-hysteria over ghosts and goblins, holes and bangs, Einstein gravitational waves, Higgs bosons and higgsinos, CMB, etc. does not constitute science. The BICEP2 report was also surrounded with similar hysterical scientists and mass-media induced mass-hysteria. That science is now done but mass media hysteria is a symptom of its decay, not a sign of achievement. Rational thought no longer prevails.

We now await Hawking et al to announce their contact with the aliens:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/scientist-warns-world-to-think-twice-before-replying-to-alien-signals-from-outer-space-10408201.html

They must be out there too; after all, the scientists have a journal for them: The International Journal of Astrobiology, published by Cambridge University, Mr. Hawking’s learned school.

Stephen J. Crothers

[Wilhelm Tell]

There are well-meaning people who are really hurting Christianity when they pose things as either you accept a certain Fundamentalist reading of the Bible or you are an atheist or at least a liberal. Actually, some of the original Fundamentalists did not have a problem with the idea of an ancient universe. The insistence on 6000 years being a litmus test of orthodoxy is something fairly recent.

[equaviator]

Maybe God made Einstein his go-to guy for explaining to the human race what He is and how He works.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The book of General Relativity will need an update.

[Durus]

With all due respect, you touting a theory that demands faith (the big bang) doesn’t put in any position to question another’s faith.

[sauropod]

.

[mad_as_he$$]

#Blackholesmatter!