Quran and the speed of light
- Thread starter ali.one
- Start date
Oh, I have one...
It's bullshit.
All you (or whoever made this blog) did was take disparate verses of the Quran that have no connections to each other what so ever and mash them together in whatever way it worked to come out with the pre-determined numbers you were looking for.
There is absolutely no logic or reason behind your methodology.
You could just as easily taken chapter and verse numbers and mased them up to get my birthday proving that I am the next prophet - that would be just as meaningless.
no seperate verses are taken.. it is proved from one single verse and other verses are mentioned just to reinforce that proof ..
"GOD rules the cosmic affair from the heavens to the earth. Then this affair travels, to Him in one day, where the measure is one thousand years of your reckoning"
applying "speed= distance/time" to the fact mentioned in tat verse gave that amazing result..
"GOD rules the cosmic affair from the heavens to the earth. Then this affair travels, to Him in one day, where the measure is one thousand years of your reckoning"
applying "speed= distance/time" to the fact mentioned in tat verse gave that amazing result..
The moon does not in fact orbit a stationary earth, however - its motion is an undulating curve around the sun.
What the calculation deals with is an illusion of motion - the speed (not velocity) of the illusion of the moon. Which is a matter of definition.
So if this one hadn't worked, there were a bunch of other moon speeds they could have tried, or different interpretations of the verse there they could have employed.
I'd have been more impressed if some Koranic scholar had calculated the speed of light - or anything else - in advance, before the scientists had it figured
What the calculation deals with is an illusion of motion - the speed (not velocity) of the illusion of the moon. Which is a matter of definition.
So if this one hadn't worked, there were a bunch of other moon speeds they could have tried, or different interpretations of the verse there they could have employed.
I'd have been more impressed if some Koranic scholar had calculated the speed of light - or anything else - in advance, before the scientists had it figured
but the calculation makes sense when it says that the speed defined is outside the gravitational effect and that definition suits well in all conditions.. the path of moon which is mentioned makes sense when u get out of the gravitational field..
...since this speed was defined in Lunar Orbits/Earth Day then it will never appear to vary to anyone because 12000 Lunar Orbits/Earth Day is common to all observers. Hence outside gravitational fields this equation in the Qur'an is true for all observers forever....
just try to make out that in what ever way the calculation has been done, did they use the correct values in place.. with such a small step if it reaches to the speed of light exactly, then it is truly amazing..
...since this speed was defined in Lunar Orbits/Earth Day then it will never appear to vary to anyone because 12000 Lunar Orbits/Earth Day is common to all observers. Hence outside gravitational fields this equation in the Qur'an is true for all observers forever....
just try to make out that in what ever way the calculation has been done, did they use the correct values in place.. with such a small step if it reaches to the speed of light exactly, then it is truly amazing..
ali.one:
Let's look at the two verses that supposedly define the speed of light again:
The second one obviously has nothing to do with distance; it deals only with time. It's a simple statement that God (Allah) is eternal and thus a human lifetime, or a thousand years, is as nothing to a being that exists forever. Lots of religions define their God as being everlasting like this.
As for the first verse, on which the entire article is based, it is a tortured reading indeed.
We are required to believe, according to the author:
1. The words "the cosmic affair" really mean "photons of light".
2. The word "heavens" really means "space", and not a separate abode of Allah.
3. "The cosmic affair" refers to a travelling thing - light - and not to the passage of events in time.
4. "Your reckoning" means the reckoning determined by the same author according to a separate set of tortured readings based on other vague Qu'ranic references, rather than just the usual human reckoning of time.
The author's interpolation of the words "(i.e. through the whole universe)" is a fudge - part of the same tortured interpretation of the verse. They are there to try to suggest something that is not in the text itself.
It surprises me that a devout Muslim would seek to twist the words of the holy book in such a manner, rather than reading what Allah said literally.
My interpretation of the first verse is the same as the second verse: that to Allah time is fleeting, because he sees the whole of time. A human life, or a thousand years, is an eye-blink for a God.
Reading any more into this reveals a kind of desperation for validation of the Qu'ran by science. It shows that the author doesn't really trust the Qu'ran or the word of Allah.
Let's look at the two verses that supposedly define the speed of light again:
The second one obviously has nothing to do with distance; it deals only with time. It's a simple statement that God (Allah) is eternal and thus a human lifetime, or a thousand years, is as nothing to a being that exists forever. Lots of religions define their God as being everlasting like this.
As for the first verse, on which the entire article is based, it is a tortured reading indeed.
We are required to believe, according to the author:
1. The words "the cosmic affair" really mean "photons of light".
2. The word "heavens" really means "space", and not a separate abode of Allah.
3. "The cosmic affair" refers to a travelling thing - light - and not to the passage of events in time.
4. "Your reckoning" means the reckoning determined by the same author according to a separate set of tortured readings based on other vague Qu'ranic references, rather than just the usual human reckoning of time.
The author's interpolation of the words "(i.e. through the whole universe)" is a fudge - part of the same tortured interpretation of the verse. They are there to try to suggest something that is not in the text itself.
It surprises me that a devout Muslim would seek to twist the words of the holy book in such a manner, rather than reading what Allah said literally.
My interpretation of the first verse is the same as the second verse: that to Allah time is fleeting, because he sees the whole of time. A human life, or a thousand years, is an eye-blink for a God.
Reading any more into this reveals a kind of desperation for validation of the Qu'ran by science. It shows that the author doesn't really trust the Qu'ran or the word of Allah.
nothing like trusting the quran based on scientific fact..
even if the calculation is proved wrong, i wont believe that quran is wrong..
u have pointerd out 4 things and tried to explain tat those interpretations may not be true
but based on assumptions and based on our knowladge, those interpretations are the best we can put in to that place..
"the cosmic affair" - let it be as it is.. dont take it as light, what ever it is, the speed referred there comes to be the speed of light right? I have verified the values put there with the standard values from Nasa. Is it not amazing that the value derived there, is soo close?
Maybe there is something wrong about the findings but surely the words of God cant be false. But the fact is that i cant find anything wrong about the calculation and if there is, please post it here.
even if the calculation is proved wrong, i wont believe that quran is wrong..
u have pointerd out 4 things and tried to explain tat those interpretations may not be true
but based on assumptions and based on our knowladge, those interpretations are the best we can put in to that place..
"the cosmic affair" - let it be as it is.. dont take it as light, what ever it is, the speed referred there comes to be the speed of light right? I have verified the values put there with the standard values from Nasa. Is it not amazing that the value derived there, is soo close?
Maybe there is something wrong about the findings but surely the words of God cant be false. But the fact is that i cant find anything wrong about the calculation and if there is, please post it here.