RSR: Stretch Cosmology

God stretched out the heavens* 2019 Update: See the experiment proposal below regarding the one-way speed of light.

* 2017 Update: Stretch Cosmology was proposed in the Del Tackett-narrated fathom-event film Is Genesis History? (Tackett makes a cameo appearance of sorts in Enyart's Focus II documentary.)

* 2013 Update: See this by AiG astronomer Danny Faulkner, A Proposal for a New Solution to the Light Travel Time Problem, in the peer-reviewed Answers Research Journal! Dr. Faulkner published the idea that God's Day Three creation of the plants, and that He may have supernaturally pulled the plants out of the ground, may be an analogy for how He stretched out the heavens on Day Four, causing the stars to undergo hyper-stellar-nucleosynthesis and actually, though supernaturally, pulling the light from the farthest stars across the universe to the Earth (and perhaps beyond).

In addition to Danny's argument, there is also this scriptural passage that may reinforce that concept of how God may have created plants, by rapidly and supernaturally pulling them up from the ground. The English word sprout is translated from the Hebrew tad-se, used in Genesis 1 not for the creation of animals but only for plants, and meaning to sprout or to shoot [out]...

Gen. 1:11: "And God said, 'Let the earth sprout vegetation...'"

That Hebrew word is used in Scripture only here in Genesis 1:11. The word daw-shaw',  considered related, appears in Joel 2:22, the "pastures are springing up..."

* Stretching the Cosmos: Real Science Radio co-hosts Fred Williams and Bob Enyart discuss more great news stories from the Winter 2012 edition of Creation magazine. And the guys reply to a listener who asks why would a star die and collapse if the universe is only thousands of years old. 2013 Update: After a change of name, the guys now refer to this to this proposal, to solve the starlight and time dilemma, as Stretch Cosmology.

* Is God Outside of Time? Google that question and we think you'll find that of hundreds of thousands of related web pages, that RSR's answer and article is ranked by Google as #1 at rsr.org/time. The well-known claim that time slows down as an object approaches the speed of light also entails that at the speed of light time stops. However, if that were true, then a photon traveling through a vacuum could not have its own innate frequency (i.e., color). But it does.

* Anti-evolutionary Eels, Next-generation Band-Aids, Egyptian Blue, Dawkins Color Vision Challenge, Threes, and Black Holes in a Young Universe: The species of eel discovered in the South Pacific shows stasis, the primary expectation of the creationist (and of renowned evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould), rather than evolutionary change, the expectation of the atheist and of theistic evolutionists.

* New Band-Aids Designed Without Glue By Copying the Gecko Toe: It's about time human engineers got around to reverse engineering the adhesiveness of the gecko's feet in order to manufacture a better Band-Aid. The Band-Aid was invented in 1920, making it eleven years older than the Big Bang which was invented in 1931. See the series of enlargements in the gecko feet image to get an idea of how God used form rather than glue to enable geckos to walk on walls.

* Post-Show Note: Real Science Radio is looking for a sketch artist! Help us create the RSR Dawkins Color Vision Challenge! Similar to our PZ Myers Trochlea Challenge (for which PZ honestly answered, "I don't know"), Bob and Fred are constructing a similar challenge but this time for Richard Dawkins, and regarding a different aspect of the alleged evolution of vision. The guys are hoping to get an artist to volunteer to sketch their challenge, and also, they're eager to get comments and constructive criticism emailed to them on the challenge itself. Done; http://rsr.org/3-to-1.

* Egyptian Blue and the Three Primary Colors: The ancient Egyptian chemists were brilliant materials engineers, and their effort to create a true blue pigment was stunning in its sophistication. Interestingly, there are three primary colors in pigments just as there are three primary colors in light waves.

Bob Debates a Geophysicist & a Mathematician* Threes Everywhere: The number three reflected in the Trinity and throughout Scripture turns the Christian's attention toward the creation to see space existing in three dimensions, height, width, and length, as does time in past, present and future. The electromagnetic force operates in positive, negative, and neutral, and in light waves, red, green, and blue blend into the hues of the rainbow whereas and in pigment the three primary colors are red, yellow, and blue. We human beings on this third planet from the Sun experience matter primarily in three states, solid, liquid, and gas. The strongest shape for building is the triangle. Writers often give three examples and artists group in threes as in interior design, sculpting, and even movie directors, as they have the word trilogy (1, 2, 3) but no word for any other number of films. Photographers use the rule of thirds, genetic scientists discovered that the language of DNA uses only three-letter words, and the scientific journal Icarus has published a 2013 paper identifying a decimal system in the amino acids of DNA, which code thereby contains, at least once, all the three-digit values, 111, 222, 333, 444, 555, 666, 777, 888, and 999. And so we humans are body, soul, and spirit (1 Thes. 5:23), made in the image of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. See also http://rsr.org/3.

* Stretch Cosmology Proposed Solution: Bob Enyart has temporarily removed the written description of this topic because in 2019 he is considering submitting it to one of the creation journals. This program's audio, however, remains available (via the above links). Check back here in late 2019 for an update.

* RSR's Vision Challenge:

A brain doesn't "see" an image but a symbolic code of that image

Today’s Resource: We invite you to browse the Science Department of our online store!

* On the Claim from Einstein, Jason Lisle, John Hartnett: The speed of light is only known from round-trip measurements. Einstein then argued that there is no valid reason to claim that the speed that light travels from Point A to Point B would be the same speed as on its return journey. So while he argued it is not a valid assumption, it is justifiable in order to simplify the math to stipulate that light travels the same speed on both legs of a round trip. Creationist astrophysicist Dr. Jason Lisle, as supported by RSR friend and cosmologist Dr. John Hartnett, has used this to address the starlight and time challenge by claiming that light arrives from even the most distant galaxies upon the Earth instantly. If so, of course their great distance would thereby be irrelevant to light's travel time to Earth. If I understand their argument, it includes a claim that no experiment can be devised, even theoretically, which could measure the one-way speed of light.

* Proposed Approach for Measuring the One-Way Speed of Light: As a challenge to this, Real Science Radio's Bob Enyart asks whether the new 10-trillion FPS camera (and the planned faster versions) might in theory be able to measure the one-way speed of light. Being a science talk show host and not a physicist, Enyart is not arguing that the following experiment design could succeed, but he is arguing that this technological development provides the tools to, theoretically if not in practice, measure the one-way speed of light. If photons normally interacted with one another, a beam of light emitted from a camera could bounce off the target beam to be measured, with the camera then recording the returning light signal. However, apparently, visible light photons rarely collide. But there are known ways to cause them to collide and high energy photon-photon collisions do occur. The concepts should provide a theoretical framework needed for the measurement. And as quantum and camera technologies improve, such a thought experiment may become practical. Here's a simplified concept...

Experiment illustration for one-way speed of light

In this video from March 2019 at 4:33 see a laser beam shooting through a liquid:

The speed of light in a vacuum is 50% faster than in glass, a third faster than in water, but only neglibly faster than in air (three hundreths of 1%) so the experiment might not need to be conducted in a vacuum.

In the simplified experiment proposed above, we would want to avoid the kind of systematic error that evolutionists make when they "sneak" intelligence into their "natural selection" computer simulations. So for example we might discredit the results if we snuck the speed of light into the synchronization of the equipment itself. So we position the cameras close enough to the laser beam in an effort to make the cameras' roundtrip optics insignificant compared to the lengthier transit of the laser through the bottle. Also, if the beam's transit to the bottom of the bottle is not instantaneous, and is slow enough for a camera's frame rate to capture it, it seems that the leading edge of the beam (or pulse) would come into view of each camera from the right boundary of its field of vision and, frame-by-frame, pass to left boundary (with millions of frames showing its progress). That would show us that the light was not travelling instantaneously on its outgoing journey. Further, we should be able to calculate its speed based on the width of the single camera's field of vision and the number of frames it takes to record the beam's journey across that field.

Installing additional cameras and a mirror at the bottom of the bottle might enable a video recording of the return trip of the beam. This could help corroborate the speed information gained from the single camera. And if the return trip back toward the top of the bottle is not instantaneous, the last camera to videotape the beam's progress before it hit the mirrored bottom of the bottle (in the illustration, the third from the right) would then also be the first camera to record the beam's return trip. That last camera would then record fewer frames between the beam leaving it's field of view and when it again reentered it's field of view on it's return trip. Quantum mechanics is wild enough that many would not be shocked if light behaved in the extraordinary way that Dr. Jason Lisle and Dr. John Hartnett propose. Regardless though, RSR makes the following prediction (which is merely what most physicists would expect). If the beam leaves a record of its travels on each of the camers, consider the time that would pass between the beam leaving and then reentering each camera's field of view. RSR predicts that we could calculate the increasing number of camera frames (time) that pass, as we move from the last, to the middle, to the first camera, between the leading edge of the beam leaving the field of the camera's view (as it heads toward the bottom of the bottle) and reappearing on its return trip.

Please send any comments to Bob@rsr.org. Thanks!