How long was a day when the universe began

[Orbit]

Many arguments here about the bible and creation are about "a day". We all only know the concept of "a day" as we live our lives here on earth.

How long was a day when the universe became the universe?

A day is the time when the sun lights the earth, for about 12 hours a cycle. It's always the same by the definition of "day". Perhaps you want to ask "How long did the universe take to form?":, in which case I would refer you to a science book.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I agree, but that is purely when looking at it from our own perspective. But let's say you are an ant and you are born and then you start doing whatever ants do and then you die. Clearly, the ant is not having big philosophical thoughts about its own existence and probably not its purpose either, it simply does whatever an ant is supposed to do, yet the ant and all other lifeforms seem to at least have the instinct of wanting to live rather than die. So one would assume that the "idea" that living is better than not, must be universal. Even bacteria, viruses etc, seems to prefer spreading rather than not.

It could be 50% from the start, but those that didn't want to survive are obviously gone, so it could have been completely random in the very beginning

Insects and animals almost certainly have no choice other than to follow the dictates of their nature; their impulse is to survive, and to procreate. The same is true of plants, and all living things, but it’s no great leap of inductive reasoning to postulate that plants, insects, and animals all have lower levels of consciousness than humans. We have the power of reason, we are not only conscious but self conscious. We have the capacity to question ourselves, and everything around us. This powerful tool has enabled us to dominate and manipulate nature, but it has also, paradoxically, alienated us from our own nature. Having eaten the fruit from the tree of knowledge, we have locked ourselves out of the garden.

 

[Pete in Panama]

A day is the time when the sun lights the earth, for about 12 hours a cycle. It's always the same by the definition of "day". Perhaps you want to ask "How long did the universe take to form?":, in which case I would refer you to a science book.

Are u aware that Genesis says that the sun was not created until the fourth day?

For us here and now we got a day that goes from midnight to midnight the next day, but during the creation they didn't have that. The first four days may have been billions of years long, and there's no mention of some kind of clock setting time re-shift correction on the fourth day so it's possible that the other days were longer too.

Time measurement is dicey. What most cosmologist have a hard time coming to grips w/ is the fact that any mention of time requires an observer because time (in most scientific circles) is relative to the observer. The inflationary epoch during say the first 10^-32 sec, where was the point of measurement? Bear in mind that EVERYTHING traveled at the speed of light --meaning time did not move at all.

 

[Orbit]

Are u aware that Genesis says that the sun was not created until the fourth day?

For us here and now we got a day that goes from midnight to midnight the next day, but during the creation they didn't have that. The first four days may have been billions of years long, and there's no mention of some kind of clock setting time re-shift correction on the fourth day so it's possible that the other days were longer too.

Time measurement is dicey. What most cosmologist have a hard time coming to grips w/ is the fact that any mention of time requires an observer because time (in most scientific circles) is relative to the observer. The inflationary epoch during say the first 10^-32 sec, where was the point of measurement? Bear in mind that EVERYTHING traveled at the speed of light --meaning time did not move at all.

You can't make a day however long you want. The word has a definition.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope. A sidereal day is the time an observer on earth would see a distant star in the same position. Due to earths movement around the sun, the sun would appear in the same position 4 seconds later because the observer (with the earth) has shifted it's own position.

Not quite. Check out my link that I provided on sidereal days. What you are describing is a stellar day The change in definitions results in a very small difference, but since using the sidereal day is already pedantic I decided to crank it up to eleven.

"Sidereal time (as a unit also sidereal day or sidereal rotation period) (sidereal /saɪˈdɪəriəl, sə-/ sy-DEER-ee-əl, sə-) is a timekeeping system that astronomers use to locate celestial objects. Using sidereal time, it is possible to easily point a telescope to the proper coordinates in the night sky. Sidereal time is a "time scale that is based on Earth's rate of rotation measured relative to the fixed stars",[1] or more correctly, relative to the March equinox."

"More exactly, sidereal time is the angle, measured along the celestial equator, from the observer's meridian to the great circle that passes through the March equinox[a] and both celestial poles, and is usually expressed in hours, minutes, and seconds.[2] Common time on a typical clock (mean Solar time) measures a slightly longer cycle, accounting not only for Earth's axial rotation but also for Earth's orbit around the Sun."

"The March equinox itself precesses slowly westward relative to the fixed stars, completing one revolution in about 25,800 years, so the misnamed sidereal day ("sidereal" is derived from the Latin sidus meaning "star") is 0.0084 second shorter than the stellar day, Earth's period of rotation relative to the fixed stars.[3] The slightly longer "true" sidereal period is measured as the Earth Rotation Angle (ERA), formerly the stellar angle.[4] An increase of 360° in the ERA is a full rotation of the Earth."

I did not know this until I read that article today. It seems that the changes in definition were adopted in 2,003.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Or atheists. To me there is no greater absurdity, than the proposition that this spectacularly beautiful and mysterious universe originated in a cipher, means nothing, and aimlessly rushes nowhere.

That's not a claim of atheism. There are no claims in atheism.

Atheists just aren't convinced that god(s) exist.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The mainstream Christian view of the Genesis account is allegorical.

I've made the following point to you in the past, but you didn't comment. As I understand it, an allegory is a specific literary form with which the creation story doesn't conform. What the creation myth is is an ancient guess about how the world we find ourselves living in came to exist. Like all creation myths, it is a creative but incorrect guess at what actually happened, which is different from an allegory, where events and characters represent something specific the author has in mind. Gulliver's Travels is a political allegory in which fantastical fictional characters substitute for prominent historical figures like Walpole in the British politics of Swift's era, symbolized by the rope dancer Flimnap. We know what these things stand for (including the rope dance) as did their author. They are not place-holders for what is not known such as the events in a creation myth. Do you disagree? If so, can you specify just where and why you think it's incorrect?

To me there is no greater absurdity, than the proposition that this spectacularly beautiful and mysterious universe originated in a cipher, means nothing, and aimlessly rushes nowhere.

That's an incredulity fallacy. You're defining reality according to your ability to conceive it, as if what seems absurd to you is more absurd than what a creationist believes. Obviously, that's not how truth is determined, and those most well versed in critical thinking and the evaluation of evidence routinely find the possibility of a godless universe as likely or more likely than one created by a supernatural intelligent designer. How does introducing an imaginary deity in an imaginary realm with infinite power and knowledge make that story less absurd?

"if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around." Can we agree that it still makes a noise even if no one is around to hear it?

That problem disappears when we reflect that sound is a creation of a conscious mind that can sense longitudinal percussion waves in the atmosphere. The tree falls and generates these waves whether there is a conscious agent to hear them or not, but the latter is required to experience these waves as sound (or noise).

I still have not been able to get a clear answer as to what exactly is objective reality

Most people mean that which exists outside of or in the absence of minds.

who determines that, because most of what is considered objective, is relative.

Nobody determines that, because none of us can get outside of our minds to see what that might be. We settle for models that help us predict outcomes. Those that can do that best are kept and become part of our mental map, others rejected, but in the end, the best we can do is attain a high degree of correlation of interobserver subjectivity.

 

[nPeace]

Most people mean that which exists outside of or in the absence of minds.

Yea. That's what they mean, but that's not what they offer... especially on that evolution monkey business.
They tell us about fossils - what they look like, genes, millions of years it will happen.
Reasoning is from the mind, last time I checked.

Nobody determines that, because none of us can get outside of our minds to see what that might be. We settle for models that help us predict outcomes. Those that can do that best are kept and become part of our mental map, others rejected, but in the end, the best we can do is attain a high degree of correlation of interobserver subjectivity.

Models that help you, huh.
Ha Ha. You guys do give me a good laugh.
I mean, it's either objective, or it's not. See what I mean.

Tell you what. Give me one objective reality that supports the theory of whale evolution.

 

[Shaul]

A unit of measurement is a unit of measurement. A foot is a foot. It wouldn't be a foot if it wasn't a foot.
Let's say that I measured your height by having you stand against a wall and marking it with a piece of tape. If I moved the tape to a higher or lower position would you magically get taller or shorter?

Actually all units of measurement are relative. Since space is expanding a foot at one moment is less than a foot a moment later if the reference framework is outside the universe.

 

[Shaul]

Both time and space are relative. Therefore the answer to your question depends on the references used.
See here, GP-B — Einstein's Spacetime).

 

[Pete in Panama]

You can't make a day however long you want. The word has a definition.

You're saying that "day" has only ONE definition? A lot of folks would disagree w/ you:

day, twenty-four hours, twenty-four hour period, 24-hour interval, solar day, mean solar

day noun time for Earth to make a complete rotation on its axis "two days later they left"; "they put on two performances every day"; "there are 30,000 passengers per day"

day noun some point or period in time "it should arrive any day now"; "after that day she never trusted him again"; "those were the days"; "these days it is not unusual"

day noun a day assigned to a particular purpose or observance "Mother's Day"

day, day time, day light noun the time after sunrise and before sunset while it is light outside "the dawn turned night into day"; "it is easier to make the repairs in the daytime"

day noun the recurring hours when you are not sleeping (especially those when you are working) "my day began early this morning"; "it was a busy day on the stock exchange"; "she called it a day and went to bed"

day noun an era of existence or influence "in the day of the dinosaurs"; "in the days of the Roman Empire"; "in the days of sailing ships"; "he was a successful pianist in his day"

day noun the period of time taken by a particular planet (e.g. Mars) to make a complete rotation on its axis "how long is a day on Jupiter?" sidereal day,

day noun the time for one complete rotation of the earth relative to a particular star, about 4 minutes shorter than a mean solar day

day noun a period of opportunity "he deserves his day in court"; "every dog has his day"

Day, Clarence Day, Clarence Shepard Day Jr.noun United States writer best known for his autobiographical works (1874-1935)​

Yeah, I'm thinking you'll probably say that you're right and all those guys are wrong. They'll still disagree w/ you, plue the fact that there are those who've studied the Bible more than you (from here):

The "Day" and Cosmic Order. The "days of creation" in Genesis 1, given the semipoetic nature of the composition, are quite possibly intended as literary devices, division markers as in a mosaic. The refrain, "And there was evening, and there was morning, " speaks not only of sequence but of an order that is affirmed following the flood as a foundational element in creation and as an answer to chaos and destruction ( Gen 8:22 ). The succession of days is testimony to a God whose governance of the universe is not haphazard but marked by order and, especially, reliability. The regularity of day and night guarantees God's promises in history as trustworthy. So when God makes a new covenant and assures Israel of continuing as a nation indefinitely, God offers the constancy of the cosmic order ("he who appoints the sun to shine by day") as his credentials for following through on his intention ( Jer 31:35-37 ).

The "Day" and Redemption History. Certain days in Israel's history were clearly days of salvation, the most striking of which was the day of God's deliverance of Israel from Egypt at the exodus ( Exod 12:14 ; 13:3 ). In conjunction with Saul's conflict with the Philistines, it is said, "so the Lord rescued Israel that day" ( 1 Sam 14:23 ).

Interest in "days to come" is a longstanding one ( Gen 49:1 ; Num 24:14 ). The prophets speak of a coming day when God will intervene in history. In that day a root will emerge from the stem of Jesse. This remarkable person will be endowed with the sevenfold Spirit ( Isa 10:33-11:10 ). In coming days, God will be exalted in all of Israel and even over all the earth ( Isa 2:11 ). In that future day Israel will be saved from her enemies and will be safely secured in her land. God promises that "In the day of salvation I will help you" ( Isa 49:8 ). Evil will be decisively dealt with and righteousness will be established. That decisive action involving judgment and salvation is the day of the Lord.

At Pentecost Peter can speak of the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy of the day of the Lord ( Acts 2:17-21 ; cf. Joel 2:28-32 ). Essentially this day is one in which God is fully on the scene; it is a day that he monopolizes. In the coming of Christ and in the Spirit's descent at Pentecost, Peter discerns a day of God. Because of God's grace and favor, the current day is the day of salvation ( 2 Cor 6:2 ). The offer during this extended "day" remains: "and everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved" ( Acts 2:21 ). Such decision is urged because God has "set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed" ( Acts 17:31 ). With regard to the history of redemption the word "day" is shorthand for a particular event (such as the exodus), but more often for an era as a singular stage in the progress of God's plan for salvation.

The "Day" and Calendars of Worship. Some days in Israel's calendar were set aside for special purposes (e.g., the Sabbath Exod 20:8-11 ; Deut 5:12-15 ). In keeping with the purpose of the day, which was to bring wholeness (Heb. salom), Jesus healed individuals of their sicknesses. The writer to the Hebrews sees in the day a prefiguring of the greater "rest" that God envisions for his own (4:6-11).

Special days are holy days that belong to God ( Ne 8:9 ). In Israel's religious calendar the Day of Atonement, observed soon after the day of the New Year (Sept.-Oct), was a day when corporate and individual sins were confessed, appropriate sacrifices and rituals were performed, and divine forgiveness was extended ( Lev 16 ; 23:26-32 ). Other special days were the several festivals, such as the Passover, the Feast of the Firstfruits, and the Feast of Tabernacles ( Lev 23 ; Deut 16:1-17 ). Taken together the days of festival indicated that Israel's religion was communal in character, that it came as an occasion for instruction, and that it was marked by joyfulness. Later in Israel's history the festival of Purim was added ( Esther 9:18-32 ). In New Testament times, Christians worshiped on the first day of the week ( 1 Cor 16:2 ), but Paul cautioned them not to overrate any festival ( Col 2:16 ).

The "Day" and Believer's Lifestyle. Life is lived a day at a time. Prayer is offered for daily bread ( Matthew 6:9-13 Matthew 6:31-34 ). Like Paul, the Christian in one sense dies daily ( 1 Cor 15:31 ), but in another sense is renewed day by day ( 2 Cor 4:16 ). Since within the larger span of history, any one person's days are like a shadow ( 1 Chron 29:15 ; Psalm 102:11 ), it is appropriate to pray for wisdom ( Psalm 90:12 ). Believers recognize that days can be stressful ( Gen 35:3 ), but they do not share a pessimistic view about life as a series of meaningless days ( Eccl 6:12 ). Jesus urged his followers to work the works of God while it is day ( John 9:4 ). Believers, children of the day as opposed to children of darkness, will do works of love and hope becoming to persons enlightened by the gospel ( 1 Thess 5:5 ).

Elmer A. Martens

See also Day of the Lord, God, Christ, the; Last Day(s), Latter Days, Last Times​

 

[Orbit]

You're saying that "day" has only ONE definition? A lot of folks would disagree w/ you:

day, twenty-four hours, twenty-four hour period, 24-hour interval, solar day, mean solar

day noun time for Earth to make a complete rotation on its axis

"two days later they left"; "they put on two performances every day"; "there are 30,000 passengers per day"

daynoun

some point or period in time

"it should arrive any day now"; "after that day she never trusted him again"; "those were the days"; "these days it is not unusual"

daynoun

a day assigned to a particular purpose or observance

"Mother's Day"

day, daytime, daylightnoun

the time after sunrise and before sunset while it is light outside

"the dawn turned night into day"; "it is easier to make the repairs in the daytime"

daynoun

the recurring hours when you are not sleeping (especially those when you are working)

"my day began early this morning"; "it was a busy day on the stock exchange"; "she called it a day and went to bed"

daynoun

an era of existence or influence

"in the day of the dinosaurs"; "in the days of the Roman Empire"; "in the days of sailing ships"; "he was a successful pianist in his day"

daynoun

the period of time taken by a particular planet (e.g. Mars) to make a complete rotation on its axis

"how long is a day on Jupiter?"

sidereal day, daynoun

the time for one complete rotation of the earth relative to a particular star, about 4 minutes shorter than a mean solar day

daynoun

a period of opportunity

"he deserves his day in court"; "every dog has his day"

Day, Clarence Day, Clarence Shepard Day Jr.noun

United States writer best known for his autobiographical works (1874-1935)

I suggest you consult a dictionary because this is quite obvious.

 

[Pete in Panama]

I suggest you consult a dictionary because this is quite obvious.

LOL!!!

Ok, whatever, have a good one!

 

[Polymath257]

Actually all units of measurement are relative. Since space is expanding a foot at one moment is less than a foot a moment later if the reference framework is outside the universe.

There is no 'reference framework' that is 'outside the universe' in this sense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no 'reference framework' that is 'outside the universe' in this sense.

Clearly you have not been in some of the same dive bars that I have.

 

[exchemist]

I've made the following point to you in the past, but you didn't comment. As I understand it, an allegory is a specific literary form with which the creation story doesn't conform. What the creation myth is is an ancient guess about how the world we find ourselves living in came to exist. Like all creation myths, it is a creative but incorrect guess at what actually happened, which is different from an allegory, where events and characters represent something specific the author has in mind. Gulliver's Travels is a political allegory in which fantastical fictional characters substitute for prominent historical figures like Walpole in the British politics of Swift's era, symbolized by the rope dancer Flimnap. We know what these things stand for (including the rope dance) as did their author. They are not place-holders for what is not known such as the events in a creation myth. Do you disagree? If so, can you specify just where and why you think it's incorrect?.

I am describing the mainstream Christian view of Genesis. That view takes as axiomatic divine inspiration of the authors. So in effect it is saying that God wrote the story, in allegorical terms, through the medium of the bible authors.

You are seeing it as just a guess by ancient people.

That's the difference, I think.

 

[Nimos]

Genesis 1:26-28; Genesis 3:8-16; Psalms 115:16; Psalms 37:11; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 11:6-9; Isaiah 65:21-25; Acts of the Apostles 17:26-28
If these don't answer the question for you, let me know.

None of them explains it.

These are merely what God wants his lifeforms to do, not why he created them in the first place or why life/survival over non-life/non-survival is considered superior for lifeforms. Sure you could make the argument about heaven and hell, but that wouldn't explain animals, which have no concept of that.

 

[Nimos]

Insects and animals almost certainly have no choice other than to follow the dictates of their nature; their impulse is to survive, and to procreate. The same is true of plants, and all living things, but it’s no great leap of inductive reasoning to postulate that plants, insects, and animals all have lower levels of consciousness than humans. We have the power of reason, we are not only conscious but self conscious. We have the capacity to question ourselves, and everything around us. This powerful tool has enabled us to dominate and manipulate nature, but it has also, paradoxically, alienated us from our own nature. Having eaten the fruit from the tree of knowledge, we have locked ourselves out of the garden.

Agree, maybe the idea of survival being beneficial is somewhat equal to that of natural laws. I do however still find it odd, because a lot of energy, effort and risk goes into procreation at least for animals, not so many humans anymore with modern science. But back in the day having children were not without danger, yet all lifeforms do it one way or another. It would make more sense to me if there were no danger involved and that lifeforms wouldn't care. But we do take those risks, without any apparent benefit for life as a whole it seems or at least not that we are aware of, given we have no clue what the purpose of life even is, if any at all.

 

[Alien826]

2. TIME DOES NOT SLOW DOWN FOR THOSE IN MOTION.

No matter what observer, the notion of a second is defined by a specific type of light emitted in a specific situation. If you are using that definition, you use something at rest *according to you*: in other words, you consider yourself at rest (which you can always do by 1 above).

What happens is that if there are *two* observers in motion *with respect to each other*, then both measure the clocks of the other as moving slower than their own. Neither detects anything different about their own clocks (or measuring rods).

Again, both observers regard themselves at rest. Time dilation is a matter of comparing clocks in motion to each other and goes BOTH WAYS. There is no absolute standard for being at rest. The situation is symmetric between the two observers.

Agreed, but is it not true that if an astronaut sets out in his spaceship with a clock, and travels away from Earth at some significant fraction of the speed of light, then turns round and returns to his point of origin he will find that his clock shows less elapsed time than clocks that remained on Earth?

Though we can't say that either clock is "correct", and yes, each clock correctly measured the "local time" throughout, nevertheless we can observe that the astronaut's clock measured less time than the Earth clock. Hey, his twin brother is now an old man and he's still young.

 

[Shaul]

There is no 'reference framework' that is 'outside the universe' in this sense.

You have no proof of that. Furthermore it is a fact that the universe is expanding. This is provable from within the universe itself via the Doppler red shift of distance objects. Thus space is expanding.