21st Century Earth Dynamics Part2

[MadMuz2000]

Just wondering if the change in relative sea levels alter the visual jigsaw piece effect of the interlocking continental masses. I mean the shapes that look to fit do so at the current relative sea levels. Has all the geology of the jigsaw regions been tested and retested to ensure mineral data accuracy as with what ever mechanism that moves these masses around is it surprising that over vast distances the elevations of the masses have not altered according to mineral sampling. Just a question.

[swankiey]

excellent theory, tee towel-very phase. I know that's not what you said. :)

[1Littleagger]

Thank you so much for information that makes me think.You are a blessing.

[jordanpasek]

How come our 4 gas giants were not stripped of their gasses too? Or did they recapture the gasses lost from the 4 rocky planets?

[nononsenseinrational]

If the compression was initially caused by all that excess gas pressure, why does it takes that long for the planet to expand? Should the decompression be correlated with the loss of gas, meaning that it ends when the gas is been stripped in the first place. Also i never tough that solid could be compressed that way and especially not at those scales. Maybe the planet would expand half an inch but by nothing suggest that the earth is still expanding. Continental drift happening to this day! Why?

[HillardEarl]

Earth Dynamics is the answer. Now from that answer, we must find the right questions? All answers are available. But without the right question. The answer is meaningless. Epictetus once said It is impossible to begin to learn that which one thinks one already knows. You can see the truth. What is the right question? All answers are available for the taking. Only if you ask the right question. Epictetus also said The world turns aside to let any man pass who knows where he is going.

[R181183]

I recently discovered that there have fossils of the same species' (or at least ancestrally very close) been found on the australian east coast and the south american west coast. Including plants, land- and sea animals. I really wondered how that could possibly have happened..

This theory seems to provide an answer.

Keep up the good work, I really would like to see this developing further.

I know gut feelings don't prove or mean anything, but this just makes too much sense to be false.

[sgfellow]

Very imaginative theory - and I mean that as a compliment. I just wanted to point out that the expanding Earth proponents can have their cake AND eat it: Imagine a pot of porridge (oceanic material) with oil (continental plate) floating on top. Turn up the heat and the convecting, subducting porridge (Earth) expands, so you can have expansion AND convection at the same time. However, such a a scenario would suggest a dynamic core, but science always uncovers more questions than it answers :-)

[rehsab01]

Why not say that the center of the Earth is a black hole, as with the center of the Sun.. except that they are different "densities"? That would explain lots of stuff since black holes are center of proto-matter creation. For example why is it the sun spots are (super) dark and suck plasma inwards? Also where does all the heavy elements (such as iron) come from or created? Use your imagination...

[MillyVanillification]

Gases are orbiting in the outer zones of the protoplanetarian disk. The fact that gas giants have also been found in other star systems is because they are much easier to detect then the dwarfy, solid planets. Meanwhile "rocky" planets have also been found. Corellation is no proof.

[MillyVanillification]

The gravitation in the center of a sphere is 0 (zero). The most mass of the earth is in its mantle, not in its core. The core may have high pressure, but very low gravitational pull. So why should heavy materials "rain" into the center?

[PlainObserver]

@MillyVanillification I hear you brother. The whole notion of zero G at the center led me to the Hollow Earth concept... which then led me to the EE theory. I like the EE theory but it is lacking a mechanism to cause the Earth to have been so small at one time. This theory provides an answer. Instead of rain think of it as condensation. The heavy elements would then sort themselves by density and sink to their bouyant level in the gravitational field.

[PlainObserver]

@MillyVanillification Even in the proposed gas giant phase there would be a void, or hollow, of some size at the very center of mass of the planet because of the diminishing gravity. When the gases get blown away by the solar burst the remaining solid material is under much less pressure and would decompress and expand. The hollow void in the center would also expand and increase in volume. The crust would also necessarily get thinner. Thats how I see it anyway.

[Arthurfex]

centrifugal force could cause the earth to expand couldn't it?

[murdiem]

Also it makes Earth a little less unique, our large moon not so important in maintaining the planets geological life? Also what effect did the 'big splash' and moon formation have on your decompressing Earth? Surely it would have settled into equilibrium?

[murdiem]

It is interesting and very clearly explained. But it seems to be just a reasoned conclusion based on incomplete evidence.

And also; when you rubbish mantle convection your model is a little flawed. If their were 2 layers as with your salt water/oil model. The heat from the convected saltwater/denser magma would drive the convection of the oil/less dense magma, no?

[wokenup100]

This just doesn't make sense to me. The animations are too crude and video isn't as nearly as engaging as Neil Adams' videos which is obviously the inspiration. It really needs better animations before I am convinced.

[MarvinHerndon]

@wokenup100 Neil Adams is a cartoonist; I am a scientist.

[MillyVanillification]

@MarvinHerndon Then it would be a good idea to call Neil Adams. Cooperation always helps :)

[DodecaDude]

@MarvinHerndon Neal is an artist and by extension a communicator. Being as artist and a scientist are not mutually exclusive, they both require the ability to observe reality and the imagination to understand it. The pulsating repetitive animations and shouting over music hurts the head and communicates next to nothing about your theory. Instead of puffing your chest out and sticking your nose up, you would do well to take some creative coursework to increase your effectiveness at communication.

[MillyVanillification]

@wokenup100 Are you actually convinced that there is a moon called Pandora populated by Na'vi?

[PlainObserver]

@wokenup100 Well Boo F'ing Hoo. So the animation is not intriguing enough. The animation serves only as a way to help one to visualize the theory. If it is not up to Hollywood production standards that is your problem. Nobody was there to see what it looked like anyway so it is all just a guess as to how it may have appeared. If you think that a slick animation makes or breaks a theory then you sir are deficient!

[crazycoyotie]

this makes more seance ~~ the Pangaea theory is what most find real an i think is most false , there is lots of under water villages so water has risen~~ i see the earth grows but not fast enough cause da water still rises faster then it can grow , im wondering why the earth was once all tropical even da polar Reagan an if it is possible that that can return again ~~ well thanks 4 your work

[jaxxstraw]

The music's rather distracting. It's like listening to a lecture in a room where there's also a school band practice underway.

[OldSchoolSkill]

"Nuclear Core" may seem like pseudo-science, but I find no valid refutation yet, here or in any journal. It took 50 years to accept tectonics. This will require as much work to validate or falsify. Dr. Herndon seems credible and has no apparent financial motive.

So far, the best evidence is high-presence of helium-3 in Hawaiian vulcanism. He-4 is possible without fission, but He-3 in large amounts indicates something's happening down there! Occam's razor makes fission a plausible answer.

[sidewallfusion]

it seems logical that most terrestrial planets begin as gas planets, could this explain the amount of water on earth, ie the extra gravitational force pulling in more ice comets? The water puzzles me. Thanks for the info.

[gregrutz]

This is a lot of crap, no evidence shown.

[wavepsychic]

If being so close to the Sun turned Mercury, Venus, Earth & Mars into rocky planets then why are there Jupiter like planets even closer to there stars (Larger then our Sun) then even Mercury is? Why are they not turned into Rocky Planets through the same process?

Math doesn't prove anything. Anyone can put in the calculations to prove there own ideas.

[Guildhelm]

Great video! As the largest rocky planet of our system maybe the Earth is a good example of a planet just between rocky plant and gas giant.

[MarvinHerndon]

Thanks. Yes, if all of the lost primordial gasses originally associated with Earth were put back, we would be a planet almost identical in mass to Jupiter.

[Destroyer670]

This is not taking the fact of the solar system formation theory.

[eDD77s]

@Destroyer670

which fact? this explains more secrets the Sunsystem contains till today for scientists.

[blacksilkblacksilk]

You are - as far as my knowledge goes - the first one to suggest a viable mechanism for expansion. That in itself is refreshing. But - being a physicist myself - I must wonder: There are calculations about moment of inertia of earth, and the rotation rate of earth; and according to those calculations the figures do not match with an expansion model.

You inspired me to do those calculations myself to check, but I would like to know your answer to this, Sir.

Best regards

silk

:-))

[MarvinHerndon]

There have been moment of inertia calculations going back to S. Warren Carey. It might be interesting to revisit those, particularly for the compressed earth radius being about 64% of the present earth radius. It might be interesting to look at different relative compressions between core and mantle. Good luck.

[Tweekerhead]

Right on Marvin!!! Thanks.... For the new wrinkle in my brain.

[MarvinHerndon]

Thanks for viewing.

[timoshenko13]

Hi Marvin. A very interesting presentation but I fail to see how it moves away from earth expansion. Are you proposing that the crustal cracks amintian a constant radius Earth? If not then surely it is just EE but with an internal power source and reduction of Earth volume. Also, the presentation fails to mention one very important ingrediant - water. Please can you let me know your thoughts on that matter. Otehrwise, thanks for sharing.

[Iggyocracy]

Am I correct that your decompression & basalt fill-in theory only applies to our current Earth, but not the proto-stripping? Meaning, our existing layers would've been fully liquid, solidifying like lava patches as the planet expanded within its new gravity field with ever decreasing mass & pressure as the gas layers were blown away. Therefore, that the iron core was the initial filler, establishing the poles & mining veins. Now being hollow with its own mass solidifying at the mantle barrier.

[MarvinHerndon]

It may help to think in terms of steps - 1. Core raining out 2. lower mantle raining out 3. gases removed 4. pressure builds internally 5. primary gracks form 6. basalt begins to extrude 7. secondary crack formation (6&7 more or less simultaneous. Along the way matter added to earth from space (like the meteorites of today, but more . This is a highly simplified version, but basically correct.

[Iggyocracy]

Aaah, so more of a plugging & re-cracking throughout the new formation with remaining gases likely & quickly pressure cooked into the elements we have today. I.E. water condensing at the cold edge of space. Do you think the trenches & deep contours were flooded & cooled first to almost immediately begin collecting & distributing sediment. Thereby, they remain deep & open today, as they were capped off early to force volcanoes elsewhere. I think Earth finally settled down under a single ocean.

[retepvosnul]

But this rules out the concept of a former super continent doesn't it ?. How does the indirect evidence stack up against this ? The fossil finds that support Pangea ? or the aquatic fossils on mountain ridges ? And what about the direct observation of the measurements of the giant plates moving in various directions with speeds in excess of 1.5 CM per year . With decompression You'd think that everything would be moving away from each other, which it seemingly doesn't.

[MarvinHerndon]

I had responded earlier, but I guess it did not stick. The biggest unknown is time frame. The super continent, or part thereof is expected, once, but not repeated. Also, the ocean floor building does not necessarily need to be uniform in all areas at the same time.

[wickedljp]

Thank you sir!

[MarvinHerndon]

T-Tauri outbursts occur in single stars as well as binaries. That's a far better photo than any other that I have. Thanks for viewing.

[bignewgame]

But we do not have a binary star system.