Search results

I understand that whatever the teaching is, it does not exist in the bible. Jesus forgot to teach it and He failed to remind any of His apostles to teach it. What Jesus did teach is "It is finished." The unwritten premise being, "Arguing against something that you do not COMPLETELY understand...

I said just the opposite of "mutual false assumptions"! The whole premise is reasonable assumptions for all methods and various methods that have diverse (i.e. different) assumptions. However, separate methods wouldn't be required to have different assumptions so long as the assumptions are...

Why would written history be the only standard by which a dating method could be verified? I understand that written history could be used as evidence in an attempt to verify some dating method but written history is hardly objective and so I don't see how it could be used as any sort of gold...

I have no idea what you could be talking about. You seem not to have the time for posting more than a sentence or two at time so an interesting conversation isn't possible anyway. BORED!

Excellent! What would you say that Paul preached about who Jesus is? Obviously, he would have preached that Jesus was the Son of God but do you suppose that Paul would have gone further than that and made a big deal about Jesus being God Himself in the flesh? Also, I need some clarification...

I was sort of hoping you'd spell it out for me. Just what is it that Paul preached? To be clear...I'm not disagreeing with you here at all. I'm just interested to see how you'd go about putting the gospel into words, that's all.

Which is?

The Earth. A conditional blessing taught by Jesus to Israel in keeping with their dispensation of law. Believing Israel will live on the new Earth and New Jerusalem will be their capital city. We, who are saved under the current dispensation of grace, have no such conditional blessings and our...

Where did @Old Hat go? He started the most interesting doctrinal conversation I've seen in weeks and then disappeared! :(

That's the way it's always been explained to me anyway. It has consistently made me wonder how do they know that it was ever entangled in the first place.

You can measure the quantum state of an entangled particle, which then instantly determines the quantum state of the particle it's entangle with, regardless of how far away it is, but as soon as you make that measurement, the entanglement goes away and, since there's no way for you to know the...

I don't think that entangled particles do what people think they do. I'm no expert but I'm reasonably certain that there is no way to transfer information faster than the speed of light, even with quantum entangled particles.

Since the cameras are acting as clocks where each frame is counted as a "tick" of the clock, I wonder whether the same problem that exists for synchronizing clocks in other experiments would apply to the synchronizing of the cameras in my experiment? 🤔

The problem is that if you want to measure the one way speed of light you have to have synchronized clocks but in order to synchronize your clocks you have to know the one way speed of light, which is what you're trying to measure. Why No One Has Measured the Speed of Light

Yes, I was aware that their result wasn't zero but it is also true that their non-zero result was within the margin of error and nowhere near where it would have been expected to be if the stationary eather that they were looking for existed. Their experiment didn't actually prove that there was...

When is the best time to call?

Moments after posting the above post, it struck me how my thinking there is wrong! The Michelson–Morley experiment measured the two-way speed of light in perpendicular directions! This will always be the case when you try to do this with one final target and where every leg of the trip is the...

Okay, so I just realized that what I've described in the opening post is a modified version of the Michelson–Morley experiment which compared the speed of light in perpendicular directions and found no significant difference between the speed of light in either direction. The significant...

I had the math wrong when I first wrote the opening post. It didn't not alter the overall point but I have fixed it.