I am plagued by questions of the universe - page 21
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
- the light of the world around you is not white. Photographers know this well: the eye is highly sensitive to green. And that means that the sun is not actually white, but purple. That's why in the Bible and in history, purple is the colour of kings and rulers. Purple was worn by Roman soldiers of the Son of the Creator under Pontius Pilate.
What does "really" mean? Colour is a subjective perception, and the sun is exactly the colour we see. Different people see colours slightly differently because of individual differences in the distribution of light-sensitive pigment in the retina. Women are on average more sensitive to colour information than men, and color blind people do not see some colours at all.
Incidentally, the curve of light sensitivity of the eye quite replicates the curve of the spectral density of the radiation of the sun. In particular, the maximum of its spectrum is just in the green region. This produces a so-called spectrum matched detector which, as can be shown, has the best characteristics in terms of signal/noise ratio. In other words, we see best when the sensitivity of the eye at a certain wavelength is proportional to the intensity of light at that wavelength.
AlexEro:
What makes you think that the Lord God is a fool? That he didn't make sure that all their secrets of the universe weren't solved in a couple of days so that human life would be unpredictable and unexpected? Or maybe he had "trouble" adjusting the DISPLAYING of spaces so that the galaxy would fit around the cat's neck? So that none of the arrogant physicists would even think such a thing was possible?
What makes you think that God, and not a couple of politically engaged crooks, composed the text of the Bible? And how does the fact that a few phrases in the Bible have some sort of meaning that is more or less correlated with science and/or morality (with the other 99% being, sorry, utter nonsense) mean that the book is valuable from line one to the last?
Are there any contradictions with the Bible? If so, show me if you can. If not - ...... well-o-o-o-o-o-o ..... then it's up to you.
You were right about the purple.
What do you mean "actually"? Colour is a subjective perception, and the sun is exactly the colour we see it as. Different people see colours slightly differently because of individual differences in the distribution of light-sensitive pigment in the retina. Women are on average more sensitive to colour information than men, and color blind people do not see some colours at all.
Incidentally, the curve of light sensitivity of the eye quite replicates the curve of the spectral density of the radiation of the sun. In particular, the maximum of its spectrum is just in the green region. This produces a so-called spectrum matched detector which, as can be shown, has the best characteristics in terms of signal/noise ratio. In other words, we see best when the sensitivity of the eye at a certain wavelength is proportional to the intensity of light at that wavelength.
I should add that if the sensitivity curve were different (you probably mean the same at all wavelengths) we would still call the colour of the sun white, as it would be the most typical colour for us in our environment. A subjective feeling, in short.
Where does the Bible say that purple is the colour of kings and rulers?
"It seems that the Creator had one son (an angel according to our understanding at that time) who first distinguished himself well, but then, being endowed with great power, he fell ill with arrogance, became proud, raised trouble against the Father, and so the Father gave himself and others shelter in the form of a material world, during the creation of which there was a great explosion . " - the cherub in Ezekiel, who was cast out of heaven. The boldface has nothing to do with Christianity.
Well, the rest of the message is a bit obscure.
The only thing I know about the mustard seed from the Bible is "And the apostles said to the Lord, 'Increase our faith. The Lord said, "If you had faith as a mustard seed, you could say to this mulberry tree, 'Extract yourself and plant yourself in the sea,' and it would obey you.
(Luke 17:5, 6)
Where's the big tree?
The purple one:
http://logosenc.org/brokgauz/purpur.html
"In NT times the trade of P. flourished in the city of Thyatira in Asia Minor (Acts 16:14). By the time of the exodus from Egypt the Israelites already knew P., they used it in making the veil in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31,36), the veils (26:1-4), and the high priest's garment (Ex 28). Sogl. 2 Chr 3:14, P. was also used in making the veil of the temple. In Jer 10:9 P. is mentioned as a material for the clothing of idols. The purple cloth was mainly the cloth of noble men (kings and princes - Ezf 8:15; Ez 23:6; Dan 5:7,16) and the rich (Proverbs 31:22; Luke 16:19). dignity, in which Christ was clothed in mockery, was the cloak of a Roman soldier / Greek kokkinos, "scarlet": Mt 27:28; porfyura or porphyrus, "purple" or "purple colour": Mk 15:17,20."
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0
"Along with purple, purple(Greek κοκκϊνοξ) denoted in the Bible the colour of costly fabrics and garments[5].[6] In the Bible purple refers not so much to the dye as to the fabrics (scarlet wool, etc.) that were used primarily in the construction of the sanctuary and its utensils,[7] and in the rite of purification[8].
The purple cloth was the most expensive cloth in antiquity. A garment dyed scarlet (blood-red) signified the highest, royal distinction. The Phoenicians were the first to learn how to use dye for such cloth which was extracted from the sea gastropod molluscs - Murex brandaris, or the so called purple snails. The dye contained several dyestuffs and was in different shades depending on the technology. Due to the rarity of such shellfish such cloth was extremely expensive and only available to the richest people[9].
In the Bible similar colours to purple are also called hyacinth, porphyry, purple and scarlet[9].
Also scarlet is a bright red dye extracted in ancient times from the bodies and eggs of the chenille (Coccus ilicis), a small hard-winged insect that lives on the chermes oak (Quercus ilicis). "
About the kingdom of heaven : Mark. 4:31-32.
"31 It is like mustard seed, which, when sown into the ground, is the smallest of all seeds in the earth;
32 but when sown, it sprouts and becomes larger than all the grains, and it shoots up great branches, so that the birds of the sky may take refuge under its shadow. "
Whether or not anything is relevant to Christianity is up to the Ecumenical Council of the Church to determine, not you.
Will you not shame yourself further with your "revelations"?
About purple:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0
"Along with purple, purple(Greek: κοκκκϊνοξ) was the colour of costly fabrics and garments in the Bible[5]. In the Bible purple does not so much refer to the dye, but to the fabrics (scarlet wool, etc.) that were used primarily in the construction of the sanctuary and its furnishing[6], priestly garments[7] as well as in the rite of purification[8].
The purple cloth was the most expensive cloth in antiquity. A garment dyed scarlet (blood-red) signified the highest, royal distinction. The Phoenicians were the first to learn how to use dye for such cloth which was extracted from the sea gastropod molluscs - Murex brandaris, or the so called purple snails. The dye contained several dyestuffs and was in different shades depending on the technology. Due to the rarity of such shellfish such cloth was extremely expensive and only available to the richest people[9].
In the Bible similar colours to purple are also called hyacinth, porphyry, purple and scarlet[9].
Also scarlet is a bright red dye extracted in ancient times from the bodies and eggs of the chenille (Coccus ilicis), a small hard-winged insect that lives on the chermes oak (Quercus ilicis). "
About the kingdom of heaven : Mark. 4:31-32.
"31 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which when sown in the ground is the smallest of all the seeds in the earth;
32 But when sown, it sprouts up and becomes larger than all the grains, and shoots forth great branches, so that under its shadow the birds of the air may take refuge. "
Only the Ecumenical Council of the Church, not you, has the authority to determine whether something is relevant to Christianity or not.
Why don't you just stop embarrassing yourself with your "revelations"?
Why embarrass yourself?
I wrote above about purple.
And what belongs to Christianity will be decided by me, too. Because what you wrote does not refer to Christianity, but to Gnosticism (which is condemned by the Ecumenical Council).
"Physicists claim that the original matter was the size of a grain of rice" - there is no such thing. An infinitesimal point that began to expand
FAGOTT:
"Physicists claim that the original matter was the size of a grain of rice" - there is no such thing. An infinitesimal point that began to expand.
That's funny.
So how does "infinitesimal point that began to expand" correlate with EVERYTHING else physics has screwed up in the last 500 years?
At least PRIVELY? Physicists believe in the immutability of physical laws over time. Admitting otherwise is equal to physicists admitting God is God. I think that point is God for physicists, although physicists would call it anything but God.
That's funny.
So how does "An infinitesimal point that began to expand" relate to EVERYTHING else that physics has screwed up in the last 500 years ?
At least PRIVELY? Physicists believe in the immutability of physical laws over time. Admitting otherwise is equal to physicists admitting God is God. I think that point is God for physicists, although physicists would call it anything but God.
1. The physical laws during the BV were different from those of today.
2. The physical laws even now are different on micro and macro levels. The physical laws for micro-level for different conditions are different - for example, the theory of strings of normal conditions and for the bowels of a supernova are different, etc.
So physicists don't believe in it, but they don't believe in God either. As Hawking said, God couldn't have created the universe because time didn't exist before the BW
1. The physical laws during the BV were different from those of today.
2. The physical laws even now at micro and macro levels are different. The physical laws for the micro-level for different conditions are different - for example, the theory of strings of normal conditions and for the bowels of a supernova are different, etc.
So physicists don't believe in it, but they don't believe in God either. As Hawking said, God could not have created the universe because time did not exist before the BW
I forgive you FAGOTT, but I will never forgive physicists, and first of all Nobel laureates, such free handling of time.
Housewives with clocks in their kitchens or timers would be allowed to do so.
Academicians should first deal with the time itself and give its exact definition, and only then argue something about the presence or absence of God.
He believes in the existence of time, but not in God. )))) Fucking atheist.