The Unseen Meaning of “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the Earth” (Matthew 5:5)

 Dear Dr Lim Ju Boo

I remember some months ago you briefly and casually mentioned in one of the WhatsApp chat groups that human civilizations here on earth would be overtaken by the meek and have-nots. But I could not quite understand what you meant.

I happen to come across this verse many times in the Bible that the meek shall inherit this Earth, but could not understand its meaning. This evening someone in the church also asked for the interpretation of this verse. Everyone was silent.

I have also asked many church leaders, pastors, preachers from various churches I attended to explain, but none could. I have also never heard it preached or explained before in any church I have attended as they, as well as everyone else, tries to avoid this verse. They all think that it is the rich and privileged who are blessed, and never the poor, meek and have-nots.

But Jesus spoke and foretold this in Matthew 5:5.

Then how come Jesus spoke the opposite, that it would be the meek and not the rich as we all agree and think who would be blessed and shall inherit this Earth? We don’t quite understand.

Can you explain it all over again as I could not find your brief mention of this anymore in my mobile phone?

Thanks, in anticipation. It would be a blessing to all of us if you can explain.

---------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your question. I shall make this explanation as brief and as simple as possible as I have already casually and indirectly explained this some 7 or 8 months ago in the “My Friends” WhatsApp chat group.

I shall post this explanation inside this blog of mine so that I need not explain it all over again if somebody else ask the same, the meaning of this verse:

“Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the Earth” (Matthew 5:5)

I was also told the difficulty that many people including learned church leaders have tried to explain what Jesus meant by that verse. Various versions have been forwarded and I do not wish to comment on their interpretation which were all entirely different from mine.

I shall forward mine independently according to my training in sociology, biological evolution and population genetics. We shall briefly explain two reasons.

Firstly, I think the major reason is adaptability and resilience to hardship together with declining birth rate among affluent societies.

We can easily see some countries like China, India, United States, Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Russia, and Mexico have the highest populations, while countries with the highest birth rate per 1000 people are in the poorer African countries like Niger, Angola, Mali, Uganda, Benin, Chad, Congo, South Sudan.

It is in these poorer countries like in Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh where the people are meeker and more underprivileged than those in richer nations. It is in these poorer and meeker countries where the population shall explode in the years to come. But are they blessed with such an explosive population in poverty? We shall answer this, not in the myopic eyes of the rich general society, but through the eyes of a scientist.

If left unchecked their population is going to creep over the surface of this Earth in par or probably overtake the wealthier countries like the United States, Russia, Europe, China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan where their populations are on the decline.  

In wealthy nations like Singapore for instance, with their rich lifestyles, most people there do not wish to be married but follow an independent self-centred living where they feel their careers take precedence over family responsibilities. That selfish act is far from being altruistic and far from being blessed by God.

If they do get married, and do not wish to have children, this inevitably results in a declining population of their kind. It would then be the poorer countries who are blessed with large families to secure their continuing existence and personal securities at old age. They would then take over those who are wealthy with their declining birth rates due to their rich, selfish, self-centred lifestyles.

Hence, we can see it is the poor and the meek who are more blessed than their rich enemies as God promised Abraham  

“I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies” (Genesis 22:17).

The second reason is not just the meek, deprived and underprivileged societies multiplying themselves much faster than all other richer countries like in Europe, China, United States, Russia, but they shall become more adaptable, hardier and a more resilient race or species to poverty and hardship.

This complies to the biological laws of natural selection God gave them to adapt to ensure the “survival of the fittest.” This law applies to all living creatures and life on earth including the human species. It is just part of natural evolution when all life emerged from the oceans 4.5 billion years ago.

In humans for instance, as in China today, she has been lifted out of poverty within eight years according to the BBC quoting Chinese President Xi Jinping as saying his country has achieved the "miracle" of eradicating extreme poverty.

His government President Xi says that over an eight-year period, nearly 100 million people have been lifted out of poverty which he described was a "complete victory" that would "go down in history".

We know that for thousands of years China and the Chinese people have suffered untold hardships from extreme poverty to foreign invasions and internal wars even within the country. Even without the foreign onslaught, nineteenth century China faced enormous difficulties, many of them causing an escalating population for their individual family reassurance, and their overall societal securities.

By the mid-nineteenth century China's population reached 450 million or more, more than three times the level in 1500.

These events resulted in land shortages, famine, and an increasingly impoverished rural population. Heavy taxes, inflation, and greedy local officials further worsened the situation.

The foreign exploitation and mistreatment exploitation worsen the country’s social and economic fabric.

Even without the foreign onslaught, nineteenth century China faced enormous problems, many of them resulting from an escalating population.

Rebellion, lawlessness, and foreign exploitation sustained as plague to China until the Revolution of 1911 ended China's imperial tradition.

That period was the first stage of their political and social evolutionary reforms that changed China and her people toward a totally different approach in handling their problems.

That social-political evolution was for the better in turning China’s internal hardship that gave the Chinese people a blessing-in-disguise.

That growth within less than 35 years from abject poverty and adversity made the Chinese an entirely socio-economic race today. The people became a super race who have adapted to extreme adversity, causing their ‘social genes’ so to speak, to change for the better, being more adaptable, hardy, stronger and more resilient now as a race than previously.

Their previous adversity and challenges have changed them biologically, socially and economically for their continuing survival. Today, the Chinese in China are far wealthier leading them to live a more modern and affluent lifestyle. This seems like a blessing, or is it? Yes, no? Let’s try to answer.

Unfortunately like all rich and developed nations and societies, this social evolution may backfire. They tend to have lesser children today.

For instance, the birth rate per population in modern China today has not risen significantly despite allowing them now to have more than one child in a family even after the abolishment of the one-child policy on 1 January 2016 as compared to their rampant population escalation in the tens of centuries previously due to their biological, economic, political and social adversities   

This socio-economic tendency if persist may cause China to spiral into a population decline in the tens of decades to come due to affluence and current modern lifestyles as seen in most wealthier countries in Europe, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore where population growth are in decline, and probably in Vietnam and in parts of wealthier S.E Asia too such as Brunei.

When any species of life including the human race becomes comfortable with the environment they thrive in, they weaken biologically and socially as they become less adaptable to changes.

Sequentially, they will be replaced by the hardier and more resilient species who were exposed to confrontational and harsher environments. In such an event, they may self-destruct through suicides for failures, unblessed with declining offspring to give way to their more resilient hard-wearing, and durable species.      

In short, it would be the meek and the poorer in greater numbers who would be more blessed to overtake and to replace the rich who are now less adaptable to poverty and hardships. It would then be the poor and the meek who shall inherit this earth as foretold by Jesus.

In sophisticated technical language we describe this in population genetics as the best way to explain trends in genetic composition of populations, including distributions and changes in genotype and phenotype frequency in response to the natural laws of evolution, their adaptability, natural selection, genetic drift, mutation and gene flow for the better or for the worse.

But we shall not go into technical language as this simple explanation and dialogue here is only meant to share with my other gentle lay readers who may also be interested in the interpretation of this verse in response to your question.

I hope this helps to clear the meaning of:

“Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the Earth” (Matthew 5:5)

It may also be helpful to all your learned church leaders, pastors and acclaimed and elite preachers - perhaps?  

All the best!  

jb lim

Will the Moon Fall Down on Earth due to their Mutual Gravitational Attraction as someone asked?

I received this comment and question from someone in my WhatsApp chit-chat group.

It reads as quoted:

“Dear Professor Lim Ju Boo

 

I read with great interest your scholarly detail explanation about the varying distances between the earth and the sun, and whether it affects the temperature of our earth

Also, your very interesting account how far the moon ought to be to cover the entire, half and one quarter of the sky following the false report about the "supermoon" except when seen over the horizon as you explained 

This leads me wondering if the moon can be attracted by the earth's greater gravity until a really super large moon coming close to us one day

Can you tell us if there would be this possible in a simple matter without using much mathematics which would be beyond most of us. I know you did a postdoctoral in astronomy at Oxford but this would be out of reach by most of us. 

Thanking you in advance”

--------------------------------------------

Here’s my reply to him:

Thank you for your question and curiosity. Let me first try to answer your question in a non-mathematical way as you requested before proving it mathematically as you wanted to avoid. Without facts and figures from mathematics you may think I am putting up some unsubstantiated theory or just a claim.

We shall try the descriptive, non-mathematically approach first so that it will be reachable to the general readers.

The non-mathematically analogy is like placing a stone or a projectile representing the moon in a sling with the string representing the gravity between the stone or a projectile, and the hand as the earth holding the sling at the other end.

When he swings the sling round and round it represents the orbit of the Moon around the Earth.

If the sling is swung round and round, the stone is held by the string. It does not fly off, nor does it get attracted or ‘fall down’ towards the hand.

But if he releases the string, the stone flies off at a tangent to the circular path since the string represents the pull of gravity between the earth and the moon.

The tendency for the stone to fly outwards away from the centre is called the centrifugal force, while the inner force held by the string is called the centripetal force to allow an object to follow a curved path. Both these two forces must just balance each other in order for the stone to stay in a circular motion.

In the same way, the Moon is being held tightly by the mutual Earth-Moon gravity as she takes her orbit around the Earth, if not the Moon would fly away like a projectile in a slingshot.

Hope this explains in a very simple non-mathematically way as you wanted.

Now, let’s try to be a bit more technical to prove this concept.      

The gravitational force (F) of attraction between the Earth and the Moon is governed by Isaac Newton’s equation on gravity:

 F = G (m1 x m2) / d2 

Where, G is the gravitational constant (6.6743 ± 0.00015) × 10^−11 m3 kg−1 s−2

m1 is the mass of the Earth (5.972 x ^24 kg)

m 2 is the mass of the Moon (7.34767309 x ^22 kg)

d, is the distance between Earth and Moon (384,400 km = 3.844 x ^8 meters)

In order to calculate the force of attraction (F) between these two heavenly bodies, we apply the above Newton’s equation:

F = G. m1m2 / d2 = 6.674×10^ – 11 x 5.972×10^24 x 7.34767309×10^22 / (3.844×10^8)^2 

= 2.928571469 x 10 ^37 / (3.844×10^8)^2 

= 1.98 x 10 ^20 (two hundred million trillion) Newton

Let us now consider if the outwards centrifugal force of the Moon is the same as the inner gravitational force that alllow the Moon to orbit around the Earth? The centrifugal force basically uses the same formula as for centripetal force.

As the moon goes around Earth every 27.3 days or 2,358,720 seconds (T) at a distance of r (3.85 x 10^8 metres) from Earth, we need to know if both the gravitational and centrifugal forces (F) balance each other?

In order to do that, we need to know the velocity (V) of the Moon around the Earth first. This would be:

V = 2 pi r / T = 1025.567 metres per second

If the moon’s mass is 7.35 x 10^22 kg, the force of the Earth’s gravity exerts on her as it orbits Mother Earth would be:

F = mv2 / r = (7.34767309 x 10 ^22 kg) . (1025.567^ 2) / 3.85 x 10^8 m.

= 7.72819197 x 10 ^28 / 3.85 x 10^8 metres

= 2.0 x 10^ 20 Newton (two hundred million trillion Newton)

where m = mass of the Moon (7.35 x 10^22 kg)

V = Moon’s velocity of orbit (1025.567 metres per second)

r = Earth-Moon distance (3.85 x 10^8 metres)

Hence, we can see the centrifugal or outward force of 2.0 x 10^20 Newton of the Moon trying to escape Earth’s gravity is exactly the same as the inner gravitation force that keeps the Moon in orbit. 

The outward centrifugal force away from the Earth's centre and inner gravitational force  exactly balances each other to bind the Moon in a circular motion around her Mother Earth.

Hence the Moon can never fall down to Earth

I hope we have proved this concept non-mathematically, and have verified it mathematically in answering your question and curiosity

 Quod Erat Demonstrandum (Q.E.D)

 

Having said that, on the contrary, the Moon is actually receding away from Earth due to the tides she exerts on Earth. How this happens is because the Earth's rotation is essentially slowing down by around 6 hours over the past 2740 years. This causes the period of a 24-hour day to increase by about 1.78 milliseconds over the period of a century. This is about 0.0015 seconds per century, or about 0.000015 seconds each year. This means 600 million years ago a day was only 21 hours.

 The slowing down is due to loss of rotational energy from friction caused by tides on the oceans and land mass. The tides are due to the gravitational pull of the Moon on Earth, both over the oceans and land mass. The ocean tides and solid tides over the land, albeit hardly noticeable over land, sweep across them especially over the oceans twice a day.

The tides over the oceans and seas causes the waters to bulge up on opposite sides of the Earth. This causes the Earth to lose rotational energy and angular momentum which currently is about 7.2 x 10 ^33 kg m^2 s^-1

Angular momentum is a closed system that cannot be created or destroyed, but is being conserved. In other words, if the Earth loses angular momentum, the Moon must gain it. In order to conserve angular momentum, it causes the Moon to recede from Earth at a rate of 3.78 cm per year. This drift has been going on for 4.5 billion years

Computer simulations showed that at the time of the formation of the Earth-Moon system 4.5 billion years ago, the Moon was much closer to the Earth. It was then a mere 22,500 km away.

The current average distance between Earth and the Moon is about 384,400 km or 3.844 x^ 8 meters.

During the formation of the Moon, the apparent size of the Moon in the ancient skies was about 8.7 degrees. That was 16.7 times larger than seen today. The current seeming size of the Moon is 0.52 degree

However, the Moon may not continue to drift away from Earth forever. A time shall come, about 50 billion years from now when the Moon’s orbit will reach its farthest. By then, the length of a lunar orbit around the Earth will be about 47 days instead of the current 27.3 days.

By that time, the rotation period of Earth will also be 47 days. This implies that one side of the Earth will forever face the Moon just as one side of the Moon is currently, and permanently facing the Earth. Both Earth and Moon will be gravitationally locked to face each other on one side.

In such an event when the Earth and Moon are locked to face each other on only one side, they will no longer have any tidal effects on each other, and the Moon will also stop drifting away.

But by then, human civilization will no longer exists, and probably all life on Earth will be extinct

The Sun itself will not even last that long. It has only about 5 billion  more years to go before it uses up its hydrogen fuel by fusing about 564 million tons hydrogen per second into 559.7 million tons of helium, losing a mass of about 4.3 million tons per second. The remaining 4 million tons is converted into energy

When the Sun uses up her fuel, she will bloat up into a red giant to engulf Mercury, Venus, Earth and possibly beyond  

I think I have answered and explained more than requested. We need to stop here lest we are tempted to write another chapter on astronomy.

Thank you for reading

jb lim

The Mystery of The Star in the East

I am very curious exactly what that bright “star” the wise men (magi / astrologers) actually saw. The book of Matthew is only Gospel in the Bible this mysterious star was described

For many decades many theories have been forwarded by astronomers to solve the appearance of the Star of Bethlehem over Judea

 Astronomers have even used computers to calculate back the dates of its appearance.

 Most of the theories believed by astronomers are based on apparent planetary alignment of bright planets such as a triple conjunction of Venus, Jupiter and Mars.

In astronomy a conjunction occurs when any two or more astronomical objects such as planets, stars or any heavenly bodies appear to come close together in the sky, as seen from Earth. They are apparently optically-fused together as seen from line-of-sight.

Sometimes bright stars like Rigel in Orion may have conjunctions with bright planets like Venus and Jupiter as part of multiple conjunctions. We shall go into that later.

There were theories that the Star of Bethlehem was actually the conjunction of various planets making them look unusually bright.  They even gave various dates of around the 3 B.C. to 4 B.C. when King Herod and was around when triple conjunctions occurred.

They were able to demonstrate triple or multiple conjunctions by calculating backwards into time when Jesus was born, and even using planetariums projectors to play back the ancient skies of Babylonia when the "Star of Bethlehem" was seen by the magi (wise men / astrologers) described in the Book of Matthew

The story of Jesus' birth in the manger is found only in Luke 1:26–27, while the Star in the East was recorded only in the Gospel of Matthew. Nowhere else except Luke and Mathew recorded the account of nativity 

The date December 25 arbitrarily given for the date of Jesus birth was chosen by the early Christians merely to compete with the Mithra festival on that day to take advantage of the general jubilation at the time of the winter solstice

(Mithraism is the worship of Mithra, the Iranian god of the sun, justice, contract, and war in pre-Zoroastrian Iran. Known as Mithras in the Roman Empire during the 2nd and 3rd centuries this deity was honoured as the patron of loyalty to the emperor).

Both Mathew and Luke place the birth of Jesus during the time of Herod, and that the monarch died in 4 BC.

It would seem Jesus could not have been born later than 4 BC and so could not have been less than two years old at the time of the second and more impressive combination.

Let me quote what was predicted about the birth of Jesus even from the beginning in Genesis.

“Judah is a lion's whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be”

(Genesis 49: 9-10).

It so happens that one of the constellations of the Zodiac is Leo, the Lion.

It would be easy for the astrologers to suppose that Leo represents Judah and the House of David since David was descended from Judah, and Jesus was associated with both.

Since "a lawgiver from between his (lion) feet, until Shiloh come" in the constellation Leo has a brightest star called Regulus which is the Latin for "little king".  This seems to refer to Jesus as a very bright star

It so happens in 3 BC and in 2 BC there was a double conjunction between two brightest planets - Venus and Jupiter in the constellation Leo with Regulus sandwiched between with a separation of just 3 degrees on either side from Regulus. Furthermore, it was seen in the eastern horizon over Judea

How does that sound? More than impressive I think as a single light seen by the wise men in the East. Could that be the date Jesus was born as already foretold in Genesis 49: 9-10?

But both these two astronomical events took place in summer, far from the winter of 25 December.

However, according to Sinnott, there were no fewer than two hundred when two brightest planets grouped together between 12 BC and AD 7, and during the same period there were twenty occasions when more than two planets came together

If Sinnott was right, I don’t think the wise men would be deceived by such "unusual events" because it would average out with one bright planetary conjunction once a month.

Then again two brightest planets Venus and Jupiter apparently (optically) came close together in the predawn skies over Judea on August 12, 3 BC, and they were separated by only twelve minutes of an arc which is only two-fifth the diameter of the Moon

 King Herod Magnus was born on July 3 BC and died in March or April, 4 BC in Jericho, Judaea. So, the dates seemed very close, the birth of Christ and the reign of King Herod

Hence, we can speculate if that was about the time Jesus was born?

Another even more "bright star" event occurred after sunset on June 17, 2 BC when Venus and Jupiter came even closer together, separated by only three minutes of an arc which is just 10 % of a full Moon. At that angle of separation, it would just be one point of light That was even more impressive to the wise men I suppose?

Seen from Babylonia, both planets would rise from the East with their closest approach around 10 PM Babylonian time as they sank over the western horizon towards the direction of Judea and Bethelhelm. That was even more impressive 

Could that be the Star from the East they followed? My analysis and feeling are probably not, and I shall explain this

In those days, over the plains of Judea, transportation was exceedingly slow by foot, camels or by ass. If the magi had seen the Star in the East and flowed it across the vast desert regions of Judea towards the town of Bethlehem their journey could have taken days, if not weeks or months. The rising and setting of all stars, planets, and even the Sun and Moon is in tandem with the speed of the Earth's rotation by a difference of just 4 minutes earlier each day due to the revolution of the Earth around the Sun.

This means even if the wise men could not catch up with the speed of rotation of Earth and the motions of the heavenly bodies, the stars could rise again the next night in the East and set again in the West about 12 hours later for them to follow each night.

But unfortunately, this wasn't the case.

It clearly states "the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came and stood over where the young Child was" (Matthew 2:9).

It looks to me like the star constantly waited for them in front and led them all the way and probably suddenly stopped without setting. It probably disappeared after that after they had arrived in Bethlehem? 

This is extremely unusual since no heavenly body behaves this way. It must be something else hovering in the Babylonian skies for many days or weeks for the wise men to follow.

It is unclear exactly how long after Jesus' birth the magi arrived. Traditionally they were seen to arrive at most a few days after the birth of Jesus as the Gospel of Luke has Jesus leaving for Jerusalem and by that time, he was forty days old from whence he went to Nazareth.

This left a fairly brief window of time for the magi to visit him in Jerusalem, especially considering they needed time to travel from the east via Jerusalem. In this verse Matthew refers to Jesus as a child rather than an infant, perhaps indicating that he was older. Today most scholars feel that Matthew probably meant that Jesus was several months old at the time the magi visited (4)

At least this was their theory which influenced me too for many years.  But not now, this Christmas today (25 December, 2109) I think differently.

I have to disagree with what astronomers have hypothesized for ages.

I now use my own independent analysis by carefully studying the biblical verses below:

"Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and come to worship him (Matthew 2:1-2).

“Then Herod, when he had secretly called the wise men, determined from them what time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem and spoke, Go and search carefully for the young Child, and when you have found Him, bring back word to me, that I may come and worship Him also. When they heard the king, they departed; and behold, the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came and stood over where the young Child was (Matthew 2:7-11)

In verse 7 it says, Then Herod had a secret meeting with the wise men and learned from them the exact time they first saw the star.

First of all, those wise men were astrologers who knew the stars and their positions well (the Bible did NOT say “3” wise men. It merely stated “wise me” without the word “three” there). 

They would already know when various stars and planets would appear and how long they would be seen in their respective positions. They were NOT ordinary people. They were magi, and astrologers. The Bible describes them as wise men, people with knowledge and wisdom.

They would already know when various planets would slowly drift into one spot (conjunction) as a “bright star”

 But that night when Jesus was born, they saw something different. They saw some very unusual light in the sky. They were not stupid people. They were Magi, wise men  

So, I asked myself what that star was, and why was it very unusual for it to appear in the sky over Judea?

In verse 7, it says Herod inquired from them what time (”exact time”) they saw the star. Why exact time?

If it was a triple conjunction as modern astronomers believe, they would already be there over many days before they slowly come together

It appears to me the unusual star appeared suddenly and precisely at an exact time which Herod wanted to know.

This kind of phenomenon happening at a precise spot (in the East) and at an exact time is not known in astronomy. Almost all astronomical events are predictable long before they happen.

This gives me the impression it was neither any kind of sudden planetary alignment, nor a comet, nor even a supernova at that time.

There was also no record of any supernova during the time of King Herod. Even if there was, we would be able to see its nebulous remnants even today as in Crab Nebula.   So, it must be something else

Then in Matthew 2:9 it says:

“When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was”.

It is very clear to me the star suddenly appeared again after they saw King Herod.

How can such an occurrence be possible, appearing, disappearing, and appearing again?

Not that I know such events in astronomy.  Neither do I know of any star or planet where it went before men, and suddenly stopped where a child was born?  This is completely absurd to me. Neither stars nor planets, even though planets were once called “wandering stars” go before humans, and allow them to follow them, and then suddenly stop at one specific spot where a child (Jesus) was born.

This is completely bizarre to me. This occurrence can only be possible outside our understanding in astronomy.

It has to be completely something else, a divine occurrence or a miracle. This is the only possibility

Furthermore, if it was a triple conjunction as most astronomers think, how could they remain apparently in one spot like a bright star for so long? Their constant motions around the Sun would have separated them within days

I believe the magi must have followed the “star” for many, many days or weeks on foot or by camel over the plains of Judea towards Bethlehem where Jesus was

Over those long periods of travel by foot or by camels, any double or triple conjunction of bright planets like Venus, Mars and Jupiter would have long separated by the time they arrived in Bethlehem.

Their separation would have confused them as to which “star” to follow then.  But they did not. They kept following only that “star”

Furthermore, no planet as wandering stars would stay in one spot where any child was born. It has to be something else we do not know.

Some non-astronomers say it was a UFO, others claimed it was a space ship that brought Jesus to Earth? 

As far as I am concerned, I do not know what it was except ONE thing which was very clear to me.

“the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came and stood over where the young Child was” (Matthew 2:9)

That single verse tells me how patient that star (emblem of God) was.  It was so very, very patient to move very, very slowly to allow those wise men to keep pace with it while they travelled on the ground by foot or by camels

Not just that alone.  It says, it went ahead of them… to lead them slowly and patiently. This is truly the hallmark of God who is forever so patient with us all to give us time to think over His presence by leading us ahead so slowly, gently, brightly and forever so patiently. Yet we don’t even realize His enduring patience with us.

Furthermore, if it was some kind of UFO or space that came from another world to Earth, it could easily cut across dimensions, time and space at the speed of light, and left those wise men travelling over the desert at snail speed. But it didn’t.

It patiently led them probably over days, weeks or months with its bright light hovering in the sky… It went before them very, very slowly till they came to the spot where Jesus was humbly born in a manger.

Isn’t that beautiful?  Doesn’t that speak to us about patience and humility, the seal of an Eternal God?

The mystery of the Star of Bethlehem teaches me a lot. I have learnt tremendously by pondering over the verses and the event that happened over 2,000 years ago

My thinking is so unlike astronomers who merely think it was just a triple conjunction of bright planets which I fiercely object to.

 I have my own training and thoughts in astronomy at which He pre-planned for me.  I did not know this earlier when I constantly prayed to Him for years for wisdom and knowledge to understand His wondrous works of art and engineering. He finally led me to the Promised Land of Learning at Oxford in 2018

It was He who finally and slowly lead me there to study astronomy to glorify Him for the Creation of His Universe, and earlier to Cambridge University to understand Evolution and the Mystery of Life, both which are the marvellous work of an Intelligent Designer 

The Star of Bethlehem is a divine revelation to me. It showed me how God led those magi with wisdom and knowledge to Jesus. I too would like to be like them to be led by Him 

This is truly a beautiful a story of a Star declaring birth of Jesus Christ in all its glory  

An Informal Student Discussion on the Big Bang Theory Part 1 at Oxford

An informal student discussion on the Big Bang (Part I)

 lim ju boo 

Student 

University of Oxford

2018 

Wow! It was quite a thesis after reading through all the sections under Unit 2 all about matter and antimatter, the scenarios during the first few seconds after the Big Bang with three chapters on the expanding Universe, the work of Edwin Hubble, in 1927 and his observation on the red-shifts in the spectra in galaxies suggesting an expansion of the Universe and the how they are receding from each other, faster and faster the greater the distance, and how Hubble formulated his Hubble’s Law based on red-shifts and velocities.

What is even mind-boggling to me is the theory  that states that for every ten billion particles of antimatter, there were ten billion and one of matter and that tiny balance of matter is what that  fills up the Universe with myriads of galaxies and clusters of galaxies and mega-galaxies we see today.

If that was so, then in the early stages of the Big Bang before matter and antimatter annihilate each other to give off gamma radiation, I reckon in the first one billionth of a second after the Big Bang, the mass of an early Universe must have been twice than what it is today considering there was also antimatter then during or soon after the birth pangs   

If that is also so, then another question I need to ask is, if matter and antimatter collide and give off radiation, then what happened to all the gamma radiation today if scientists say they failed to detect them since neither matter nor energy can be created nor destroyed except changed from one form to another such as matter into energy as given by Einstein famous equation E = mc2, or from one form of energy to the other

Can I postulate if the theory is correct, then some of the energy of matter and antimatter annihilation becomes part of the background microwave radiation as heat which is just about 3 Kelvin above absolute zero which suggest evidence of not just the Big Bang, but part of this matter-antimatter annihilation???

I do not know.  It is just my thinking after reading the sections in Unit 2 It is just my personal after thought.

Another thought that troubles me is, what actually caused the Big Bang. What existed before the Bang?  Was there a latent Universe that existed before the Big Bang? Did time exist before the event? Was the entire Universe together with time tightly compacted inside a very massive singularity where time, space, matter and energy were just one before the Bang?  If it was, then what causes the entire massive singularity to explode?

If there was a massive explosion, my line of reasoning is that, there must be another force far, far, far greater than an unborn Universe to tear it apart into smithereens giving off a lot of heat as it spreads across an empty space (or were there “space” then?) to form the elements (nucleosynthesis) as the expanding Universe cooled.

Many years ago I dreamt a dream 3 times over where I was brought by God to the edge of the Universe

There I saw another Universe -   a negative one revolving very slowly in the opposite direction. There was a river linking both the Universes where spent energy from our positive Universe flowed through this river of energy to the other negative Universe to be recharged, and once fully charged, another opposite river on the other side flows back into ours  dimension to renew ours. What I saw was two huge caldrons with molten matter flowing in opposition directions with two rivers linking them

It was just a dream of course, but the uncanny thing about this was, the same dream was repeated three times over that hardly occurs in dreams.

I don’t know, the whole Universe is such a mystery to me. Cosmology is very interesting, but extremely mind-boggling to my feeble-mind.

This is just to share my own thoughts with the rest with my student colleagues at Oxford

My line of thinking now is

Why matter matters

2.3 An expanding Universe I

2.4 An expanding Universe II

2.5 An expanding Universe III

2.6 The formation of the elements

2.7 The cosmic microwave background

Evidence of Big Bang

 

Brief Informal Student Forum (Part II)

lim ju boo 

University of Oxford

2018

What evidence is there for the Big Bang?

In cosmology there are two schools of thoughts on the origin of the Universe

The first one has only a minority of support and is based on a steady state model in that the Universe is always there, and the same whereby the density of matter in an expanding universe remains unchanged due to the continuous creation of matter.

However we now have more empirical evidence in favour of the Big Bang theory. Three major evidences are:  

1.        Red-shifts Spectra:

Edward Hubble in 1927 was able to determine the distances of Cepheid variables by observing their luminosities varying with their periodicities; the more luminous the Cepheid, the slower the variations, and by using the fact that the intensity of light varies inversely as the square of its distance, he was able to establish their distances

Later he was able to demonstrate even further the distances to the galaxies by observing their spectra.  He showed the galaxies were actually receding from each other with no central point in the inflation. He observed their spectra were all red-shifted with increasing velocities with increasing distances.

This was the first clue that the Universe is actually expanding away towards a finite edge (Observable Universe) - the further away the galaxies, the faster the velocity of recession.

The rate of expansion was determined at a rate of about 21.5 km/s, small though, but over time of 13.7 billion years as the age of the Universe this is significant in terms of the distance it has expanded. This expansion can only be the result of a Big Bang.

2.        Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB):

Perhaps the best evidence that the Universe started off with a Big Bang from a super-dense singularity is the presence of an almost uniformly distributed CMB with regions of small variations here and there in the temperature spectrum.

The CMB is manifested as an afterglow which is the heat remnant of a Big Bang.  The CMB afterglow is just 2.7 Kelvin above absolute zero, and seems brightest at wavelength around 2 mm

The CMB radiation discovered in 1964 provided the crucial evidence of a Big Bang model. The universe in the mini seconds after the Big Bang was hot, dense, and opaque plasma

Georges Lemaitre first noted in 1927 that an expanding universe could be traced back in time to have originated from a single point on which scientists have built a cosmic expansion based on his idea.

3.       Nucleosynthesis of Elements:

Tllar nucleosynthesis by neutron capture.

Thhe Sun and stars convert the most abundant element in the Universe - hydrogen, into helium through fusion energy. As energy is released, the higher ratio of hydrogen to helium is being shifted towards helium.   

In the main sequence stars other elements heavier than iron are also being formed through stee abundance of other elements other than hydrogen and helium seem to suggest the cooling effect after a Big Bang when  particles like protons, neutrons and electrons can come together to form elements

(505 words)