Yeah I found a Youtube video of him reading it. I will jump on it when I get a chance.
EDIT: He has several papers out there. Is there one in particular you would recommend that I start out with?
I don't know. I didn't read them.
Besides, I have already posted starting material.
OK, then why do you seem to think HPT is wrong or that it even contradicts anything Wolfram has proposed? HPT and C-Decay do not prove a young universe, but the latter does open the possibility for distant starlight to reach earth in a 6,000 year time frame. Interestingly enough, you will hear Barry Setterfied describe time in terms of atomic clocks, if you ever investigate what he says. From what I read/heard from Wolfram, his definition of time might work well with C-Decay.
I don't think anything for this issue.
But you didn't do a shred of investigation.
I have watched HPT Overviews by Bryan Nickel on YouTube. My unfavorability is mostly confirmed.
First, guy know what he is speaking. He says he is mechanical engineer and there is no reason not to trust. His explanation of concept is good and theory look logical. For every concept, he tell us how to test it straightforward. Details I can't judge since I don't physics enough.
What I can check is how he thinks and how he constructs his theory, which sadly leaves much to be desired. He doesn't follow obvious implications and checks them. Also, I don't sense that he ask himself the obvious counterexample.
For example, he claims that in central Atlantic was opened hole creating new plates launching water into atmosphere. He claim proof is plateau on Atlantic side on North America, South America and West followed by mountain chains parallel with "opened hole" on opposite side from Atlantic. OK, don't know enough to comment physics. However, what is with Europe? It border Atlantics and doesn't have mountain chain parallel with Atlantic.
He could claim this is special case and explain how HPT explains this in another video or special paper. He doesn't this. This pisses me off. Guy spend hours making videos of Earth and doesn't see on map how Europe contradicts his explanation.
He also claims mammoths lived in tropics and provides some good explanation on first try. He also claim there was some process moving equator to it's current location creating reason we find mammoths now in Siberia. Ok. What about fossils of polar animals from pre-Flood polar regions? Polar regions have living being now and there isn't any reason for opposite before flood. No comments. Not checking obvious implication is his theory correct.
Also, he claim Earth has lost 3% of mass which are now asteroids. OK? So average mass density has to be lowered or Earth radius has to get smaller. No check.
Also, how did Noah survived waves? I can't imagine raising mountains without earthquakes. What they bring near water? Water waves 10+ meter tall. How can Noah's ship survive this?
Where is math proof that water can push rocks into space? What about rocks which don't achieve escape velocity? They will fall both creating bombardment of surface. Where is proof? Again, it's obvious not all rocks will finish in space.
By the way, since Earth has lost mass, gravity between Sun and Earth should weaken changing Earth's orbit around sun. Since G=(gravity constant*m1*ma2)/(distance*distance), Earth will less mass will fell less gravity pull moving Earth away. Assuming no other forces, it will move 3% from pre-Flood orbit. I think. Assuming same speed of Earth as before flood and checking with circumference of cycle, now it it will take Earth 3%*2*3.14 = 0.1884, so about 18% more time for one cycle around Sun.
He claim before Flood one year is 360 days. Now I don't need calculator to see that 18% of 360 is way higher way 5.something, so theory falls "order of magnitude" math test.
This isn't worst. You see, Earth is moving through space when "Atlantic hole" was opened. He did check that Earth accidentally won't achieve escape speed from Sun's gravity? Of course not.
I have watched this video before replaying:
What is important is claim that on asteroid amino acids were found with both chirality. Here on Earth, all living being create only left chirality amino acids. So if asteroids only come from Earth and on Earth are only left chirality amino acids, how are right amino acids found on asteroids?
I didn't call you an unbeliever, but you can go look for yourself at the Biblical Families statement of beliefs, in partiular what it says regarding our beliefs with regard to the Bible. HPT follows a ton of evidence and does comparison and contrast with several other theories. Choose one of the theories regarding the origin of Comets. Look up Table 17 in ITB, and assign your own values (Red, Green, Yellow) to the theory of your choice as well as to HPT. The fact that HPT does follow science and does challenge other theories that are in the Establishment Scientific community, is reassuring about the veracity of Scripture, which has been instrumental in strengthening the fiath of some, yours truly included, and assisting unbelievers in finding the truth of God's Word. Rather than HPTrelying on the Bible to prop up its science, it is quite beneficial to prop up the Bible with that scientific pillar I mentioned in a previous post.
I think he needs way better science. It has happened exactly what I have (almost) predicted.
He tried to create theory to explain everything, didn't notice holes and now tries to expand theory not noticing even more holes.
Do you what is strange? If this guys didn't try to claim asteroids come from Earth, I have far less to critique him. I have counted 8 issues and 5 are direct consequence of rocks flying into space.
Without flying rocks it more reasonable theory.
I still wouldn't have forgiven him Europe.
There is reason "creationist" are mocking and laughing stock in science community. It ain't faith. It's because people like me with just one course of physics at college have so much obvious questions after watching. I wonder will professional physicists be able to write longer paper with questions and hole noticing that paper explaining theory.
By the way, notice how to explain more, correct misunderstanding etc... will complicate theory increasing chance of some data not being explained by theory creating more complex theory...... so again never ending cycle.
My final conclusion: This guy may understand how current theories are crap. Sadly, he is trying to replace crap with crap.
.
writings.stephenwolfram.com
