Fafhrd on 20/3/2006 at 05:12
this guy seems like a pretty bona fide nut job, scientifically speaking, and seems to ignore quite a bit of common sense in Clip #3. The reason the far side of the moon doesn't have any maria and is covered in impact craters is because the majority of asteroids that pass by the near side are pulled onto Earth, so don't impact the Moon, the far side doesn't have that problem. The moon certainly isn't fucking growing like he seems to think. Also "Before Jupiter was large enough to be our gravitational umbrella" what? Since his crazy balloon planets idea seems to only affect a planet's volume, Jupiter would have always had enough mass to act as our gravitational umbrella. Neal Adams needs to stick to drawing comic books.
RyushiBlade on 20/3/2006 at 05:29
Wait... I'm sorry, I admit that I'm not a genius, but if the Earth is growing larger, then what's 'filling it up'? It can't just grow. There's no matter to fill up the space.
... Is he implying the Earth will one day become hollow as the plates continue to spread apart?
Edit: Looking at Clip #12, you'll see the Earth's "original" size, and then the much bigger Earth created as the continents spread apart. Look at all that empty space between the core and the shell. That's one hell of a space to fill up, but the Earth obviously doesn't have anything close to that much empty space.
Also, take into account the fact that the Earth would slow down considerably as it grew bigger (like when you pull your arms towards you when spinning, you speed up, only this is in reverse). It would have had to be spinning insanely fast in its original, smaller, state for its rotational speed to be as fast as it is today. I would also think simple mathematics could prove this theory wrong if we take into account the rate of decay in the Earth's rotation.
Fafhrd on 20/3/2006 at 07:51
Quote Posted by RyushiBlade
Wait... I'm sorry, I admit that I'm not a genius, but if the Earth is growing larger, then what's 'filling it up'? It can't just grow. There's no matter to fill up the space.
That's kind of my point, in Clip 3 he says that the moon's (and I assume the rest of the planets') expansion is caused by geode like crystal growth in the interior, but makes no attempts to explain where the mass is coming from.
descenterace on 20/3/2006 at 08:17
Note that he immediately describes current theory as 'bad science'. If someone does that, they're usually an attention-seeking halfwit.
If he'd presented the evidence first, he might sound vaguely genuine, but it's all sensationalist bullshit.
Epos Nix on 20/3/2006 at 09:52
Quote:
Wait... I'm sorry, I admit that I'm not a genius, but if the Earth is growing larger, then what's 'filling it up'? It can't just grow. There's no matter to fill up the space.
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_giant)
As a star cools it expands. Why wouldn't this apply to planets as well?
trevor the sheep on 20/3/2006 at 10:32
Because planets aren't stars?
Epos Nix on 20/3/2006 at 10:48
Following RyushiBlade's logic, something can't expand unless some sort of matter fills the space, yet no new matter is being introduced into a star upon its conversion to a red giant. Similarly, no new matter is introduced into water upon its conversion to ice, yet it expands. Matter does not have to be introduced into something for it to expand... not everything is a balloon.
/edit:
I didn't quite get into the jist of Neal's arguement when I posted that. His explaination as to the increased size of the Earth is due to literal growth, not expansion. Basically, everything, from the smallest of atoms to the largest of galaxies is growing exponentially. The reason? The universe itself is growing.
I've no clue as to what would cause the universe to grow, but to understand how it affects Earth I would wager its something similar to what would happen if you drew a circle on a balloon and then blew the balloon up: the circle would increase in size relative to its former self, but wouldn't take up any more or less surface area. Of course, in the case of the balloon you can attribute the increase in size to the air pressure inside the balloon... the universe doesn't provide us that luxury though. However, whatever is fueling the increase in growth, according to him, does infact increase the object's mass, hence gravity, etc. Where would extra matter come from though? Who knows... maybe another universe or an extension of ours?
RyushiBlade on 20/3/2006 at 12:44
But we're talking about increasing a planet's size by up to "30%"! Hell, it's almost like penis enlargement. The Earth is about 6,400 miles deep. More or less. That means the Earth was originally 4480 miles deep. (Right? I get nervous around any number greater than 10.)
Original Area of the Earth: 252,084,224 square miles
Current Area of the Earth: 514,457,600 square miles
Someone may want to check my math on that, but that gives an increase of an astonishing 262,373,376 square miles. That's HUGE. There's no way there are 'geode formations' equalling that size. If Epos Nix is right in saying Neal's theory is that the universe itself is expanding... I still don't see how that could account for any influx of matter. I suppose if there was a force on the outside of the universe, pulling everything equally with an extreme force, it would account for his theory (as well as part of the reason as to why the universe is accelerating), but then we're left to wonder what the hell that force is.
Basically, I think it's a load of bollocks.
Epos Nix on 20/3/2006 at 12:56
So because one part of a theory is unexplained the whole theory is 'bollocks"? That's some scientific reasoning there! ;)
Keep in mind there doesn't have to be an influx of matter. An influx of energy will do, with celestial bodies acting as energy converters, producing obscene amounts of hydrogen, thus increasing the overall amount of matter in the universe. The question then remains as to where the energy would come from. For that I guess you'd have to pry open some large celestial body and have a look inside to see exactly what is being converted. But I don't think the idea itself is too farfetched (the fact that I've always thought something wasn't quite right with Pangea doesn't help matters).
