One way or another, in my Everyday life we measure distances: to the nearest supermarket, to a relative’s house in another city, to and so on. However, when it comes to the vastness of outer space, it turns out that using familiar values like kilometers is extremely irrational. And the point here is not only in the difficulty of perceiving the resulting gigantic values, but in the number of numbers in them. Even writing so many zeros will become a problem. For example, the shortest distance from Mars to Earth is 55.7 million kilometers. Six zeros! But the red planet is one of our closest neighbors in the sky. How to use the cumbersome numbers that result when calculating the distance even to the nearest stars? And right now we need such a value as a light year. How much is it equal? Let's figure it out now.
Concept of light year It is also closely connected with relativistic physics, in which the close connection and mutual dependence of space and time was established at the beginning of the 20th century, when the postulates of Newtonian mechanics collapsed. Before this distance value, larger scale units in the system
were formed quite simply: each subsequent one was a collection of units of a smaller order (centimeters, meters, kilometers, and so on). In the case of a light year, distance was tied to time. Modern science knows that the speed of light propagation in a vacuum is constant. Moreover, it is the maximum speed in nature admissible in modern relativistic physics. It was these ideas that formed the basis of the new meaning. A light year is equal to the distance a ray of light travels in one Earth calendar year. In kilometers it is approximately 9.46 * 10 15 kilometers. Interestingly, a photon travels the distance to the nearest Moon in 1.3 seconds. It's about eight minutes to the sun. But the next closest stars, Alpha, are already about four light years away.
Just a fantastic distance. There is an even larger measure of space in astrophysics. A light year is equal to about one-third of a parsec, an even larger unit of measurement of interstellar distances.
Speed of light propagation under different conditions
By the way, there is also such a feature that photons can propagate at different speeds in different environments. We already know how fast they fly in a vacuum. And when they say that a light year is equal to the distance covered by light in a year, they mean empty outer space. However, it is interesting to note that under other conditions the speed of light may be lower. For example, in air, photons scatter at a slightly lower speed than in vacuum. Which one depends on the specific state of the atmosphere. Thus, in a gas-filled environment, the light year would be somewhat smaller. However, it would not differ significantly from the accepted one.
An extra-system unit of length used in astronomy; 1 S.g. is equal to the distance traveled by light in 1 year. 1 S. g. = 0.3068 parsec = 9.4605 1015 m. Physical encyclopedic Dictionary. M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Editor-in-Chief A. M. Prokhorov... ... Physical encyclopedia
LIGHT YEAR, a unit of astronomical distance equal to the distance that light travels in outer space or in a VACUUM in one tropical year. One light year is equal to 9.46071012 km... Scientific and technical encyclopedic dictionary
LIGHT YEAR, a unit of length used in astronomy: the path traveled by light in 1 year, i.e. 9.466?1012 km. The distance to the nearest star (Proxima Centauri) is approximately 4.3 light years. The most distant stars in the Galaxy are located on... ... Modern encyclopedia
Unit of interstellar distances; the path that light travels in a year, i.e. 9.46? 1012 km... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary
Light year- LIGHT YEAR, a unit of length used in astronomy: the path traveled by light in 1 year, i.e. 9.466´1012 km. The distance to the nearest star (Proxima Centauri) is approximately 4.3 light years. The most distant stars in the Galaxy are located on... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary
An extra-system unit of length used in astronomy. 1 light year is the distance that light travels in 1 year. 1 light year is equal to 9.4605E+12 km = 0.307 pc... Astronomical Dictionary
Unit of interstellar distances; the path that light travels in a year, that is, 9.46·1012 km. * * * LIGHT YEAR LIGHT YEAR, a unit of interstellar distances; the path that light travels in a year, i.e. 9.46×1012 km... encyclopedic Dictionary
Light year- a unit of distance equal to the path traveled by light in one year. A light year is equal to 0.3 parsecs... Concepts modern natural science. Glossary of basic terms
light year- šviesmetis statusas T sritis Standartizacija ir metrologija apibrėžtis Astronominis ilgio matavimo vienetas, lygus nuotoliui, kurį vakuume nusklinda šviesa per 1 atogrąžinius metus. Žymimas šm: 1 šm = 9.46073 · 10¹² km. atitikmenys: engl. light... ... Penkiakalbis aiškinamasis metrologijos terminų žodynas
light year- šviesmetis statusas T sritis fizika atitikmenys: engl. light year vok. Lichtjahr, n rus. light year, m pranc. année lumière, f … Fizikos terminų žodynas
Books
- There is no turning back. Set of 3 books, Alexey Lukyanov, Ivan Sergeevich Naumov. Set of 3 books. 1. "Tsunami. Book one. Earthshakers" 1999. Egor and Yusya Kruglov are left without adult care. Nothing good awaits them ahead. Disability has turned...
- Fascinating astronomy, Elena Kachur. About the book In the new and long-awaited book, Chevostik and Uncle Kuzya go to the observatory! Here they will have a fascinating acquaintance with heavenly bodies gracing our night sky. Together with…
The science of creation: how old is the Earth according to biblical texts? What evidence is there for the correctness of the Christian belief in the creation of the world? All about this in our material!
Creation Science
It says here that initially a single world ocean that covered the entire earth broke up into separate basins separated by land. The appearance of continents and seas on the face of the Earth was of utmost importance in the history of the development of our planet, but it happened in such a distant past that no traces of this event remained in the geological record.
IN modern science the question of the origin of the hydrosphere, as well as the atmosphere, is the subject of mutually exclusive hypotheses, which are based not on direct geological data, but on certain cosmogonic constructions and general views on the origin of the Earth. For the geologically foreseeable time, there is no data that would allow for a noticeable increase in the volume of the hydrosphere, which was noted by V.I. Vernadsky. If this position is correct, then it should be assumed that land appeared only as a result of a long process of geological development of our planet, expressed in the differentiation of its solid shells into oceanic depressions that contained the main mass surface waters. Thus, modern scientific data do not contradict the picture painted by the book of Genesis, but one has to be surprised, if one denies its divine inspiration, that a writer of a people who hardly sees the sea great importance in the development of the Earth gave it a watery shell.
Bible and geology
We do not consider questions about the causes of the origin of oceans and continents, mountains and plains in this essay, since none of them contradicts the Bible. Something else is important for us now - a comparative analysis of the sequence of creations according to the Bible and the sequence of the appearance of various types of the material world in the light of modern scientific and natural knowledge.
These verses say that inanimate nature, at the command of God, produced wildlife in the form of plants, which thus arose before animals. So, already at relatively early stages of the Earth’s development vegetable world reached significant diversity and developed not only in water, but also covered land.
There are no traces left of the very first stages of life in the geological record, so we have to limit ourselves to only general considerations and guesses. It is generally accepted that life arose in the oceans, but G. S. Osborne and L. S. Berg (1946) believe that the first stages of life took place on land, in swampy and damp places. According to modern ideas, first expressed by V.I. Vernadsky and now included in textbooks, our modern topoatmosphere (without which no animal life, which requires the presence of free oxygen, is possible) is biogenic. Without plants, animals would not only suffocate, but they would have nothing to eat, for only plants have the ability to convert inorganic forms of matter into organic ones.
In the deposits of the Archean era (see Geochronological table on p. 36) there are no reliable organic remains. The oldest undoubtedly known plant remains were found in the Precambrian limestones of Montana; Bacteria and various algae were found and well studied in Proterozoic sediments; in Precambrian deposits of the Czech Republic - wood described under the name Archaexylan, with signs of the structure of gymnosperms (that is, conifers); Indefinable remains were found in the Precambrian of the Urals land plants and spores of higher plants; spores of higher land plants - bryophytes and pteridophytes - are described from Cambrian deposits of the Baltic region; from the Upper Silurian of the Australian province of Victoria - a flora of primitive, now extinct psilophyte plants. In the Devonian, the known terrestrial flora is already characterized by a large diversity of species and groups.
Geochronological table
Vegetable world
Thus, based on modern scientific ideas and data, we have to believe, in full accordance with the Bible, that plants were the first organized forms of organic life on Earth, and the plant world was already ancient times reached a significant variety of forms.
| Gen 1:14 | And God said: Let there be lights in the expanse of heaven to illuminate the earth, and to separate the day from the night, and for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years; |
| Gen 1:15 | and let them be lamps in the firmament of the heaven to give light on the earth. And so it became. |
| Gen 1:16 | And God created two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, and the stars; |
| Gen 1:17 | and God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light on the earth, |
| Gen 1:18 | and to rule the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. |
| Gen 1:19 | And there was evening and there was morning: the fourth day. |
The following verses talk about the creation of the Sun, Moon and stars. We have already talked a lot about cosmogony in the previous essay, so now we will formulate only brief conclusions from two scientific hypotheses of the origin of stars: 1) both hypotheses assume the presence of prestellar matter in the Universe. This matter only under certain conditions forms stars; 2) when implementing the mechanism of the second concept (assuming the presence of a special superdense state of matter), the existence of invisible stars is fundamentally possible, which can flare up in subsequent times. Further, the formation of clots of matter is possible in such limited areas beyond which no radiation can penetrate. This formation of matter can be characterized in figurative biblical language as God separated the light from the darkness.
Age of the Universe
Let us consider the problem of the age of the Earth and the bodies of the Universe, as it appears to theology and modern natural science consciousness.
For theology, the only criterion for the age of the world is the biblical texts. In the given texts of the book of Genesis, the creation of the world is described in certain stages called “days”. It is impossible to understand by them our usual astronomical days associated with the rotation of the Earth around its axis, since before the fourth “day” the Sun did not exist and, therefore, there was no change of day and night. Since the six days of the Bible - a conventional division of time - have nothing to do with the astronomical day, with their day and night, the night is therefore not mentioned in the book of Genesis in connection with the day of creation: “and there was evening, and there was morning” - for every hour had its own work, and it was not interrupted at night. This is emphasized by the order of words “there was evening, and there was morning” instead of the seemingly natural: “there was morning and there was evening - the fourth day.”
It is necessary to dwell on the chronology from the creation of the world, which was previously accepted by everyone Christian world and spans about 7,000 years.
There is no data in the biblical texts to determine the age of the world. Consequently, the question of calculating the age of the world does not fall within the purview of theology. Some interpreters of the Bible tried to approach chronology indirectly, using the information available in the Bible about individual clans and generations and the history of the Jewish people, and received completely different figures. The method they used, by its very nature, could not be part of the task of determining the age of the world from the first day of creation. Science has long been trying to evaluate different ways and methods of the age of various parts of the world from their very formation. First of all, let us dwell on determining the age of the Earth.
Rough, simplified calculations represent science's first infant attempts to determine the age of the Earth. Only the discovery of radioactive decay by Becquerel and the Curies allowed geology to obtain a “standard of time” that does not depend on any geological processes. At any temperature, at any pressure, radioactive elements transform into non-radioactive lead and helium at the same speed. The ratio between radioactive elements, in particular uranium, and the lead or helium formed from it, adjusted for the rate of decay, is a measure of time. The same measure of time can be the ratio between radiogenic and non-radiogenic isotopes of the same element. Without being able to delve into the details of the time determination technique, we will report only the final results of the work done by a number of researchers.
1) The most ancient minerals found on earth are 2.0–2.5 billion years old. The most ancient rocks on the earth's surface were found in Antarctica and are 3.9–4.0 billion years old.
2) The age of meteorites reaches 4.0–4.5 billion years.
3) Based on the study of solar radiation, V. G. Fesenkov believes that the age of the Sun should closely correspond to the age of the Earth and, probably, other planets, and suggests that the planets, in particular the Earth, could exist in the absence of a fully formed Sun.
4) The theory of the expanding Universe predicts its age at 15–20 billion years.
Thus, in all of the above cases, determining the age of objects (an expanding metagalaxy, earth's crust, Sun), produced by different researchers, using different methods and methods, gave figures of the same order. Based on the requirements of scientific caution, it is impossible to talk about more. Are these coincidences random? It is difficult for us, brought up on the scientific thinking of the 20th century, to imagine that the entire majestic Universe with its billions of stars would have an age close to the age of the oldest rocks on the surface of our planet and the first origin of life on it.
One can, of course, doubt that the “red shift” indicates the expansion of galaxies, one can doubt Einstein’s theory, from which, regardless of the “red shift,” the expansion of the Universe theoretically follows, one can doubt the principles of determining the age of minerals and meteorites by radiological methods and any other, one can doubt the reliability of astrophysical data, but then one has to completely deny the suitability of our observations for interpreting the Universe. Atheists stand on this path. They say that it is impossible to transfer the laws of motion of a finite, limited region of the Universe to the entire infinite Universe. In other words, they recognize two worlds: one world, where there are laws leading to “clergy,” where they, unfortunately, have to live, and another world, a world that has not yet been discovered and is unknown to us, the “otherworldly” world (!), where there are no laws leading to “clergy”. The best thing that atheists should do, so as not to get into trouble themselves, is to admit that science, due to its limitations in each specific period of time, cannot provide a complete picture of the Universe that accurately reflects it, and, therefore, is unsuitable as a method of anti-religious propaganda.
Wanting to understand the meaning of the biblical description of the fifth day of creation, we must remember that the classification among ancient peoples, as well as among modern peoples of archaic culture, has an external morphological ecological character, and not a comparative anatomical one, like modern natural scientific taxonomy. For the ancients, a lizard seemed more related to some centipede rather than a frog, a sparrow to a bee rather than a mole, a bat to a swallow rather than an elephant; Finally, wouldn’t our poorly educated contemporary compare a dolphin with a fish rather than with a cow? From a scientific biological point of view, the family relationships of animals in the examples given are just the opposite.
Reptiles and birds
So, what meaning did the ancients put into the concepts of “reptiles and birds”? Reptiles (20th century, in Hebrew sheres) means the actual worms of aquatic and animals, in some cases multiparous, which is emphasized in this text by the word yish e r e su 'let it produce', derived from sharas, which means 'to swarm, give birth' or 'to give birth in abundance'. More successfully than in the Russian translation, the 20th verse was translated by Luther: Und Gott sprach: Es errege sich das Wasser mit webenden und lebendigen Tieren, lit. ‘God said: Let the waters be troubled by swarming and living animals.’
Saint Basil the Great also gives such an expanded understanding of the word sheres in his “Six Days”. In his commentary on verse 20, he writes: “A commandment has come out - and rivers produce and lakes give birth to their own and natural species; and the sea is sick with all kinds of swimming animals,” and below, in connection with this, he lists not only fish, but also slugs and polyps, cuttlefish, scallops, crabs, crayfish and “thousands of various oysters.”
In ancient times, birds, as Basil the Great testifies, meant all animals flying over the earth, both birds themselves and insects.
In the 21st verse the word tanninim is used, denoting a large sea animal itself, translated as 'fish' in the Russian translation, and for reptiles the word used is not sheres, as in verse 20, but romeset, denoting crawling, reptiles, so in this case the Russian translation is quite accurate.
So, in verses 20–23, which we are now examining, we talk about the appearance on Earth of various animals, the ancestral home of which, according to the Bible, is water; it is said that the sea was inhabited by a wide variety of creatures - small and large, and that land reptiles arose after aquatic ones and their ancestral home was also water.
Without dwelling on the relationships between individual types of the animal world and the genetic transition of one type to another, about which there are a large number of often mutually exclusive hypotheses, let us consider the factual material that geology and paleontology currently provide.
The earliest stages of the development of the animal world are hidden from us; The first remains of animals belong to the Upper Precambrian - these are the nuclei and imprints of protozoa, the remains of the skeleton of sponges, the tubes of worms, the horny shells of brachypods, mollusks and the tubes of pteropods (crustaceans).
In the Cambrian, judging by the available remains, animal world already reaches a huge variety of forms. There are representatives of almost all living types. In Cambrian deposits, not only the remains of hard skeletons were found, which are usually the only ones preserved in the fossil state, but also (in North America) excellently preserved prints of organisms with only a soft body: jellyfish, holothurians, various worm-like and arthropods. The words of St. Basil the Great that “the sea was sick with all kinds of swimming animals” are applicable to the Cambrian Sea.
With even greater justification, these words can be attributed to the Silurian period: up to 15,000 species of Silurian marine organisms are known. Apparently, the attempt of animals to get out of the water is associated with the Silurian, since in sediments of this age, although extremely rarely, there are remains of land arthropods, centipedes and scorpions, that is, in biblical terminology, reptiles. How this transition was carried out in general, what its stages were, we do not know; it is known that by the end of the Devonian it had already ended, for from the Devonian North America(Pennsylvania) the imprint of a four-toed foot of a terrestrial vertebrate (Thinopus) has long been known, and the first reliable bone remains of an amphibian skull are from the Upper Devonian of Greenland.
In the Carboniferous period following the Devonian, newt-like amphibians were widespread - they were, in the full sense, animals reptiles on the ground. At the same time, insects from the Orthoptera group appear and reach their greatest development. The number of their known species - given the incompleteness of the geological record - reaches 1000. About this period we can say that “birds flew across the firmament of heaven.”
In the Permian period, along with amphibians, reptiles (reptiles in the modern sense of the word) were also widespread. The Mesozoic era is a veritable kingdom of reptiles, which not only gave rise to such gigantic forms as the 28-meter brachiosaurus, but also filled the “waters of the seas,” along with a variety of fish, amphibians and a rich world of invertebrates.
In the Jurassic, flying reptiles are found, the structure of whose wings is general outline resembled the structure of bats, and from Jurassic deposits two finds of real, although very primitive birds are known from the lithographic shales of Bavaria. In the Cretaceous, birds become quite numerous.
Thus, according to biblical terminology, the Devonian, Carboniferous, Permian periods and a significant part Mesozoic era can be called the day of reptiles and birds.
This is how the Bible talks about the first stage of creation on the sixth day. There is no doubt that by animals and livestock we should understand land mammals, and that their homeland is the mainland, but it is unclear what is meant by reptiles, since reptiles were already mentioned when describing the fifth day. Perhaps the natural scientific data themselves will help us understand the meaning of this term in the Bible.
Currently, the appearance of mammals is associated with the findings of extremely scarce remains in the Middle and Upper Jurassic deposits. Rare remains of marsupials and placental mammals are known from the Upper Cretaceous, and the following Tertiary period can be called, together with the modern Quaternary, the era of mammals; they not only dominate the land (animals and cattle), but also rose into the air (bats, etc.) and took possession of the seas (whales, dolphins, seals, walruses, etc.). The shape, richness of color and variation in size of mammals is amazing - from tiny voles to giant elephants and whales. They have mastered all the forests and steppes of the globe, they are not afraid of either the heat of the deserts or the cold of the polar countries - everywhere they are the most mobile, the most active, the most intelligent animals. Man himself belongs to them.
In all likelihood, reptiles in the book of Genesis refer to frogs, toads (that is, tailless amphibians) and snakes. Paleontological data also inclines us to this understanding of this word, since the appearance of amphibians and snakes coincides with the time of the appearance of mammals.
Is the world static?
On previous pages we saw that according to biblical and scientific data, the appearance of the Earth and the cosmos as a whole was changing. Pondering the meaning of the biblical text, theology puts forward a problem of enormous natural scientific significance: did God create the world unchanged and static, or can the world of God change and develop? Is it possible to improve in this world and grow from lower to higher in the field of spiritual activity and material, especially biological development, or is everything that exists subject to monotonous, ever-repeating closed cycles, like the movement of machine pistons? To the question: The Creator of which world should have greater wisdom and greater power? - only one answer is possible: of course, a mobile and developing world. Thus, from a Christian theological point of view, which recognizes God as Almighty, it is easier to accept natural scientific theories of a developing Universe than a static one. The great principle of universal development, which permeates to one degree or another the entire creation of God, is concentrated with special force in the inner, spiritual world of man - the crown of Divine creativity. Consequently, if a person, a creation possessing will and reason, does not work on his spiritual development, does not strive for it, then he consciously or unconsciously is an opponent of the great creative idea of the Divine, that is, a fighter against God, conscious or unconscious, and therefore the spiritual begins in him desolation, regression.
The possibility of human mental and spiritual development has been indisputably proven throughout human history and especially by the countless host of Christian ascetics, canonized and uncanonized saints.
It seemed that theology was supposed to anticipate the ideas of the natural evolution of the world. They actually exist in embryo in some Church Fathers, although they start from different starting positions. So, for example, St. John of Damascus wrote: “what began with a change must change.” But why then did the Inquisition and the Jesuits fight against scientific discoveries, why did some churchmen hostile the theory of the evolution of animals and plants? Why in the 19th century did they stubbornly defend the idea of the immutability of species, although such an assumption has no basis either in Tradition or in Revelation and is contrary to all analogies in nature? Based on the limited scientific data of the ancient world and the Middle Ages, theologians created a speculative scheme of the universe, which, in their opinion, exhausted the power of God. And so, when the empirical study of nature - the creation of God, expanded known to people the limits of His power and wisdom beyond the boundaries of their old ideas, these theologians forgot that the power of the Creator extends beyond the limits of human understanding, they made a fuss about the imaginary atheism of scientific theories, “for His immeasurable creative power and wisdom” (Lomonosov’s words) were measured by their limited knowledge. However, not all clergy are guilty of this. Some of them were even ancestors evolutionary theories in biology. For example, the English priest W. Herbert (1837) believed that “species were created in a state highest degree plastic, and that through crossings and deviations they produced all the existing species.”
Currently biological evolution can be considered a scientifically established pattern. However, contrary to popular belief, neither zoology nor botany as the science of modern life forms (neobiology) can prove it. They can only prove the plasticity of the organism or its stability, or the nature of the relationship between these two polar properties of the organism. In short, neobiology deals with factors that can be considered factors in evolution, but not with evolution itself.
Only paleontology, together with geology, has factual documents of past eras of life. Consequently, only it can provide the factual basis for the history of the organic world, that is, the framework within which questions of the development of life can and should be developed - that empirical basis, beyond which the realm of fantasy begins.
Paleontology and evolution
However, paleontology did not immediately start talking about evolution. The famous Belgian paleontologist Louis Dollot divides the history of paleontology into three periods: the first - the period of the creation of fables, when instead of studying, they preferred to reason, and large extinct animals were mistaken for the skeletons of giants or mythological creatures; the second is the morphological period; with it essentially begins paleontology as the science of fossils, created by Cuvier in the same way as comparative anatomy; and the third period is the period of evolutionary paleontology, created by the works of V. O. Kovalevsky. “Kovalevsky’s work,” wrote Dollo, “is a true treatise on the method in paleontology.”
What geological and paleontological evidence can be given in favor of the evolution of the organic world?
1) It has been empirically established that there are no modern forms and there are remains of now extinct animals, and different deposits differ from each other in different fauna, and as we move to younger deposits we encounter more and more highly organized forms. This can be explained either by Cuvier's theory of catastrophes (which assumes countless repeated creations and destructions of everything previously created, with each time more highly organized organisms appearing than in previous acts of creation), or the result of evolution.
From a theological point of view, the catastrophe theory is absurd and has no basis in Revelation. It reflects not Christian theological views, as they are trying to portray now, but the state of the factual material in Cuvier’s era, when, with a comparatively small number of paleontological finds, intermediate forms between known species and genera were not found. This circumstance, by the way, forced Darwin to devote a large section in his “Origin of Species” to the incompleteness of the geological record in order to save his theory from the blows of paleontologists.
2) In the fossil state, before the appearance of remains of new classes and other classification groups, there are remains of organisms that occupy an intermediate position between the new “future” class and the previously existing one, and their assignment to one class or another is very difficult. In this case, it is impossible to restore all stages due to the incompleteness of the geological record, since we do not know whether we are really dealing with transitional phenomena or with traces of the presence of certain classes unknown to us. This leaves a loophole for skeptics.
3) But there are genera in which it is possible to trace all the gradual transitions from one form to another from successive horizons. Moreover, the extreme forms are so different from each other that they, of course, should be classified as different species; It is impossible to draw the boundary between these species in a cross-section, since the intermediate forms give very gradual transitions. We are faced, as it were, with the situation that it is necessary somewhere conditionally to classify a mother as one species, and the daughter she gave birth to as another - a new one, and to classify two half-brothers born at the same time to different systematic units, so that somehow, at least conditionally , draw the line between species. A fact that is impossible in neobiology, but often happens in paleontology.
In this work, we do not dwell on the currently established laws of evolution (adaptive radiation, acceleration of the development of tachygenesis, irreversibility of evolution, non-specialization, etc.), since this is not directly related to our topic. Let us only note that Darwinism and evolutionary views should not be equated; they are not identical, as our high school students think.
Creation of the world and the origin of man
| Gen 1:26 | And God said: Let us make man in Our image and after Our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the wild animals, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that moves on the earth. |
| Gen 1:27 | And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female he created them. |
| Gen 1:28 | And God blessed them, and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the wild animals, and over the birds of the air, and over every livestock, and over all the earth, and over every living creature. , reptiles on the ground. |
The problem of human origin is one of the most exciting in biology and anthropology. For several centuries it has been a battlefield between people holding different philosophical, scientific, religious and even political views.
Starting with Giordano Bruno, who in his essay “The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast” (1584) spoke in favor of the independent origin of man in different places on the globe, the ideas of polyphilia were used in the fight against the Christian religion. Similar goals were pursued by the development of the polygenesis hypothesis human races, which contained the statement that different races are either different species of the same genus, or even different kinds. The works of monophilist scientists, in particular in modern times(analysis of anatomical features that do not have adaptive significance - Henri Balois), proved that the only possible concept regarding the human race is monophyly.
If the question of the unity (monophyly) of the human race can now be considered scientifically more or less resolved, then questions about the specific ways of formation of the species Homo sapiens and about antiquity modern man are the subject of heated debate.
Between the previous stage and the Neanderthals and modern people, the oldest race of which is known as the Cro-Magnons, there is a certain break in gradualism, which is recognized by all scientists.
Archaeological finds show the impossibility of paleontologically defending the antiquity of Homo sapiens.
The question arises, why are they so stubbornly striving to prove the enormous antiquity of modern man, to prove his antiquity even at the cost of unconscious or conscious distortion of scientific facts?
The fact is that orthodox Darwinism explains the formation of man with his amazing mental abilities, which sharply distinguish Homo sapiens from the entire animal world, by the action of natural selection, which determines the entire diversity of animals and plants. According to Darwin's theory in its orthodox form, any species can evolve as a result of the fact that its individual representatives receive a slight superiority over their relatives, and only these more advanced representatives always survive the struggle for existence and only they pass on their progressive characteristics to their descendants. To explain the origin of man as the result of this extremely slow-acting mechanism of evolution, it is necessary to assume an enormous duration of his existence. The human brain is clearly superior to man's need to survive in his struggle for existence with other animals. Therefore, Darwin was forced to attribute its improvement to the long and fierce struggle of man with man and one human tribe with another. He also had to resort to the factor of sexual selection. In other words, according to Darwin, a person’s mental abilities satisfied his needs to survive in the fight against his own kind. Consequently, among peoples standing at lower stages of historical development, they must be immeasurably lower than among peoples who have gone in their own way. historical development forward. However, modern research has discarded the idea that the so-called savages were mentally retarded.
In the above biblical verses, the first thing that attracts attention is the grammatical agreement of the singular and plural. In verse 26: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” This hints at the mystery of the Holy Trinity, which in Three Persons is the One Indivisible Deity. God is One, but Three Persons of the Divine Nature. The dogma of the trinity of the Divine is completely unknown to the ancient Jews, but is entirely connected with Christianity, therefore for an atheist this discrepancy turns into a simple slip of the compiler or copyist. For a Christian, this is a pre-revelation of what later became a revelation.
So, man was conceived by the special will of the Divine as the ruler of the earth and everything that is on it. “And the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul,” the second chapter of the book of Genesis complements the narrative of the first chapter (Genesis 2:7).
In the Bible we do not find a story about how, or by what means, man was made from the dust of the ground. It only indicates, as St. Gregory the Theologian notes, that man was created from already existing “material.” Both our soul and body, as the great Christian ascetic St. Seraphim of Sarov taught, are created from the “finger of the earth.” Man, created from the dust of the earth, was “an active animal being, like others living on the earth<…>although he was superior to all beasts, cattle and birds.” They, as part of the earth, that is, as coming from the earth, could even serve as material for its creation. Therefore, there is nothing anti-Christian in including humans in the same systematic series with other animals, as Linnaeus did and as is now customary in biology - this is a statement of one of the aspects of human nature. There is nothing anti-religious in hypotheses of the origin of man from an ape-like creature; for a Christian, confirmation of these hypotheses only reveals how man was created in the biological process of his formation. The main thing for the Bible is not this, but that God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul,” that is, man, who had previously been “the dust of the earth,” an animal, although the most perfect and intelligent of all animals , acquired the Holy Spirit and through this the ability of real communication with the Divine and the possibility of immortality. By coming into contact with the earthly world with his material nature, man became the king of this world and the viceroy of God on earth. And as God’s vicegerent on earth, he must continue the work begun by God - decorating and cultivating the earth for the glory of God.
In creativity, whatever it manifests itself in - whether in art, in the creation of new breeds of animals and plants, or new celestial bodies, - is one of the aspects of our similarity to God. “You are gods,” said the Lord (John 10:34). We must approach creativity with prayer, with sacred mystical awe, with deep gratitude to God for the joy of our likeness to Him, with fear of what we use this likeness given to us for. Human creativity has two sides: the external one, which was just mentioned, and the internal one, which many people have currently forgotten about. Captivated by their external creativity, directed not to the glory of God, but to the glory of man, people forgot about internal creativity and, amusing themselves with their discoveries, inventions and so-called “miracles” of technology, they are losing the Kingdom of God and their immortality in a game of chance.
God offered life and death to man, good and evil (see Deut. 30:15), so that man could choose and make himself one way or another.
A person can descend to an animal state and rise with the help of God to an angelic state, for the seeds of a diverse life are embedded in him; The constantly, naturally changing world gives a person the opportunity to develop and grow according to his own will.
The world could not be built according to Beautiful Arbitrariness and not have laws, if only because a person could only cognize a world in which laws exist; Only a world developing according to laws could a person possess, only in it could a person demonstrate his creative abilities.
Having examined the biblical account of the creation of the world in the light of modern ideas, we did not see anything in it that contradicts science. It can be said with certainty that science in its development is more and more consistent with the narrative of Moses. His story in many details becomes clear only now: the beginning of the world, light before the Sun and stars, emphasizing the anthropological factor in the development of nature, and much more. Comparison latest discoveries science with the Bible clearly shows how much the providence of the Jewish prophet rose above not only the limited ideas of ancient peoples, but also above the views of natural scientists of modern times. For an atheist, this is an inexplicable miracle; for an anti-religionist, this is a fact that must be kept silent; for a Christian and a Jew this is not surprising, for for them the Bible and Nature are two books written by God, and therefore they cannot contradict one another. The imaginary contradictions between them are explained by the fact that a person reads one of these books incorrectly or both together.
Looking back at the path traveled by science over many centuries to understand the Great Book of Nature, we can say in the words of Einstein: “The more we read, the more fully and highly we appreciate the perfect design of the book, although its complete solution seems to be moving away as we moving forward.”
At the very beginning of the essays it was said that Christianity considers God the Creator to be the beginning of everything. In presenting the history of creation, we consciously sought to remain on the basis of precisely established facts and generally accepted opinions in our atheistic age, contrasting them with the biblical story and not rising to theological contemplation and thought. Now, finishing this essay, it is perhaps worth touching them lightly, at least with hints.
From the biblical account of the creation of the world it is clear that in the creation of the world after its creation natural forces acted and developed. natural processes: “and the earth brought forth greenery,” “let the water bring forth reptiles,” etc. But these elements did not act spontaneously, but upon receiving special abilities granted to them by God: “And God said: let the earth bring forth greenery,” and it produced, “let the water bring forth reptiles,” - and it produced, that is, matter did not simply develop as a result of its initially existing properties, but the will of the Divine, moving from one stage to another, bestowed new abilities on the elements, expressing Itself in the form of natural, that is, laws that have retained their meaning to this day. In other words, God, having created matter, did not leave it to remain in chaos, but as a wise Ruler directed the development of the Universe separate from Him, being in this sense the Creator of everything visible and invisible.
The manifestation of God's will is visible throughout the entire history of mankind, but it is expressed in most cases in the form of natural laws - imperceptible to outside world, which does not even listen to miracles, but is significant for a Christian. A Christian scientist must be able to see with his mind and feel with his heart the manifestation of the Divine Will in Nature and in human history and tell about It.
“It is fitting to keep a sovereign’s secret, but it is commendable to announce the works of God” (Tob 12:11).
Cm. Archpriest Gleb Kaleda. The Bible and the science of creation // Alpha and Omega. 1996. No. 2/3 (9/10). - Ss. 26–27. - Red.
In sacred books, the word “day” is used quite often without connection with the astronomical day. Jesus Christ calls the entire time of His ministry “day.” “Abraham your father,” He says, addressing the Jews, “rejoiced to see My day” (John 8:56). The Apostle Paul says: “The night is past, and the day is at hand: let us therefore put away the works of darkness” (Rom. 13:12); “Behold, now is the acceptable time, behold, now is the day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2). In the latter case, day is the time after the Nativity of Christ. “In your sight,” David figuratively exclaimed in a psalm, turning to God, “a thousand years are like yesterday” (Ps. 89:5), and the Apostle Peter wrote: “With the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (2 Pet 3:8).
We find the same understanding of the biblical day in St. Basil the Great. In the second conversation on the Sixth Day, this “universal teacher,” as the Church calls him, says: “Whether you call it a day or an age, you express the same concept; whether you say that it is a day, or that it is a state, it is always one, and not many; Whether you call it a century, it will be one and not multiple.”
A critical analysis of this chronology was given in 1757–1759. the founder of Russian natural scientific apologetics of Christianity M.V. Lomonosov, who in his work “On the Layers of the Earth” wrote about the presence of “...implicit and dubious numbers in Hebrew Old Testament, which, like many other places in it, the most skillful teachers of this language could not quite understand to this day; and this is not the last reason that all Christian peoples begin calculating the years from the Nativity of Christ, leaving the ancient, as not quite definite and doubtful; Moreover, there is no agreement on this between our Christian chronologists; for example, Theophilus Bishop of Antioch believes from Adam to Christ 5515 years, Augustine, 5351, Jerome 3941.”
Polyphyly- the theory according to which life (or its separate forms) could arise independently in different places. Monophyly- theory of the single origin of life. Accordingly, the terms polygenesis And monogenesis(along with monophyly) reflect views on the origin of humanity. - Ed.
The so-called theory of primitive (prelogical) thinking, put forward in the last century by L. Lévy-Bruhl and supported by a number of ethnographers and psychologists, is based, firstly, on bias and secondly, on insufficient knowledge of the material. The same can be said about the absolutely untenable statement according to which there are no words of abstract meaning in the languages of the peoples of archaic culture. - Red.
A lot of time has passed since the Earth appeared. Moreover, from a scientific point of view and from biblical teachings, data on the age of our planet do not coincide at all. So how old is the Earth according to the Bible? Let's take a closer look.
History of the creation of the world
Based on the events described in the Bible, one can calculate its age.
As a result, the age of the Earth according to the Bible is 6,108 years (until 2017).
From the Bible we learn in detail about everything that happened on Earth from the first day of its creation. Reading and analyzing this sacred book, we increasingly understand that it contains historically correct data.
Proof of this is the exact dates of birth and death of people, real events, which occurred with specific numbers indicated.
- Genesis 5 reveals to us the sequence and duration of life of Adam and his descendants. In total, this period takes 1,056 years.
- Genesis 7 and 11 cover a long period from the beginning of the life of Noah and the Flood to the birth of Abraham - 2,008 years.
- Genesis 21 tells the life of Abraham and his son Isaac - 2,108 years.
- Genesis 25 and 26 show us in detail the time from the birth of Jacob to his campaign in the lands of Egypt. The earth is already 2,298 years old.
- Genesis 47 tells of life in Egypt and departure from this country - 2,298 years.
- The book of Exodus (chapter 12) leads us to the building of the temple. This is already 3,208 years.
- The Book of Kings (chapter 6) ends this time period with the captivity of the Babylonians and stops at 3553.
An era begins that is marked by the appearance, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We know that Jesus began his ministry when he was 30 years old and ended it at 33 years old. The events of this time are also described in chronological order:
Different versions of chronology
Humanity has been concerned about the creation of the world since ancient times. How did the Earth appear, how old is it? There are 3 main theories in the world: philosophical, biblical and scientific. Which of these positions to choose and which to believe, everyone must decide for themselves. But science and philosophy are limited by reason and cannot go beyond mathematical reflection. This is just science fiction, nothing more. According to these two versions, the age of the Earth is 4.5 billion years, which supporters of the biblical version fundamentally disagree with.
The divine theory is based on a document called the Bible. This is where you can find out specific dates and years. It is worth noting that this theory is adhered to by famous scientists: Sergei Golovin, Carl Bach and Henry Halley.
If we stop believing in the Bible, we can say that our ideas about faith are also wrong. Is it correct?
Light year- an unsystematic unit of distance measurement in astronomy.
Numerically, one light year equal to the distance light travels in one year.
More precisely, a light year is the distance that light travels in a vacuum, without the influence of gravitational fields, in one Julian year (365.25 days or 31,557,600 standard seconds).
In Russian literature, the light year is designated “St. g.", in foreign: "ly"
What is one equal to? light year:
Light year in kilometers: 9,460,730,472,580.8 km.
9 460 730 472 580 800 meters
63,241.077 astronomical units (AU)
1 light year is equal to 0.306601 parsecs.
In addition to the light year, there are also fractions of the light year: light month, light week, light hour, light minute and light second. They are rare, but it will be interesting to see how different distances are expressed in these units:
The light year is a fairly convenient unit of distance measurement in astronomy. The highest speed at which information can spread in our world is the speed of light. Therefore, distances expressed in light years simultaneously show how quickly one space object can affect another.
For example, you've probably heard that the star Betelgeuse in the constellation Orion is expected to explode in the foreseeable future (in fact, within a few centuries).
Betelgeuse is located at a distance of 495 to 640 light years from us.
If it explodes right now, then the inhabitants of the Earth will see this explosion only in 500-600 years.
And if you see an explosion today, then remember that in fact the explosion occurred around the time of Ivan the Terrible...
This example clearly shows how convenient the light year is - it simultaneously shows both distance and time.
Light year - how many Earth years is it?
How many Earth years are there in a light year? Quite a strange question, but sometimes it comes up... A light year is a measure of distance, as written above, and an earthly year is a measure of time. Therefore, the answer to the question, how many Earth years are in one light year, will be - none :-)
or tell your friends: