The movement of the earth in Qur'an

[Union]

OMG , I forgot about the 2 periods about the creation of the earth ......

Geologic Time scale

Eons and Eras
The first principal subdivision is called the eon. An eon, the largest division of the geologic time scale, spans hundreds to thousands of millions of years. Geologists generally agree that there are two major eons: the Precambrian eon and the Phanerozoic eon. The Precambrian goes from the formation of the earth to the time when multicellular organisms first appeared - that's a really long time - from 4,500 million years ago to just about 543 million years ago. Then begins the Phanerozoic eon, which continues up to today.

Eons are made up of eras, divisions that span time periods of tens to hundreds of millions of years. The three major eras are the Paleozoic, the Mesozoic, and the Cenozoic. The Cenozoic era is the one we are in today. It began 65 million years ago, right about the time that the dinosaurs went extinct.

Keep in mind that these three eras are all grouped within the Phanerozoic eon. Remember that other eon, the Precambrian eon? Well, that one doesn't get to have any eras inside it. We don't have a lot of information....

http://earthsurfaceprocesses.com/3c-E-MassExtn.html

http://imnh.isu.edu/exhibits/online/geo_time/geo_time_eons.htm
The Structure of Geologic Time

http://geology.com/time.htm
Geologic Time Scale
A Time Line for the Geological Sciences

Dividing Earth History into Time Intervals


Geologists have divided Earth's history into a series of time intervals. These time intervals are not equal in length like the hours in a day. Instead the time intervals are variable in length. This is because geologic time is divided using significant events in the history of the Earth.


Examples of Boundary "Events"


For example, the boundary between the Permian and Triassic is marked by a global extinction in which a large percentage of Earth's plant and animal species were eliminated. Another example is the boundary between the Precambrian and the Paleozoic which is marked by the first appearance of animals with hard parts.


Eons

are the largest intervals of geologic time and are hundreds of millions of years in duration. In the time scale above you can see the Phanerozoic Eon is the most recent eon and began more than 500 million years ago......

 

[gnostic]

CP-2156 Life In The Universe - NASA

To place the construction of all matter into perthective, consider figure 1, which summarizes the run of density and temperature throughout all time for a Big-Bang Universe. It represents the consensus of contemporary scientific thought in the broadest sense. Six major epochs are delineated, each corresponding to a major period in the history of the Universe. Specified across the bottom of this figure are the general names of the epochs, along with their time domains. Note that this plot is highly nonlinear, stretching from an incredibly small fraction of a second to the present time, 18 or so billion years after the origin of the Universe. The curves depict the average density and the average temperature of everything in the Universe at any point in time.

Thank you, union.

Isn't it amazing, what you can find on the Internet and what you can copy-and-paste?

But did you understand all that?

I am no astrophysist, but I do understand the theory to the big bang model, and the various stages of the evolution of the universe.

I am not arguing that Eric J Chaisson is wrong in his summary about the BB theory, but I also don't think you understand that 3 of the earliest epochs after the Big Bang - Planck's, hadron and lepton - are also still pretty much "theoretical".

Theoretical as in, it is still hypothetical, still abstract, and still a mathematical model. Nothing observable and nothing concrete. They think the theory of the earliest phases after the Big Bang, is logical and sound, they have not been able to verify if it is true. And verification of any scientific proposition, hypothesis or theory come from observation, testing and/or evidences.

I am not saying the BB theory is wrong or that the article you have quoted is wrong, Union.

What I am saying is that this part of the universe, cannot be verified...yet. They could be right, but they could be wrong.

They don't know yet about the Planck's epoch, or the Hadron epoch, or the Lepton epoch. They really don't know yet, WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN THE 1st 10 SECONDS AFTER THE BIG BANG!

Until they can verify what happened in the 1st 10 seconds to be true, through verifiable observation or through evidences, you really shouldn't be viewing the 1st 3 epochs of the universe to be true.

You must understand that scientists only know for certain is what happened 10 second AFTER the Big Bang, not before this 10 seconds.The only thing accountable is what is verifiable.

After this 10 seconds is the Big Bang nucleosynthesis, when the first hydrogen nuclei and helium nuclei were first formed, with their respective numbers of protons and neutrons (there is actually no neutron inside the hydrogen nucleus, I hope that you understand this). This is the phase that they know what really happen.

And Chaisson wrote that it is possible that the universe is older than 13.8 billion years. That the universe could be old as 18 billion years.

The age - 13.8 billion years - is, what is currently science have been able to observe, hence the "observable universe". With our current technology, we can't observe beyond 13.8 billion years. At this stage we don't know.

And if the age is indeed 18 billion years old, then it would torpedo your claim of the universe-earth ratio being 3:1 like that of your quoted passages. A 18-billion-year universe would make the universe 3.84 to 1 ratio.

 

[gnostic]

OMG , I forgot about the 2 periods about the creation of the earth ......

Geologic Time scale

Eons and Eras
The first principal subdivision is called the eon. An eon, the largest division of the geologic time scale, spans hundreds to thousands of millions of years. Geologists generally agree that there are two major eons: the Precambrian eon and the Phanerozoic eon. The Precambrian goes from the formation of the earth to the time when multicellular organisms first appeared - that's a really long time - from 4,500 million years ago to just about 543 million years ago. Then begins the Phanerozoic eon, which continues up to today.

Actually, there are 4 eons in Geological time scale, with the Precambrian being a combination of 3 eons, and the Precambrian have being labelled as a "supereon".

There are 14 eras, at least 22 periods, and 34 epochs. Some of the epochs can be further divided to ages.

 

[FearGod]

LOL, science now is a guess work because it supports the quran.

 

[Augustus]

LOL, science now is a guess work because it supports the quran.

No, there are numerous ways that you could divide all of these periods of time and they are a bit arbitrary and based on theoretical concepts, human reasoning or subjective classifications which can change or be reinterpreted over time. People just see someone mention the number 6 or 2 in one of them then retrofit it to match the verse, while ignoring any other explanation that has different numbers in it. There are more than 6 stages/'epochs', the number 6 only works if you ignore the others, look it up.

You might see it as a sign, but it is ridiculous to expect anyone applying even a hint of critical reasoning to believe it demonstrates anything other than a contrived attempt to make the text seem 'scientific' by selective quote mining of out of context information coupled with a liberal dose of revisionism of how the verses have typically been understood.

Anyway, seeing as early Muslims were aware of the Genesis narrative, and seeing as no Islamic text notes that the 6 days in the Quran are different from the 6 days in Genesis, why should we assume it meant something different?

 

[FearGod]

No, there are numerous ways that you could divide all of these periods of time and they are a bit arbitrary and based on theoretical concepts, human reasoning or subjective classifications which can change or be reinterpreted over time. People just see someone mention the number 6 or 2 in one of them then retrofit it to match the verse, while ignoring any other explanation that has different numbers in it. There are more than 6 stages/'epochs', the number 6 only works if you ignore the others, look it up.

You might see it as a sign, but it is ridiculous to expect anyone applying even a hint of critical reasoning to believe it demonstrates anything other than a contrived attempt to make the text seem 'scientific' by selective quote mining of out of context information coupled with a liberal dose of revisionism of how the verses have typically been understood.

Anyway, seeing as early Muslims were aware of the Genesis narrative, and seeing as no Islamic text notes that the 6 days in the Quran are different from the 6 days in Genesis, why should we assume it meant something different?

You're twisting science according to your will, while they classified it to 6 main epochs then you fetch for insignificant branches among the main epochs just in your silly attempts to falsify the verse.

 

[gnostic]

LOL, science now is a guess work because it supports the quran.

In what way does science support the Qur'an?

Science is methodology in acquiring knowledge. But more importantly it attempt to "explain" how the world works, and attempt to verify if it is true or false, through test and evidences.

The Qur'an is a mishmash scripture of Jewish-Christian and pagan Arabic teachings, containing vague passages that doesn't explain anything. It doesn't test anything, and often the knowledge are archaic.

If the Qur'an was self-explanatory, then why you would need scholars to explain things to the uneducated?

If the Qur'an was self-sufficient, then why do we need science?

Does the Qur'an teach astronomy?

Does the Qur'an explain what any of human organs do or explain how it work?

Can the Qur'an teach people to build houses, roads or bridges?

The Qur'an may be acceptable in teaching ethic, law and how people interact with others, but it certainly can't teach or explain science or any scientific phenomena.

 

[FearGod]

In what way does science support the Qur'an?

Science is methodology in acquiring knowledge. But more importantly it attempt to "explain" how the world works, and attempt to verify if it is true or false, through test and evidences.

The Qur'an is a mishmash scripture of Jewish-Christian and pagan Arabic teachings, containing vague passages that doesn't explain anything. It doesn't test anything, and often the knowledge are archaic.

If the Qur'an was self-explanatory, then why you would need scholars to explain things to the uneducated?

If the Qur'an was self-sufficient, then why do we need science?

Does the Qur'an teach astronomy?

Does the Qur'an explain what any of human organs do or explain how it work?

Can the Qur'an teach people to build houses, roads or bridges?

The Qur'an may be acceptable in teaching ethic, law and how people interact with others, but it certainly can't teach or explain science or any scientific phenomena.

Did i say the quran teaches science ?
I said if a scientific findings came to support a verse in the quran then it's a theory and a guess work for the atheists.

 

[Augustus]

You're twisting science according to your will, while they classified it to 6 main epochs then you fetch for insignificant branches among the main epochs just in your silly attempts to falsify the verse.

It doesn't falsify the verse, as the verse is talking about days, as per Genesis. If it was in any way different then surely this would have been noted. I'm just pointing out that it is ridiculous to expect any non-Muslim to see this as 'remarkable', and those who deny it's miraculousness are not being 'closed minded' they are simply applying basic critical reasoning.

And you are the one being silly as I imagine you know nothing about the actual science, yet are fully capable of distinguishing between 'main epochs' and 'insignificant branches'. The only thing you understand is the number 6. Here are 9 epochs, what makes 3 of these 'insignificant branches' and the other 6 'major epochs'? Planck epoch, Grand unification epoch, Electroweak epoch, Inflationary epoch, the quark epoch, Hadron epoch, Lepton epoch, Photon epoch, Habitable epoch.

What happens if scientists change their mind anyway about 'major' epochs, like they changed their mind about Pluto being a planet. Would that falsify the verse? (No, you would just change your story again, that is why these claims are so ridiculous).

 

[gnostic]

Did i say the quran teaches science ?
I said if a scientific findings came to support a verse in the quran then it's a theory and a guess work for the atheists.

No, the verses are not theories.

If it was scientific theory, then it has to explain. That's what theory is, it is an explanation, and the theory is only scientific, only if it can be verified, either through verifiable evidences or through repeated tests.

Science is supposed to explain what a phenomena is, how it work, and even how it can be used.

What part of "explanation" that you don't understand?

The Qur'an doesn't do that. It make superficial and often obscure description.

You do realise explaining and describing are not the same things, don't you?

 

[FearGod]

No, the verses are not theories.

If it was scientific theory, then it has to explain. That's what theory is, it is an explanation, and the theory is only scientific, only if it can be verified, either through verifiable evidences or through repeated tests.

Science is supposed to explain what a phenomena is, how it work, and even how it can be used.

What part of "explanation" that you don't understand?

The Qur'an doesn't do that. It make superficial and often obscure description.

You do realise explaining and describing are not the same things, don't you?

I didn't say the verse is kind of a scientific theory, what i said that if a scientific findings happened to agree with one verse then for you and some others is just a theory that it can be as well wrong.

 

[FearGod]

It doesn't falsify the verse, as the verse is talking about days, as per Genesis. If it was in any way different then surely this would have been noted. I'm just pointing out that it is ridiculous to expect any non-Muslim to see this as 'remarkable', and those who deny it's miraculousness are not being 'closed minded' they are simply applying basic critical reasoning.

And you are the one being silly as I imagine you know nothing about the actual science, yet are fully capable of distinguishing between 'main epochs' and 'insignificant branches'. The only thing you understand is the number 6. Here are 9 epochs, what makes 3 of these 'insignificant branches' and the other 6 'major epochs'? Planck epoch, Grand unification epoch, Electroweak epoch, Inflationary epoch, the quark epoch, Hadron epoch, Lepton epoch, Photon epoch, Habitable epoch.

What happens if scientists change their mind anyway about 'major' epochs, like they changed their mind about Pluto being a planet. Would that falsify the verse? (No, you would just change your story again, that is why these claims are so ridiculous).

Is that hard for you to understand just a simple sentence. and it isn't mine but from Nasa

scientific thought in the broadest sense. Six major epochs are delineated, each corresponding to a major period in the history of the Universe.
ch1.0

 

[Augustus]

Is that hard for you to understand just a simple sentence. and it isn't mine but from Nasa

scientific thought in the broadest sense. Six major epochs are delineated, each corresponding to a major period in the history of the Universe.
ch1.0

Haha , I just read the actual linked text. So before you start mocking people for not understanding 'a simple sentence', you might want to actually read more than that 'simple sentence' before you start claiming miracles

It isn't from NASA to explain current understanding, it's just an article on the website in a section marked 'history' because it is about 35 years old. The knowledge in it has been rendered obsolete by modern advances. Oh dear, that is rather unfortunate for you.

As I told you before, you didn't understand anything except the number 6, and were simply quote mining anything that could be used to justify your desperate need to claim scientific accuracy. "Look! some scientist has said something that could vaguely be interpreted to support my religious viewpoint. Quick, let's claim it as a miraculous sign!"

Look at the names of the 6 'epochs' from your article:

Now look at a more modern timeline which features more than 6 epochs, note the changes to the names and time changes as scientists have developed a greater understanding of the process (or perhaps they are simply scientists finding "insignificant branches" to falsify the verse?).

I take it you now think that the verse was never referring to these epochs and now relates to something completely different?

 

[Union]

Thank you, union.

Isn't it amazing, what you can find on the Internet and what you can copy-and-paste?

But did you understand all that?

I am no astrophysist, but I do understand the theory to the big bang model, and the various stages of the evolution of the universe.

I am not arguing that Eric J Chaisson is wrong in his summary about the BB theory, but I also don't think you understand that 3 of the earliest epochs after the Big Bang - Planck's, hadron and lepton - are also still pretty much "theoretical".

Theoretical as in, it is still hypothetical, still abstract, and still a mathematical model. Nothing observable and nothing concrete. They think the theory of the earliest phases after the Big Bang, is logical and sound, they have not been able to verify if it is true. And verification of any scientific proposition, hypothesis or theory come from observation, testing and/or evidences.

I am not saying the BB theory is wrong or that the article you have quoted is wrong, Union.

What I am saying is that this part of the universe, cannot be verified...yet. They could be right, but they could be wrong.

They don't know yet about the Planck's epoch, or the Hadron epoch, or the Lepton epoch. They really don't know yet, WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN THE 1st 10 SECONDS AFTER THE BIG BANG!

Until they can verify what happened in the 1st 10 seconds to be true, through verifiable observation or through evidences, you really shouldn't be viewing the 1st 3 epochs of the universe to be true.

You must understand that scientists only know for certain is what happened 10 second AFTER the Big Bang, not before this 10 seconds.The only thing accountable is what is verifiable.

After this 10 seconds is the Big Bang nucleosynthesis, when the first hydrogen nuclei and helium nuclei were first formed, with their respective numbers of protons and neutrons (there is actually no neutron inside the hydrogen nucleus, I hope that you understand this). This is the phase that they know what really happen.

And Chaisson wrote that it is possible that the universe is older than 13.8 billion years. That the universe could be old as 18 billion years.

The age - 13.8 billion years - is, what is currently science have been able to observe, hence the "observable universe". With our current technology, we can't observe beyond 13.8 billion years. At this stage we don't know.

And if the age is indeed 18 billion years old, then it would torpedo your claim of the universe-earth ratio being 3:1 like that of your quoted passages. A 18-billion-year universe would make the universe 3.84 to 1 ratio.

Hi Gnostic . Our current discussion is on the total major epochs of the creation of the universe and not what happened in the micro seconds' detail . This is a complete different discussion altogether . In whatever scenario , the major epoch number of the epochs will remain the same .

I have read before that the age of the universe could be 18 Billions years old , and now probably you see the wisdom why Almighty GOD , why HE didn't mention it by age . If the age of the universe is really 18 Billions years I would think the age of the earth is 6 Billions years ... A scientific proof that yet you and me to wait to see ....

 

[Union]

Actually, there are 4 eons in Geological time scale, with the Precambrian being a combination of 3 eons, and the Precambrian have being labelled as a "supereon".

There are 14 eras, at least 22 periods, and 34 epochs. Some of the epochs can be further divided to ages.

I have already posted references from different scientific sources , which can be summarized as they stated :

" Geologists generally agree that there are two major eons: the Precambrian eon and the Phanerozoic eon..."

However , I got a news for you . Qur'an mentioned also that this 02 eons subdivided into 4 time scales to fashioned the earth to make it inhabitable :

[041:009] Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in two Days? And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.

[041:010] He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it, and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measure therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in four Days, in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).

 

[Union]

Haha , I just read the actual linked text. So before you start mocking people for not understanding 'a simple sentence', you might want to actually read more than that 'simple sentence' before you start claiming miracles

It isn't from NASA to explain current understanding, it's just an article on the website in a section marked 'history' because it is about 35 years old. The knowledge in it has been rendered obsolete by modern advances. Oh dear, that is rather unfortunate for you.

As I told you before, you didn't understand anything except the number 6, and were simply quote mining anything that could be used to justify your desperate need to claim scientific accuracy. "Look! some scientist has said something that could vaguely be interpreted to support my religious viewpoint. Quick, let's claim it as a miraculous sign!"

Look at the names of the 6 'epochs' from your article:

Now look at a more modern timeline which features more than 6 epochs, note the changes to the names and time changes as scientists have developed a greater understanding of the process (or perhaps they are simply scientists finding "insignificant branches" to falsify the verse?).

I take it you now think that the verse was never referring to these epochs and now relates to something completely different?

You found nothing my friend . All are falling under these major six epochs , no contradiction , no new news , no old news
That is why the author of NASA commented :

"
.This history of the Universe is the prevailing view among most cosmologists. All theoreticians do not agree on specific events before about 1 sec. Depending on the intricacies of the model chosen, the density and temperature during the radiation era can change by several orders of magnitude. In virtually all models, however, the Universe is regarded to have been initially very hot and dense, after which it cooled and thinned..... "

 

[Augustus]

You found nothing my friend . All are falling under these major six epochs , no contradiction , no new news , no old news
That is why the author of NASA commented :

"
.This history of the Universe is the prevailing view among most cosmologists. All theoreticians do not agree on specific events before about 1 sec. Depending on the intricacies of the model chosen, the density and temperature during the radiation era can change by several orders of magnitude. In virtually all models, however, the Universe is regarded to have been initially very hot and dense, after which it cooled and thinned..... "

35 years ago, this was the view, new technology has given them a greater understanding. Science doesn't stand still, and this is absolute cutting edge science. Think of the advances in technology since 1980!

About the Planck epoch: "Experimental data casting light on this cosmological epoch has been scant or non-existent until now, but recent results from the WMAP probe have allowed scientists to test hypotheses about the Universe's first trillionth of a second (although the cosmic microwave background radiation observed by WMAP originated when the Universe was already several hundred thousand years old). Although this interval is still orders of magnitude longer than the Planck time, other experiments currently coming online including the Planck Surveyor probe, promise to push back our 'cosmic clock' further to reveal quite a bit more about the very first moments of our universe's history, hopefully giving us some insight into the Planck epoch itself. Data from particle accelerators provides meaningful insight into the early universe as well. Experiments with the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider have allowed physicists to determine that the quark–gluon plasma (an early phase of matter) behaved more like a liquid than a gas, and the Large Hadron Collider at CERN will probe still earlier phases of matter, but no accelerator (current or planned) will be capable of probing the Planck scale directly."

What you are doing is choosing a snapshot of history that says 6, and saying this is the definitive version because it has the number 6 in it. This is the problem of your approach, scientific knowledge is constantly redefined and once you have argued that there are 6 epochs, you have to deny that the more nuanced understandings change anything. In 1940 there probably were less than 6 epochs, in 1980 there was 6 and now there are more than 6. Why is 1980 the best time to choose how many epochs there are?

You could describe the history of the universe in numerous ways, each with different numbers of stages, so any description is to some extent subjective. The newer versions, unsurprisingly, have more details but you are forced to pretend that they are still saying 6 epochs, even though they clearly list more than 6 categories named epochs and other periods not named epochs, but identified as specific stages. All you care about is the number 6 though, and fitting everything around this number even when you have to deny what is clearly visible before your eyes.

 

[FearGod]

Haha , I just read the actual linked text. So before you start mocking people for not understanding 'a simple sentence', you might want to actually read more than that 'simple sentence' before you start claiming miracles

It isn't from NASA to explain current understanding, it's just an article on the website in a section marked 'history' because it is about 35 years old. The knowledge in it has been rendered obsolete by modern advances. Oh dear, that is rather unfortunate for you.

As I told you before, you didn't understand anything except the number 6, and were simply quote mining anything that could be used to justify your desperate need to claim scientific accuracy. "Look! some scientist has said something that could vaguely be interpreted to support my religious viewpoint. Quick, let's claim it as a miraculous sign!"

Look at the names of the 6 'epochs' from your article:

Now look at a more modern timeline which features more than 6 epochs, note the changes to the names and time changes as scientists have developed a greater understanding of the process (or perhaps they are simply scientists finding "insignificant branches" to falsify the verse?).

I take it you now think that the verse was never referring to these epochs and now relates to something completely different?

Last attempt to help you.

The similarity of the cosmic chemical transitions to phase changes.

HYLE 20-1 (2014): Six Phases of Cosmic Chemistry

 

[Union]

35 years ago, this was the view, new technology has given them a greater understanding. Science doesn't stand still, and this is absolute cutting edge science. Think of the advances in technology since 1980!

About the Planck epoch: "Experimental data casting light on this cosmological epoch has been scant or non-existent until now, but recent results from the WMAP probe have allowed scientists to test hypotheses about the Universe's first trillionth of a second (although the cosmic microwave background radiation observed by WMAP originated when the Universe was already several hundred thousand years old). Although this interval is still orders of magnitude longer than the Planck time, other experiments currently coming online including the Planck Surveyor probe, promise to push back our 'cosmic clock' further to reveal quite a bit more about the very first moments of our universe's history, hopefully giving us some insight into the Planck epoch itself. Data from particle accelerators provides meaningful insight into the early universe as well. Experiments with the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider have allowed physicists to determine that the quark–gluon plasma (an early phase of matter) behaved more like a liquid than a gas, and the Large Hadron Collider at CERN will probe still earlier phases of matter, but no accelerator (current or planned) will be capable of probing the Planck scale directly."

What you are doing is choosing a snapshot of history that says 6, and saying this is the definitive version because it has the number 6 in it. This is the problem of your approach, scientific knowledge is constantly redefined and once you have argued that there are 6 epochs, you have to deny that the more nuanced understandings change anything. In 1940 there probably were less than 6 epochs, in 1980 there was 6 and now there are more than 6. Why is 1980 the best time to choose how many epochs there are?

You could describe the history of the universe in numerous ways, each with different numbers of stages, so any description is to some extent subjective. The newer versions, unsurprisingly, have more details but you are forced to pretend that they are still saying 6 epochs, even though they clearly list more than 6 categories named epochs and other periods not named epochs, but identified as specific stages. All you care about is the number 6 though, and fitting everything around this number even when you have to deny what is clearly visible before your eyes.

***Repeat*** All other sections and subsections of time scale in the evolution of universe can be merged in six major epochs as it was proposed in NASA websites . It can never be wrong though astronauts elaborated these in different ways . And see what FearGOD has to inform .

 

[Union]

Last attempt to help you.

The similarity of the cosmic chemical transitions to phase changes.

HYLE 20-1 (2014): Six Phases of Cosmic Chemistry

Hmmm ! Praise to Almighty GOD .

Augustus' and Gnostic's cases are dismissed one and all , though they would in no time post ' Blah , Blah and Blah....'