The effect is incredibly small, about one part in a few trillion, which means that you have to look at something very massive, or build an instrument that is incredibly sensitive and put it in orbit.
This is according to : Dave Dooling, Dr. Nan Zhang, science.msfc.nasa.gov, 11/06/1997
That was kinda old, but I also found this:
After 11 years of watching the movements of two Earth-orbiting satellites, researchers found each is dragged by about 6 feet (2 meters) every year because the very fabric of space is twisted by our whirling world.
The results, announced Wednesday, are much more precise than preliminary findings published by the same group in the late 1990s.
Frame dragging
The effect is called frame dragging. It is a modification to the simpler aspects of gravity set out by Newton. Working from Einstein's relativity theory, Austrian physicists Joseph Lense and Hans Thirring predicted frame dragging in 1918. (It is also known as the Lense-Thirring effect.)
The researchers say their result is 99 percent of the predicted drag, with an error of up to 10 percent. The details are reported in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.
The reason I quoted what I did was to show the unlikelihood of biblical authors having any practical knowledge of this effect. Aside from divine inspiration (a subject which I believe at this point boths side should consider "up in the air") there's no way that a biblical author, an OT author no less, would have that sort of knowledge, not if we are just today making these discoveries with the most state-of-the-art and sensitive equipment. I think my response to your biblical allusions would be that they are nothing more than metaphors and you're making one heck of a stretch.
Rolf, I agree, this is fascinating stuff, truth is stranger than fiction. Your bible references to this phenomena are thin though, and even if they are explicitly describing this frame dragging effect, pointing out a fact of the universe means nothing and I’m not sure if we should count on it as evidence for the validity of the bible. I’ll try and make a better case of this in a moment.
The E=MC2 formula transposes to M=E/C2>>>CREATION EX-NIHILO!!
Could you elaborate on how you made this stretch? Maybe I missed something, but you took Einstein’s thing and then put your thing on the end of it and cried, “eureka!”
Could be wrong, but please, elaborate.
Atheistic science is bankrolled by the government which is (ha! ha!) neutral in matters of religion.
Except for the fundamentalist christian in the white house. I think Jiggg even made a point of that.
Turn a few pages and you see God's statement to Abraham that the stars cannot be numbered.
The bible says a lot of things. Refer to Soulman’s posts on the Levite and his concubine.
the possibility that frame dragging might possibly--I say again, possibly--be what the psalmisat referred to when he said of the heavens, "as a vesture you shall fold them up and they shall be changed."
A bit of a stretch, Rolf. Also remember, I never said anything about the bible being completely devoid of truth. Just because the bible points out an element of reality that is indisputable in it’s truthfulness doesn’t support the truthfulness of the bible. It simply means the fact is there for all to see. All this proves is that the bible is a witness to reality, you have not proven that reality is a witness to the bible.
I’m positive that the bible isn’t the only ancient witness to the facts of life and reality. Wasn’t it the ancient egyptians who developed the 365 day calender and the twenty-four hour day?
The Hindu Rig Veda, dating from the second millennium BC, makes its own references to a lunisolar calender, so once again, your bible is nothing unique. The ancient Chaldeans themselves discovered a method of tracking the retrograde and helical cycles of planets as they moved through space. Obviously their method was far more backwards than ours is today, but once again, your vague biblical allusions, while they may be true, are nothing unique and lend no credence to your claims of exclusivity and validity.
Rolf, what you’re attempting is some form of natural theology, am I correct? If I am, than you must make observations of reality based on the presupposition that god interacts and communicates with us directly, otherwise mere observation of reality is far too indirect a method of us to come to knowledge of a creator.
Now I know what you mean by your evidence profiting me nothing. Without the proper presupposition your evidence merely highlights facts that would be reality with or without the bible, therefore you aren’t presenting evidence of your case, you’re merely presenting evidence of reality with corresponding observations of facts from both the bible and science.
I could be wrong, but we may have no more room to move forward on this subject.
That wouldn’t make me very happy, Rolf, but let’s keep trying.
Yours truly,
Prodigal
, don't believe there's a hell, either. And I believe that hell is separation from God. I don't see it as a place of endless torture. The torment of hell is the absence of God, and all He is: Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Gentleness, Goodness, Faith, Meekness, Temperance, Life, and many other things.