Matty’s Paradigm. A scientific theory of creation. By Matty Lawrence
A Bible-based complete plugin replacement for the theoretical foundation of modern science. Also known as Geo-centro-spheric devolutionary creation.
Hello, and welcome back, to Matty’s paradigm, the podcast. It’s great to be with you as we discuss some of the issues that are involved with a Biblical understanding of science and nature. Last time I had the delightful Siri helping out with the intro, announcements, and sound effects, and we thank her for that, but she couldn’t be with us today. Siri is doing the announcements for the Biblio’s Blood podcast, so Instead we have, Outback Siri here.
This episode is dedicated to finding a decent microphone and to a young member of the Twitterverse who goes by the name Dennis The Menace.
Siri: Dennis the Menace, like, from the Beano?
As far as I know. Dennis and I crossed paths a while back and we’ve had some spirited discussion, ad lib
Twitter can be rough, but I draw the line on profanity and name calling
Dennis took exception to my article called The Pillars of the Earth and Radial Shrinkage. So much so, in fact, that he wrote a 29 page rebuttal of it. So what I want to do is respond to Dennis. I had a rant about this in the car on the way to work earlier in the week, and it’s good enough to use so I going to let you hear the clip, then I will explain my findings from Dennis the Menace’s article.
Dennis the Menace
First of all let’s clear up a misconception. Dennis is operating under the wrong assumption about how creation science works, as is obvious from this quote: And I’m going to have “Johnny English” Siri read this quote.
[Johnny English Siri] “I expect creationists to use real world observable evidence to prove the Bible, not use the Bible to prove the Bible.”
That’s not how it works. In creation science we use faith in the Bible to interpret real world observations. It’s the same as science, where they use the belief that there is no god to interpret real world observations.
No different process, just a different assumption.
The basic premise from which all of my work begins is, “God doesn’t lie.” This makes total sense to me, since, why would I worship a god who does lie? I’m not going to. God’s character is so much higher and purer than any person could ever be that he is above reproach. There is no reason for God to lie, he doesn’t have to hide anything or impress anyone.
Science is basically the same. The basic premise from which all theoretical science begins is, “human wisdom is sufficient.”
The most important issue that Dennis attempts to deal with is my claim that the earth does not have a solid inner core and liquid outer core. This belief is based on what the Bible says, without consideration of any evidence or theories, in Luke 16 verse 26. In the quote, Jesus is relating an instance where Abraham is speaking:
And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
In context, the rich man is in hell, and in torment looks up to see Lazarus with Abraham far above. He is looking across the great gulf which is empty space within the earth between the surface of hell and the underside of the lower mantle. We have to understand that there is a core, which is molten, which is hell, and there is an empty space between the surface of the core and the lower mantle.
So Dennis does something very clever and attempts to use the field value for the acceleration due to gravity and the mass of the earth to prove that there is no empty space inside the earth.
He mentions that in an article I wrote called Matty’s Constant for Calculating Planetary Mass I used the accepted value for the mass of the earth, and this is true, I did a Google search to find the mass of the earth and plugged it into my table of values.
Let’s have Cortana remind us of the mass of the earth… Thanks Cortana
So Dennis goes on to use some math to calculate the mass of the outer core, and this is about 26% of the mass of the earth, and he points out that if this is in fact empty space, then that amount of mass must be subtracted from the mass of the earth. Clever right? He does some more math to show that if the mass of the earth is 26% less because of empty space, then that would affect the gravitational force of the earth, such that a free fall experiment at the surface of the earth would return a value for the acceleration due to gravity of about 25% less than what we measure. Wow, slam dunk. Right?
So at this point I’m sure he is expecting me to sheepishly drop my eyes and say, “Oh, right, I didn’t think of that,” and suffer the defeat of having my bubble burst.
However, as I frequently have to point out to atheist science trolls, I don’t play by your rules. I make the rules.
Let me make this clear: I am not using physical evidence and data to prove the Bible. I am using the Bible to interpret physical evidence and data. Dennis makes the error here, not me. Dennis says:
[Johnny English Siri] “Now take earth’s measured mass and subtract 26% to get the new Matty’s Paradigm mass.”
The earth’s mass has never been measured. The earth’s mass is calculated by using the radius of the earth, the law of universal gravitation and the field value for acceleration due to gravity. However, this calculation is based on assuming that the earth is solid, or a combination of solid and liquid. So, the assumption that the earth is solid is part of the math that gives us the field value for the acceleration due to gravity, which is used to show that the earth is solid. Does that sound like circular reasoning to you?
If, as the Bible says, there is empty space in between the surface of hell and the bottom of the lower mantle, what are the implications for the understanding of gravity? If the earth’s mass is less by as much as 26% compared to what we think it is, and yet the field value for acceleration due to gravity is what we measure, then the relationship between mass and gravity is not what science thinks it is.
We are already making considerable progress on developing the idea that gravity is not proportional to mass, but mass is proportional to gravity. Gravity is a created thing that causes the formation of planetary bodies of characteristics that relate to its quantity and frequency.
We have developed a testable hypothesis that will demonstrate the existence of the human soul and hell, based on gravitational waves. Now we have shown that the assumed relationship between mass and gravity does not exist. As a result, we do not know the mass of the earth. The number that science has that it uses as the mass of the earth is based on circumstantial evidence, and the assumption that gravity is proportional to mass.
I think poor Dennis just got dunked. Here are Dennis’s calculations:
There’s more to the issue of having an empty outer core, though. Gravity is an important factor to consider when examining the validity of earth having an empty outer core.
From the perspective of modern science, the mass of the entire core is 1.719 x10^24 kg, or 27.5% of the earth’s mass. And the mass of the inner core is 1.162 x10^23 kg, or 1.86% of the earth’s mass. We can subtract the two to get the mass of the outer core and the percentage of earth’s total mass it makes up.
- By subtracting 1.162 x10^23 kg
- from 1.719 x10^24 kg
- we get 1.603 x10^24 kg.
This is 25.6% of the earth’s mass!!! Almost 26% of the earth’s mass!!!
Now take earth’s measured mass and subtract 25.6% to get the new mass for Matty’s paradigm.
If we do (5.972 x10^24 x 25.6%) we get 1.528 x10^24 kg, which is the mass we need to subtract from earth’s original mass.
- Now we subtract 1.528 x10^24
- from 5.972 x10^24 to get
- 4.444 x10^24 kg as earth’s new mass.
Now that we have earth’s new mass we must calculate its gravitational force. For this example we will calculate earth’s surface gravity using the equation
- g = G x M/r2
where “g” is surface gravity, “G” is the gravitational constant, “M” is the mass of earth, and “r” is earth’s radius.
If you do this calculation with earth’s accepted mass you get 9.81 meters/second squared.
However, we are using what would be Matty’s earth mass. Start with the exponent on the radius,
- so earth’s radius is 6.378 x10^6 m,
- when we square that we get 4.068 x10^13 m.
Now divide Matty’s earth mass by the previous calculation,
- so 4.444 x10^24
- divided by 4.068 x10^13 meters.
- This gives us 1.092 x10^11.
One more step, multiply this by the gravitational constant which is 6.67 x10^-11.
- So we do 1.092 x10^11
- multiplied by 6.67 x10^-11
- to get 7.29 meters/second squared as earth’s new gravitational pull.
Interesting, this is significantly less than the accepted gravitational pull, a little under 25%.
Now we have something that we can test! We can directly measure what the acceleration of gravity is on earth using the free fall test and then compare our findings with the theoretical calculations made. In the case of the theoretical calculations being used, they are 9.8 meters/second squared and 7.29 meters/second squared.
Using the free fall test, which can be found in my works cited page, one can test for themselves the earth’s ACTUAL acceleration of gravity. The test should yield approximately 9.8 meters/second squared if they follow the constraints of the experiment properly and make no errors. The test is accurate enough that even if errors are made, they won’t be higher than several percent.
You’d have to have a percent error of about 23% to get 7.29 meters/second squared. This is the nail in the coffin for Matty’s claim about the earth’s outer core. The free fall experiment proves, effectively and DIRECTLY, that there is no possible way that earth could have an outer core without mass.
Thanks for listening. If you’re interested in what we’re talking about then please check out matty’s paradigm dot org. The music in this episode is a medley of samples from Geezer Lake, from the album Feet In Mud Again. Some of the sound effects were downloaded from freesound dot org. The hello and cheerio were by Grandad Parnell. Truth was provided by Jesus Christ. Fevered ranting by Matty Lawrence. You can also find us on Twitter at matty underscore lawrence. I would love to hear from you. May God bless you, and Jesus save you.
|Where did you get here from?|
|1||October 10th – Corollary III|