The Earth is Growing?!

[#juan]

While I'm suspicious of the idea, a growing Earth doesn't sound that hard to conceptualize to me. IF the Earth grows, perhaps it's not the mass that is changing but rather its volume and density. Let's say the core of the Earth became less dense for some reason, couldn't the Earth expand without necessarily gaining mass?

I suppose it could but I don't think it has to. Meteorites have been raining down on the planet for four billion years and have provided something like 3 times ten to the fifteenth tons of mass. Sounds like a big number but it is over a very long time. A growing Earth would be a very slow process.

 

[#juan]

While I'm suspicious of the idea, a growing Earth doesn't sound that hard to conceptualize to me. IF the Earth grows, perhaps it's not the mass that is changing but rather its volume and density. Let's say the core of the Earth became less dense for some reason, couldn't the Earth expand without necessarily gaining mass?

I suppose it could but I don't think it has to. Meteorites have been raining down on the planet for four billion years and have provided something like 3 times ten to the sixteenth tons of mass. Sounds like a big number but it is over a very long time. A growing Earth would be a very slow process.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

Space itself is expanding, not mass within it. Everything is expanding at the same rate and it wouldn't result in the Earth blowing up like a balloon as in this video.

The processes of plate techtonics are well understood with regions of plate spreading as seen at the mid-ocean ridges and subduction zones usually along the continental boundaries where the denser ocean plates dive under the less dense continental plates. Mountain ranges like the Himalayas and Rockies are caused by this process and would not occure if the Earth was expanding. This theory also doesn't take into account that continents have drifted independently from what they would have done if it was merely a case of the Earth expanding like a balloon.

This is good for a laugh, not anything more.

 

[lone wolf]

Theory's cool ... but more than double the volume with little increase in mass? Doesn't fit as well as those continents....

Wolf

 

[Canucklehead]

Ah hell, just for fun...

The Earth is in the galaxy, the galaxy is essentially a massive vacuum bag as a whole... we have all seen back in grade 8 science class what happens to objects in a vacuum. This could just be a full-scale example of the puffed up balloon/marshmallow or wotever was used in your particular class. No hard evidence but I'll get back to ya in another 8 billion years with some results

 

[Pangloss]

I question the idea that anyone who studies theories outside the current paradigm should be classified a wingnut, idiot, bonehead, etc.

Wrong, perhaps. Missing vast tracts of information to support a theory, fine. But, 'nutjobs' have been responsible for some of our greatest scientific advances. It's sad to think that all off the wall theories would need to be kept secret, hidden, locked away so as to keep the men who posed them from coming to ridicule or harm.

And admittedly, making a video which presents it as fact, rather than explaining why it's a theory is a bit boneheaded, but, that's typical human ego for you.

Oh, no, there is such a thing as wingnut research, idiot science and loonie hypothesis. The ideas they put forth, one falsified, need to be put to sleep as mercilessly as possible. If the person or group persists in pushing their falsified idea, then they deserve ridicule equal to what their idea got.

Growing Earth contradicts the conservation of matter. Get around that, and I will take back all my criticism.

Pangloss

 

[MrGamma]

Growing Earth contradicts the conservation of matter. Get around that, and I will take back all my criticism.
Pangloss

Are you sure... I just saw a paper written by Steven Hawkings which suggest that the extreme gravity of a black hole is responsible for the production of particles...

The entire universe is composed of suns which are converting mass into energy with nuclear explosion... ( something we only replicated in the 40's )

There are very common sense laws of physics which state for each action there must be and equal and opposite reaction... So... if the universe is continually producing Energy from Mass... Would it not make sense if it were also continually producing Mass from Energy?

Could the gravitational forces of the Earth be generating particle mass just like a black hole does but on a smaller scale?

Perhaps the tidal force of the moon is responsible for it? Two gravitational forces locked together cause some sort of particle production?

 

[MissAnnika]

some people will say anything to make money. i cant even imagine how this is possible, but i'm sure they came up with some science behind it that few people understand.
if i want to make money mayb i should make a claim as well
new headline "the earth has a second moon!!" or something like that

 

[MissAnnika]

actually i just reminded myself if i want to make money then all i have to do is collect whale vomit. seriously! it's used as an ingredient to make many expensive perfumes. so i guess in the winter time when the humpback whales come to hawaii to give birth, i'll b hangin around the coast. its worth 65 bux an ounce

 

[scratch]

some people will say anything to make money. i cant even imagine how this is possible, but i'm sure they came up with some science behind it that few people understand.
if i want to make money mayb i should make a claim as well
new headline "the earth has a second moon!!" or something like that

Niki,

Believe nothing of what you read, half of what you hear and all that you see.

s.

 

[typingrandomstuff]

Oh. Sure. Another good rumor to talk about.

 

[talloola]

If the earth seems bigger sometimes, everyone' just' needs to cut their lawns.;-)

 

[MissAnnika]

if you cut ur lawn and find a car, u just might have a redneck yard!

 

[Trex]

actually i just reminded myself if i want to make money then all i have to do is collect whale vomit. seriously! it's used as an ingredient to make many expensive perfumes. so i guess in the winter time when the humpback whales come to hawaii to give birth, i'll b hangin around the coast. its worth 65 bux an ounce

Its called ambergris and it is used in perfume making and I think it may come out of the other end of the whale.
After it bob's about at sea for a while it's worth big bucks, more than $65 a zee for the good stuff.
Whalers used to dig around in the whales looking for it.
Spermaceti was the other stuff the whalers were after, used as a fine lubricant.

Thank heavens these substances can be replaced artificially and the whales left in peace.

Note to the Japanese about that one .

 

[scratch]

Its called ambergris and it is used in perfume making and I think it may come out of the other end of the whale.
After it bob's about at sea for a while it's worth big bucks, more than $65 a zee for the good stuff.
Whalers used to dig around in the whales looking for it.
Spermaceti was the other stuff the whalers were after, used as a fine lubricant.

Thank heavens these substances can be replaced artificially and the whales left in peace.

Note to the Japanese about that one .

Note the Japanese all you want. They have the same mentality as the Israelis.

 

[MrGamma]

Well... I certainly can;t even begin to argue the physics... I just don't have the skills... but I did find really compelling evidence which explains the formation of the Hawaii Islands and Iceland and bascially every Island arc system.

If you look at these Volcanic Arcs on the map they are always curved... you will see a trench along the convex side and the volcanoes along the concave. Sometimes the trench is upto 10km deep with an steep horizontal incline. I have found no exceptions... I'm not sure if many Geologists are even aware of this phenominon but one confirmed my observations.

The Current Accepted theory is that a plate is sliding, curving and subducting underneath the plate. As the plate continues to sub-duct under the earth it reaches a hotter part of the Earth's Mantle at which point it melts and the chemical reaction causes eruptions on the surface.

This is not what's happening. Why should a trench curve under before it meets the plate instead of colliding into the beach and sheering off? Why should horizontal movement cause water displacement which causes a Tsunami? Why does it curve down for miles before sliding under the island?

Alternatively, It could be the plate moving in the opposite direction ( away from the island ) and the trench is being torn even deeper causing a vertical displacement of water which causes he Tsunami. The volcanic eruptions are the stress fractures under the mantle. They always form on the concave side... it makes sense that all new rifts in the earth are formed in a circular fashion...It's an expanding earth.

Anyways... This alternative theory matches sea the age of the sea floor... Explains the absence of basaltic rock accretion scraping up onto the beach... I will go out on a limb and say geodesy data is inconsistent as well as paleomagnetic data.after having a chance to review it. Theres is still alot to cover... What do you think of this observation?

 

[thuglyfe]

I am as certain of this as I am of anything: that video is pure pseudoscientific nonsense. The earth is not growing, subduction does happen, the plates do move at measurable rates, there is hardly a single true statement or a well-reasoned argument in the whole ten minutes of it. It's crap.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

What do you think of this observation?

I think you've misunderstood some of the data, and you're missing some data. Hawaii and Iceland, for instance, the two examples you chose to name, are not related to subduction zones. Hawaii appears to be a situated over a hot spot in the mantle that produces regular lava flows under the sea that builds the islands. You can see on a map that there's a chain of progressively smaller islands arcing away to the northwest from the island of Hawaii itself, which displays the movement of the Pacific Plate over the hot spot. The islands are older (and smaller, thanks to erosion) as you move away from Hawaii along the arc all the way to Midway. Iceland sits on the mid-Atlantic ridge where the sea floor is spreading to both east and west and new material is welling up from the mantle, it's the opposite of a subduction zone. Oceanic plates go under continental plates rather than crashing and shearing into them because they're denser. It's basalt versus granite, basically. When continental plates collide, they do crash and shear and huge mountains get pushed up, that's what formed the Hindu Kush and the Himalayas.

 

[hermanntrude]

i'm deeply doubtful about this one. Juan's theory of gaining mass from meteorites seems almost plausible, but it'd have to be a LOT of meteorites. However... that's basically how the earth formed in the first place. Lots of rocks hit each other and stuck together in the heat of the collision. then of course the moon got involved and screwed things up for a while... i guess the expansion might just have been the tail end of the process by which the earth formed.

Having said that, this theory is attempting to overturn science which is very well rooted in measurable facts and real phenomena which can be shown to be true, so probably not.

 

[MrGamma]

I think you've misunderstood some of the data, and you're missing some data. Hawaii and Iceland, for instance...

Yes.... coming back to this thread I am not sure why I used Iceland and Hawaii hotspots in the same Island Arc concave/convex pattern...

I do believe I may have started with one observation and led into the other... I was very interested in the horst graben patterns fund in those areas... and of course they are associated with the rifting and "hotspots"...

When continental plates collide, they do crash and shear and huge mountains get pushed up, that's what formed the Hindu Kush and the Himalayas.

Understood... I have yet to fin anything which is the nail in the coffin evidence supporting sub-duction... and yes... I've studied benoiff zones... they could be rift zones in the basalt... the way I see it... and I've asked a few people.. including geologists... benoiff zones and sub-ducting slabs are inferred interpretations... the p and s waves just don't tell you if the lab is sub-ducting or not... I could be wrong.... but I've been looking...

I am no geologist... I have only been learning as I go.... and you must admit... this theory is highly debatable... it's stretch... but it could work...