The Amazing Expanding Earth!?
Mar 9th, 2007 by Matt
In an attempt to not completely ignore my “Strange Tales of Mystery and Intrigue” catagory, I bring you this post.
I have heard of this theroy a while back and had quickly written it off, but This video really makes for a compelling argument. (not to mention some really beautiful animation.) And it also brings up the very true and valid point that modern science refueses to look at alternitive theories that may cause them to re-think years of scientific study.
I do have to ask one question though… Where did all the water come from?
Check this video out to see how the same theroy may explain some of the land formation on the moon.
-Matt
Fascinating…I’ve never heard such a theory. Thanks for the interesting tidbit on a Sunday morning, Matt!
maybe the water came from indside the earth… since we really dont know for sure whats there. Also hydrogen fuel cells have an interesting byproduct, water and heat. Maybe the earth is one big Feul cell.
Look at Neal Adams page http://www.nealadams.com/morescience.html it is truly amazing.
Did this submit.
Hi,
–I think that the visual evidence that all the rocky terrestrial moons and planets in our solar system have tectonic splits and have expanded is unequivocal (especially when viewed with animations such as by Neal Adams). Neal’s Europa video shows how the opposite sides of tectonic splits match as good as any ballistics match. As a prior engineer and now radiologist, I also know that when you pull bone or concrete or rock apart, it breaks or fails at a perpendicular angle to the forces of traction (explaining the same completely vertical 5 to 6 mile drop around every continental shelf on earth).
–Without a clear explanation of why this is happening, the imagination can come up with a lot of frightening possibilities (such as the earth blowing up like Superman’s home planet Krypton). I saw one post in which the response was that “this proves that we are all going to die in fire”. This vacuum of an explanation has also led others to shun the topic completely (does not fit into their accepted truths and they don’t want to look stupid because they can’t explain it). It has led others to suggest that all science thus far is a crock of shit and needs to be reinvented from the ground up in light of this new evidence (even suggesting that the solar wind interacting with the earth’s magnetic field causes rocks or matter to grow out of thin air in space and in the cores of the planets and moons).
–I hereby propose the following rather simple and in retrospect intuitively obvious explanation for all the observed data, and it does not involve any new undiscovered physics and also makes it obvious that the earth is not going to blow up.
1. The solar system began as a large collection of gas and debris that started to collapse due to gravity and form a large rotating disc of gas (due to conservation of angular momentum) with the central bulge in the center developing into our sun.
2. When the gas pressure in the core of the center of this system built up to 10 million degrees, the sun had fusion ignition and the subsequent blasting of the solar wind and solar storms began.
3. Initially, all the planets where made out the same stuff as the sun (mostly hydrogen and helium) and looked about the same (all gas giants like Jupiter). But then the guys in the front row seats (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, and the moons of Jupiter to a lesser extent) had their atmospheres blasted and eroded away by the solar wind. This reduced once proud gas giants to only their tiny inner rocky cores (with heavier metal cores inside them). Jupiter has an inner rocky core and a nickel-iron core deep inside there somewhere too but it was a lot farther away from the sun’s blast (back in the nose-bleed section like the other surviving gas giants Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune).
4. When the inner planets started, their inner cores were forged under tera tons of pressure. Blowing away most of their atmosphere (and mass) then removed much of that pressure from above. These residual cores then expanded due to simple decompression. The outer crusty shell of these cores would have to split and crack to allow this expansion (like a kernel of popcorn or like the shirts on the Incredible Hulk when he got pissed). Grap a sheet of typing paper right now and compress it with your hands into as small of a ball as possible, then put this wad of paper on your desk all by itself. It expands slowly for a while from being release from the external pressure. The inner planets and moons are however more like a popcorn kernel with a shell or an egg with a shell. When you heat popcorn does it start expanding immediately? No, the pressure has to build up enough to eventually cause mechanical failure of the shell. The same thing happens when you over-boil an egg, the shell eventually cracks and egg white oozes out and solidifies (just like the mid ocean trenches). The model of a kernel of popcorn might also serve as a model for how the rate of expansion would change over time:
–a. First, the heat is turned on, but nothing seems to be happening despite steadily increasing pressures inside the kernal (most of the atmosphere of a gas giant is being blown away but the little rocky kernel in the center looks unchanged).
–b. Eventually, some time later, the shell eventually fails allowing expansion of the popcorn. One might hence expect a considerable delay between the loss of most of the atmosphere and the first cracks in this initially very thick crust for the same reason.
–c. Once the shell fails, the expansion would be expected to initially be fairly rapid but then slowing down over time (like a spring-powered toy or like the crumpled piece of paper on your desk). The current rate of expansion as measured by GPS and ranging on the earth is measurable but extemely small now (hopefully suggesting that the earth might be nearly done popping).
5. This mechanism would explain why all the rocky planets and rocky moons in our solar system have these tectonic splits in their crusts with evidence of having smaller diameters in the past (with probably some residual slow expansion still occurring on some). It also explains why the inner planets are rocky and have this photographic evidence of expansion (front row seats to the sun’s show), and also explains how the guys in the nose-bleed upper bleachers (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, & Neptune) escaped being blasted down to their underwear. No new mysterious physics need be invented. We are not going to blow up.
I have not found my suggested mechanism for earth expansion on any of the expanding earth sites that I have visited thus far. I believe that it is the most rational and intuitively obvious explanation of the observed data thus far. My main goal here is to offer a logical explanation for this phenomenon and to deflate any “end of the world” talk.
Respectfully submitted,
Dean Easton MD, Chairman Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Valley Hospital Med Center, Las Vegas, NV
B.S. Engineering (Ohio State University, summa cum laude, 1977) & former Major, USAF
Amateur astronomer & astrophotographer (since 1961) (I went into medicine so that I could afford better telescopes).
Where did the water come from?
The bible states, that the earth was initially totally covered by water and all things living were in the water – then the land appeared. So, if the amount of water is constant, and we inflate the earth, the water depth decreases and the high spots that were under water surface. If this is so, then we would find fossils of sea life up in mountain ridges, possible lots of them, since this would have been the shallows in a water-covered world.
What do you think?
This theory is realy the answer to our universe and the origin of everything. Where did the Moons come from? What is the future of our planets?
Have a look at my website where I tried to explain it.
http://www.geocities.com/chrismoolman/index.html
Not the best of sites but but I hope it helps you to understand why.
I understand that to keep any field of research dynamic, we need the odd maverick with revolutionary ideas. But just because Hollywood tells us that the lone outsider will always upset the status quo by seeing the forest for the trees (too much metaphor mixing?), does not make it true. Heck, Plate Tectonics was revolutionary and took decades to become accepted (my mother did Uni in the late 60s and PT was only just starting to be taught – so it’s really less than 40 years since becoming mainstream), doesn’t that make it a maverick?
Anyway, Plate Tectonics is a true scientific theory: it fits ALL observations, and makes predictions. There is the same lack of ‘problems’ with PT as the creationists insist there is with the theory of evolution.
Not a single mechanism used to explain the expansion holds up to scrutiny, but that doesn’t necessarily void the hypothesis. However, there are a lot of features that expansion cannot explain satisfactorily, such as mountain-building (especially the younger episodes); location of major volcanism and the chemistries of various lavas; evidence (fossils, correlating rock sequences, palaeomagnetism) of supercontinent cycles; I could go on.
@Dean: comparing the cohesive properties of crustal rocks with that of corn or eggs is unrealistic. Plus, the amount of expansion needed would not be achieved by a gas athmosphere. not to mention other problems.
As for Neal Adams, his ‘obvious’ explanations can be shot down easily by a first year geology student. It’s clear he hasn’t bothered actually understanding (or even reading) current theories.