Plants Without Gravity Or Electromagnetism?

-- Click To Expand/Collapse Bible Verses -- Gen ch1:v11-13
Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

In prior verses of the account's third day, we saw God state that the creation was "good". We may also deduce that the creation of matter indicates that the atomic nucleus was complete and the weak (or electroweak) and strong nuclear forces were created in order to hold the nuclei together. We must also assume that electrostatic forces were also present (and therefore Van der Waals forces) in holding the electrons in orbits about the atoms (and molecules about each other). However, the theory of maxwell that states that accelerating charges emit electromagnetic waves (light) does not hold for atomically bound charges on a quantum scale. (As atoms do not continually emit light.)

However, if electromagnetism is not created yet, nor gravity - how may we have God placing a fossil record of plant life and consequent real life in the "present" upon the earth, (contingent upon it's apparent past)?

Firstly, plants absorb water through osmosis and make energy through photosynthesis which requires sunlight. However, God does not define plant life as "life" in the sense that he does the moving "creatures" He creates later.

God makes the earth itself bring forth (plants), rather than Himself: and whatever survives on the morning of the third day, if it be "lively" due to its apparent past only, if it were then to appear in the present in the morning, we see God uses plants in this verse to show that the mechanism of a fossil record may bring into being plants in the present, contingent matter which shares many characteristics of life but which to Him is completely dispensible.

We also now have some sense that this is one day in time, the very last moments of which were used to create plant life, as a demonstration that fossils may be a contingent basis for the existence of life, rather than the fossils actually existing once as life also. (We recall the Earth itself brings forth these plants (as opposed to purely ex-nihilo creation), whose "seed is in itself", (a record of many generations) and brings into the present the same plant "life" as a result - and which continues in the similar vain as its intent,.. not suddenly mutating or exploding into goop.

The text would indicate that the fossil record of plants is added, and they are made to appear in the present: so that they are not given the same manner of creation as God does moving creatures. They are not biblically defined as life after a creation of the same sort, and their present existence is merely a consequence of God not only providing them as food but also in God's wisdom, they were placed to show that a form of lively vegetation could exist merely as consequent from the apparent past. (In order to provide a staging for its appearance within the present as contingent upon an un-instantiated record).

Again, we have reached a similar state - the creation of contingent life-like organisms, God saw it was good, it survives on its own.

We have to account for a lack of gravity and electromagnetism, the addition of which the account relates in the acts of the fourth day. Were we to create life without Gravity or EM we would have to watch it die in agony - yet God creates plants that are expendable in this sense: God does not define plants as life in the bible. We also have had to interpret a rather limited lexicon of classical hebrew, a very small language with only a few hundred root forms, and many concepts would be enough to leave a humble man like Moses stuck to explain it unless God had given Him a correct account that more importantly, would be preserved even until today!

We may assume that even if there were no forces of electromagnetism and gravity, we could at least allow ourselves magnetism as well as the electrostatic forces. As yet though we leave the establishment of electromagnetic waves and the visible spectrum to the fourth day.

Would plants appearing "real" as simply following from an apparent past be enough to test the stability of many biological forms without enabling chemical reactions? (changes in molecular state require energy levels of electrons in atoms to shift, they then release EM waves.) Is all chemistry static without allowing any emission of EM waves? I could assume so,.. but I rather consider that if it could be shown that DNA etc. was stable under such conditions - (very difficult with different laws of physics) then we should thank God for His staging the creation of life with plants before creating the moving creatures.

What of gravity? - The curvature of spacetime (gravity) due to mass is important also. Atomic bonds also alter the observed mass of a molecule with some latent energy related by the equation E=mc^2, a relativistic relation. The atomic release of a photon has some atomic reaction against the momentum of the EM quanta released; momentum is conserved. Yet the conservation of momentum is intrinsic to the equivalence principle of relativity: We must assume that inertial mass is related to gravitational mass. (It is a conundrum why these are so very close, almost or negligibly equal.) It makes sense at this stage to consider that with no EM photon emmissions from chemical action, there is technically no requirement as yet in creation for inertial, or thence gravitational mass. (If these be equal or directly related to each other.)

Without this inertial mass we have another astounding fact... accelerating charges indeed emit light, EM waves. If electrons (which are negatively charged particles) are bound to positive atomic nuclei in an "orbit", we see that the electron was not created with inertial mass in the sense of a classical "orbit". (With constant acceleration on its inertial mass due to centripetal force, as of electrostatic attraction) I.e. Not with any need also for inertial, (hence gravitational) mass at this stage of creation, but with only the principle of conservation of (angular) momentum to bind it to the atomic nucleus. This lack of inertial acceleration separates the atomic cloud of electrons about the nucleus from the consequences of classical atomic theory and gives us the reality of the quantum model.

It is incredible then that the creation account can be deduced to be more in line with the Neils-Bohr and later models of the atom rather than the one of Rutherford. The creation of stable matter without permitting chemical or inertial reactions amongst atoms exists without the requirement for inertial and gravitational mass. Atoms could conceivably exist as they do today without electrons having any inertial mass -so there is no need for the charges to continually emit light, as they are not classically in "orbit" as we would understand it. On an atomic scale, there is no real basis for throwing out the bible's creation account for its lack of EM and gravity at this stage in the text.

One could ask whether the plants actually died if they were deprived of these forces for only half a day,.. if these acts of creation are in truth sequential 24 hour periods then we may declare the plants to possibly be very ill after,.. but if they are not 24 hours,.. why do we need the plants to wait for EM waves for more than a minute or two? The reason God created them without EM and gravity was to make them "appear" from the mechanism of an "apparent" past - He could test that the universe would be able to continue existentially and to be stable chemically without His continual presence to "motivate" it. Rather, without gravity and EM, not only would chemistry be "on hold on the molecular scale" but also chemical "breakdown" may have been on hold also.

Without EM, we may assume the energy levels in atomic nuclei could not shift. In that case there would be no chemical reactions, even amongst elements in atomic form. In testing whether the past could "stand under" or "buttress" the present by testing this organic chemistry, We are shown that God indeed took appropriate care, nothing had need to suffer in the creation account.

Anyway,.. suffer the little lettuce aside, we move on.

Continue To Next Page

Return To Section Start

Return To Previous Page