• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

Speed of light

Gary K

New member
According to the arguments I see here angels travel faster than light.

If we read the prayer of Daniel in chapter 9 we find it takes approximately 7 to 9 minutes to read. Gabriel was dispatched to answer Daniel's questions sometime during Daniels prayer and arrived while Daniel was still praying. The one place in the universe that I have heard of that makes sense to me where heaven resides is Orion because the light that streams from behind it, and it is anywhere from 240 to more than 1000 light years away from earth.

So, what's the big deal about the speed of light? Seems to me light isn't all that speedy compared to the speed at which angels travel. And who can rule out God having even faster ways of travel?


Well-known member
I've really enjoyed listening to the recent RSR programs on the speed of light. As a YEC the light-time travel problem is one that's fascinated and stumped me for years.

A while ago I read one of Lisle's books wherein he proposed the ASC (infinite one-way speed of light convention). I liked the idea, but something about it never felt right. After thinking through this again I've concluded that the one-way speed of light can't be infinite.
Agree, nothing in this universe is infinite. It is a creation.
If the one-way speed of light in a given direction is truly instantaneous, then no time passes during which light traverses a given distance. To put it another way, the same light (i.e. photon) is in two places at once. Only God can be in multiple places at once, so the idea that a photon can also is a problem.
God can create beauty instantaneously. I don't know if He did, but He was setting up creation the way He wanted it and, I think, making it beautiful for us as well as Himself. In a sense, you and I are somewhat in 'two places' at once. Your left hand is occupying a different space from your right hand at the same time.
There's also a fascinating implication of a photon being in two places at once. When light is bounced off a mirror, the initial photon of light would pop into existence at the source AND be reflected off the mirror at exactly the same moment. Sounds cool, but again, none of this makes sense.
The mirror is but an image. Theoretically, in a different dimension, you could have a point, but it is a reflection of something that already exists. Interestingly, shown to us by other minute particles that are between the image and the other photon.
And there's another problem. The equation for speed is speed = distance / time. Therefore, a speed of infinity would require time to be 0 (infinity = distance / 0). But division by zero leads to absurd and clearly false expressions like 0=1.
To illustrate this, let's say that on a one-way trip, light travels 100,000 miles in an instant. Therefore infinity = 100,000 miles / 0. Multiply both sides of the equation by 0, and you get 0 miles = 100,000 miles. You can do this with any distance and will always get 0 = whatever distance you use.

Of course, we can get around these problems by saying that the one-way speed of light in one direction is some real number so fantastically large that it might as well be infinity. However, the idea of the speed of light being different in different directions seems counterintuitive, like the results of the double-slit experiment but much weirder. That alone isn't a reason to dismiss it, but it raises a number of even more difficult questions such as how light "knows" what direction it's going or whether it's being measured on the return trip.
Good observations, difficult concepts to equalize.
Anyway, change my mind :cool:
Not sure there is anything here to change your mind about. It is a great discussion! 🆙


Well-known member
The general answer to this from people that cite the Light Travel Time problem say we see events in the light, like going supernova, of a star that is farther away than would be seen by us now. In other words, the record of the super nova would have to have been created as part of the light stream that was between earth and that star. And thus two possible conclusions arise, that God would be deceptive or that God does things that don't make sense.
Neither (I agree with you). If people 'assume' something, that is their problem. You cannot think God is being deceptive: it is His universe to speed up or slow down or work as fast as He likes etc. Men are incredibly myopic at that point, THAT is the problem, not God. They make assumptions and demand "God should have told me!!!" Like they are the creators and God the servant : Plain:
The two conclusions don't seem to be a bad reflection on God in my opinion, but it seems to bother them. Even so, I'm not sure the spreading, depending on how it was done, has to lead to either conclusion.
Exactly. Assumptions are problems of people demanding everybody (and God) adhere to 'their' logical patterns 💫
What do you think of the idea that each LTT problem object we see, as an entity that is information, was simply "sped up" to solve the problem of LTT? In other words, if we call each of those entities a kind of model it's life and light could easily be sped up like a computer simulation. For example, with some computer sim programs if one wants to they can travel through a model of our solar system and one can set their "speed", which can easily be set to faster than light because it's just a model.
We have a problem already with God 'speaking' everything into existence. We, who are (physically) natural, expect material to come from material, finite to come from finite, etc. Science, in expectation and subsequently theory, doesn't do a fair job of reasoning on particulars. They 'assume' a truth and go from there.


Well-known member
This is an example of the unhelpful, vague descriptions pop-sci publications use. The phrase "experience time" is absurdly redundant, for to experience anything requires time. Saying that a photon doesn't "experience time" is the same as saying a photon doesn't exist, which is nuts.
Depending on what 'exists.' I don't grasp, not being God, that He is Spirit. There is no person on earth that can explain that to me. We have a 'spirit' but we take that on faith, having lost touch through the Fall. The physical is different than properties of God.