Gents...The fervor to seek the complicated answer has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
The attraction/repulsion between them is magnetic, gravitational, electro, weak & strong force. We've gone from nothing to matter. Physicists have the temerity to throw this away in favor of searching for other particles that the universe is too stupid to create. Besides electrons & positrons, explained and logical, you religiously believe in quarks, neutrons & other exotic particles. This is rot & nonsense. The question is, can a universe be made from electrons & positrons? The answer is yes.
So now we have split and contained zero, into minus 1 and plus 1. Yet the force that holds them at a certain distance, is like stretched rubber bands, between the bubble and the point particle inside. Now nature drives energy through the bubble and strikes the point particle, knocking it from the core. It continues to attract, but now it attracts everything. The bubble, continues to repulse, but now everything. The first is a positron, the bubble is an electron.
Physicists - Let us discuss a proposition. That the universe is stupid, and is not so clever that it can create different forms of matter. So it creates one form of matter. A kind of pre-matter tht has been processed in a way that we will never know in our life. To us this matter is zero. But it can be pulled on, by an outgoing force. Skin perhaps. This neutral force is pulled into doubles of less than nothing. At the center of each, a point particle, pulling back inward.
excuse me may I add that the title of this presentation is undisputably incorrect. The word conspiracy is difined as "an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot." What I am saying to you is that Americans so often mis use their own language until they sound uninteligent. The title for this presentation should be "Scientific theory of the Earth growing." Case and point.
@21youngpenfield You are correct,...except if I didn't have definers as in "OF SCIENCE",...which is not PEOPLE,..but a PROCESS,... which in turn is a RESULT of the actions of PEOPLE conscious or sub/un-conscious! The result is THE PROCESS.
1,500 yeas of teachers teaching that the sun orbits the Earth, is not a conscious conspiracy,...but a conspiracy never-the-less.
@rongrite 3. when they will post HQ pics of the pols we will know for sure...we can just spaculate and most of the so call embraced theories are not proven, just a common embraced theory ...they can't tell u what is gravity!
@rongrite 2. For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction, Yet if the planets accreted from impacts of comets and falling rocks, how is it that the planets are all still on the same solar plane, and are not spread out, above and below and all around the sun?
Why the galaxies are spirals? The same way, a gravitational vortex (given by the sun axis rotation or huge black holes for galactic rotation)! Spiral arms can be associated with orbits!
@rodgeYou have added time. The first two pairs in the universe lasted for billions of years, with time and more Pairs the more likely they would meet.
What would the Pairs DO with all this time? Could the Positrons, in time attract the whole fields that they CAME FROM to join in a coating around the Positron to become Protons.
To become Hydrogen.
Then Gravity could join them, without "annihilation"
Could something else be used to keep the Pairs Apart for "LONG ENOUGH"?
@rongrite Well bark on a tree isn't exactly tectonic plates that are able to move because the Earth's lithosphere has a higher strength and lower density than the underlying asthenosphere if that's what you're implying.
@Madpolis7 Let's pretend that the trunk of a tree is the Earth, and the bark, is the crust. As the tree grows, the older bark, splits, and wrinkles up, over the new, younger, smoother, lower, growth of the tree.
The same thing with the continents upon the Earth, they are the older "bark" that splits, and wrinkles up, over the new, younger, smoother, lower, growth of the Earth.
The shape of the bark, like the shape of the continents, shows that both have grown.
@rongrite The earth isn't a tree! It has a liquid center, and the tectonic plates sit on top of it. I am NOT suggesting that the CONTINENTS sit on top of the magma. Its the PLATES. Proof is how we can literally identify these plates at fault lines, epicenters, and volcanoes. This is something we actually measure, while measurements with modern high-precision geodetic techniques show that the Earth is not currently increasing in size to within a measurement accuracy of 0.2 mm per year.
@Madpolis7 Well, hmm, why don't you explain Howdee Come massive Mountain Ranges
Began to rise up only about 60 Million Years Ago. That is "BEGAN",..after the Dinosaurs died off. If they rose up at the same rate for the last 600 Million Years, would have given us TEN TIMES as many Mountains as we have today. Turns out there was NONE!
How's THAT for your Precision MEASURING? 0,2 mm per year.
Another? 200 MYAgo Sea Level was over 800 feet deeper than today. Where's that water?
@nealadamsdotcom Howdee Come Mountain Ranges? I don't seem to recognize that, and neither can the internet. Regardless, who ever said that the mountains grew at the same rate?
Do you have any proof at all that the Earth is growing? We can measure the plates moving, but like I said, measurements with modern high-precision geodetic techniques show that the Earth is not currently increasing in size.
@Madpoli 1. You can look up the ages of Earth's Mountain Ranges There were no mountain Ranges to impede the migrations of Dinosaurs to all 7 continents. Funny how Geologists don't actually "TALK" about that since they want you to believe their "THEORIES" that Mountain Ranges "MUST" have existed for billions of years!
I KNOW,...means nothing to you.
Means, to me that 200 MYA, the crust of Earth was just 3-4 miles thick. because there were no oceans,
@nealadamsdotcom You see, when the crust cracked and spread down to the molten Basalt level. The heated Gases migrated to the Rifts and deserted the continental plates. which got thicker and thicker, inviting DRAMATIC SEASONS and ICE AGES!
From 3 to 30 miles is dramatic.
Now the THICK broken apart pieces had to recurve to a flatter plane as the Earth grew. at 30 MI thick, The upper crust must BUCKLE into Mountain Ranges.
There is NO technology that measures EARTH'S GROWTH
@Madpolis7 i think it is safe to say that a measurement of the diameter of the Earth taken from any point on the surface is never going to be the same,.as measured from any other point on the surface. Even with today's technology, it would be impossible to measure the thickness of the Earth from every point on the surface and average them all out. Satellites measure the distance from a point on the surface, and the altitude is measured from sea level, not the center of the Earth!
@rongrite Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
@KyIeMcCIeIIan Yes. That's the first explanation that comes to mind!
But where are the debris??? There should be miles of space dust covering all the bedrock upon the Earth, if it has grown this much, in such a geologically short period of time. Also the amount of space debris that hit the Earth annually, is known pretty accurately, and it is nowhere near enough to explain this growth.
The new additional matter is growing from within, and that is causing the continents to spread.
@KyIeMcCIeIIan youre an idiot, space dust falling to earth wouldnt cause the continents to spread apart. Also its not "countless tons". The earth is tremendously larger than the amount of stuff coming from space to make a difference
@mryellow123 A pig-headed Professor is very much the same as a Pig-Headed student. Their ears are blocked. Their brains are dead and they think that LEARNING is for children. My memory saye he was a computer geek who studied Physics for that purpose. If he can't come up with a good argument, have him do an animation that proves th Pangea Theory.
@nealadamsdotcom Calling a Professor who wasted 2 hours on the phone with you talking through the details "Pig-Headed" just because he broke your theory, makes you look like an even bigger wanker if that is even possible.
Your theory is just backwards. It's easy to come to the conclusion you have when ignoring any and all evidence which doesn't fit .
Maybe if you censor a few more comments from those who point out the inconsistencies, it will become true.
@eferinfirth AHHh, now I remember him. We spoke for about 20 minutes. He offered little or nothing to the discussion,..expect he asked if I thought, in Beta Decay, if the Positron that flew out was in there all along? I said Yes, obviously!
Actually, I got the feeling that he thought so too, but was ashamed to admit it!
Turns out many physicists feel there is a core positive something at the core of the Proton.
Picking a conclusion and Backfilling is a standard methodology. Einstein used it.
As to the creation of matter. To discover there is only one form of MATTER CREATION discovered by man in the last 100 years, one doesn't have to be the best technical Physicist in the world to logically conclude that Pair-Production is likely MORE PROFOUND than Physics has treated it in the last 70 years, and FINALLY has turned their attention there.
@mryellow123 I'd like another crack. He's older. I believe he was a student at the time. Perhaps he's learned a few things. Like about Pair-Production and QUARKS!
@nealadamsdotcom New matter cannot be created. They teach you that in eighth grade science. It is also quite simple to prove. And I doubt you can provide an ounce of evidence for the production of matter.
@shadow6k 'Kay. Pair-Production (MATTER CREATION) was first observed by Carl David Anderson in 1932.
Physicists currently can keep positrons isolated from Electrons using magnetic fields and are experimenting with Positron fueled engines. Positrons and Electrons are MATTER!
@mryellow123 There IS Compressive Subduction at the Ring of fire. If you examine the map at continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth you will see it began 60 MYA!
"If course they fit together?"
I'm sorry? Are you aware that you conceded the whole argument? HELLLOOO.
Only the oceanic plate SUBDUCTS! The continental plate is TOO LIGHT!
@mryellow123 No, once you discover Subduction, Obduction and Mountain Building as a result of the compressive forces of the crust, then you must investigate exactly HOW MUCH each accounts for.
Subduction accounts for 1/20 of the spreading. Now you can go and account for the rest ! You have "demonstrated" one if the falacies of the Pangea Theory!
@mryellow123 While I would like to take credit for it, that HONOR goes to Professor of Geology Samuel Warren Carey. who first presented in the 60's.
His are the "giant" shoulders that I stand on. I merely did that incredible map animatiom. with the help of my brilliant daughter. AND I DID THE physics!
You,...are merely an ignorant internet troll. FACT! Hie thee back to the Cat Fart videos, deadbrain, where you belong. We are adults here, and we're talking Adult stuff.
@nealadamsdotcom Yea it's convection and I'm not going to explain it in detail on youtube, thank you very much... what's your point anyway? The asthenosphere is in a liquid condition due pressure. Why can't there be convection? I still don't see the problem?
@seeqer66 Sorry to have disagreed with such a devout Religious fanatic. Perhaps GOD did make a doubularity, or singularity thing with his magic wand,..out of ,..um,..the Holy Trinity or Allah's nether regions. I get confused, because there are about 5 Big Bang Theories. The latest talks about Pair-Production. Another, Doubularity. Another all the matter packed into an object the size of a football/an acorn/ or a Barn. Then we found it's accelerating OUTWARD!.
@nealadamsdotcom What are you trying to distract me with now? Religious fanatic???
There's all sorts of speculation about what happened before the "Big Bang". Most having to do with a lot of fancy math. NONE have one ounce of evidence to back them up. Thus my statement of fact that scientists have no idea what caused the "Big Bang". According the evidence provided so far. Our Universe (as is now) came from a point in space. In all likelyhood, the energy/matter existed before.
@mczeljk No, THE MORONS believe that all the straight sided continental pieces differentiated to the crust by GOD in Jigsaw puzzle molds and traveled around the world like bumper Cars in a carnival, to JOIN (Sans basaltic sutures,) in a big giant island, leaving the other two-thirds of Earth, WATER, 3 miles thick. . An Island which, after 200 Million Years Broke into pieces to spread over the Earth and then REJOIN EXACTLY where they broke apart.
Who told you that the continents rejoined exactly where they broke apart? For example how does India fit in your claim when India was ones joined to what now is Africa and then travelled north an collided with Asia to form the Himalayas.
And that the continental plates move has been measured and therefore proven.
I'm prepared here to keep an open mind, and I've read many comments about Pair Production.
When water cools down it solidifies into ice, it also grows in volume. Maybe this effect is also happening on Earth? Also if Earth is in a liquid state shouldn't the centripetal forces of the Earths rotation also create an elliptical effect? Also what effects do we know about the Earths magnetic field having on the volumetric size of Earth? This is an interesting theory.
@euandykes Water is one of the few liquids that decreases in density when frozen.
Most solids, are denser than their liquid forms.
However, "metaphorically", we can't see mass without matter, and matter has volume. And matter grows in large gravitational centers.
So, the growth of matter, is like a densefication of a portion of the mass of the universe. Another way to look at it, if the universe is infinite, then all parts of it must grow, because infinity divided by anything is ∞.
I am not scientist but I do read and I think neutrino or something else is being captured by our thermonuclear core of the earth. During last 200 million or so, it started to grow more faster due to our sun's dynamic. Our Sun is dying star. And our planet leaving this some kind of magnetic zones in relations to Sun's sphere of influences. Thus in the last, certain period of Sun's deactivation, it started to enable planet earth to grow exponentially, thru neutrino or some exotic particle capture
@nealadamsdotcom I don't mean to disrespect you, but how can you say that Black holes generate new matter when we know so little about them? Almost all of your arguments are based on assumptions and its rather frustrating.
@Madpolis7 - None of my arguments are based on assumptions. MY arguments are are based on facts and deductions from these facts.
You wrote before you looked at, from either hub, of every black hole in the universe, electrons are fired from one side, and positrons are fired from the other side, in massive streams of matter particles. So massive, that they are a great subject of discussion in the fields of physics and cosmology. Research, research, research.
@nealadamsdotcom Well I'm not exactly an expert in this field, and if it is such a greatly discussed subject, then perhaps you could send me a link to an article about it? My Google searches are failing.
@Madpolis7 That's because it is a conspiracy of science.
LOL.
Actually this is entirely Neal Adams theory, (though it has grown, too)
so you have found the source.
There have been others, who have noticed that the Earth has gotten bigger, because the continents fit together on a smaller globe without any deep ocean floors. But they have not been able to explain the reasons for this.
But Neal has nailed the only possible cause for this!
@nealadamsdotcom Are you referring to pair production in black holes creating electrons and positrons? You need to have a temperature of 6x10^9 Kelvin for that, I'm not sure about black holes but you certainly can't reach that temperature in the center of the Earth.
@Madpolis7 - You can reach it in a lightning bolt. High energy photons strike the earth all the time. Pair production is happening in your room, all the time, as you type. In the time it takes to write your next note, pair production may happen 100 times in your room. We have no idea how much energy is at the core of the earth. What we do know is that it can be produced in a laboratory, in colliders, and as science is discovering, it is the most common event in the universe.
@Madpolis7 - Pair production happens in space. What you are speaking of is the temperature it seems to take to create a high energy photon. However, in magnetic fields, like at the earth's core, other factors enter.
I recommend you do much more reading on pair production, rather than pronounce the limited knowledge that you have.
@nealadamsdotcom What? Its takes 10^13K to create a Photon, 6x10^9K to create electrons and positrons, and pair production simply doesn't occur at any temperature under 10^9K.
My own research isn't doing so well so maybe you could help me with some links? I found articles proving that magnetic fields influence pair production, but I found nothing about it being possible in the center of the earth, can you please provide me with links proving your hypothesis?
Does this mean the earths mass increased proportionally to the increasing surface area? Is earth just less dense now? Could this be the result of small particles of interstellar dabrye contributing to earths mass?
@gdykes - No, the earth's mass increased. New matter was made. That is the whole point of this.The growing earth is the smallest tip of the iceberg. What we learned in science, is one atom is exactly like every other atom in the universe. The earth is exactly like every other suspended body. Understand our little earth, and we understand the universe. In the beginning, there was just the universe. From it, we make the matter universe.
@gdykes Accretion cannot account for this amount of growth in only the last 70 million years. And there is no sign of much on the surface. So, growth of matter is internal to the planet. The additional material is pushed out of the Earth at the mid ocean rifts, widening the newer, lower,deep ocean floors. The growth is accelerating to a factor of mass, i think. But volume also increases. Density generally increases, towards the center.
Great theory, more logical than the Pangea Continental Drift embraced by most scientists.. I wonder can an expanding universe be one of the reasons or cause of the growth of almost everything?
@joelomarmendoza - The universe does not expand. There is no such physical process. It's like talking about elves and fairies. Growth exists and we understand it. Now we need to understand the science behind it. Growth is conversion of one thing to another, so that it can be added to another.
People who care: We are rapidly headed for 1,000,000 views. You can accelerate this process. I know, 1,000,000 views means nothing to a cat fart video, or a posting of cute puppies. But when a science posting goes into the millions, people sit up and take notice. People are beginning to invite me on more radio shows and more lecture tours. This theory is gaining a "voice", thanks to all of you.
This is important. Some of you already know this. Push the numbers in any way you can. Thank you.
@nealadamsdotcom I've heavily supported and spread this idea. I even purchased your video collection back a few years ago. Very cut & dried perfect explanation of everything I ever wondered in high school. Thank you for thinking outside the box
@Idkfawin32 - Thank you for responding so very nicely. The future holds great answers and an incredible adventure for all that are interested in science. Remember, science is not rocket science. It belongs to people, and the language of science should be for the people.
@nealadamsdotcom Slightly star-struck that you responded :) anyways I agree fully. It's a shame the science seems to be accepted through hierarchy. The reason seems to be that the higher-up scientists have the tools and access/money necessary to prove or interrogate their theories a bit more. Science should be more open, only then can it flourish(Ex. Computer Science)
Anyway its glad to see you are getting more publicity, hopefully one day everyone will understand your theories.
@Idkfawin32 - I don't believe the system is unfair. I have always had to battle to get the truth out there. I don't want or need an advantage, and if my view prevails, it will be because I have done my homework better and more completely, and because I am right. New ideas start with one person. Any help is appreciated. But in the end, it's all about truth.
@nealadamsdotcom I don't really know if I phrased it right but what I was saying is people should be more open to new ideas. Do you think you will have any more videos coming out any time soon?
@Idkfawin32 - Yes, I will. I also am planning on speaking tours, as well as the revamping of the book that I never released. I didn't release it at the time, because it constantly needed updating.
You understand, I'm fitting the science in between Batman Odyssey, and all the other work I do.
i don't know if "science fiction" is the best descriptor. The best science fiction is based on scientific fact. Some science fictions are based on scientific theories but they are never as good, and really should be in the category of fantasy.
@seeqer66 - There is subduction at The Ring of Fire. It began 60MYA. It was caused by the Australian plate rifting from the Antarctic Plate at that time, shattering the oceanic plate above it, and giving purchase to the only subduction on earth, the Ring of Fire.
@nealadamsdotcom Matter cannot be created or destroyed. This is a fact, in the Universe we now inhabit. Who has ever said the Universe came from nothing? We don't know what happened before the "Big Bang". We have no way of knowing WHAT the Universe came from, at this time.
@seeqer66 - At some point, the matter universe came from what we call nothing. That is the conclusion of all of science. Those who believe the matter universe always existed, are deluded religionists. Or, believe in magic. If this is you, you have no reason to be here in this discussion. We are talking science. There is one and only one method of matter creation from seemingly nothing.
@nealadamsdotcom You really need to research the big bang. its obvious you do not understand it. there was a point of singularity where everything was compacted into an infinitely small, infinitely hot, infinitely cold, infinitely dense point. all the matter was there and when the big bang happened it expanded and cooled leaving what we see now as the current universe. And is still cooling and expanding.
at first i was gonna write you off as a crazy kook. but i decided to watch anyways and listen before passing judgement, and i gotta say you kinda make a point. but what if it does both. expands at a greater rate than subduction. subduction can take place as long as there is heat and pressure and it has to be really slow. expansion can happen faster since there is no opposing force and can still use matter from subduction. this would explain why so little has happened in such a long time.
@imus1426 1. NO, NOTHING "EXPANDS" ! Things GROW! There is no such Physical phenomenon as EXPAND!
2." LONG TIME" in a human life is a JOT in time. Earth is growing Exponentially FASTER with time. In 400 million years Earth will be the size of Saturn!
@Yeshua3996 this is a decent theory. is it real? who knows. but scietifically speaking things can expand. its a simple matter of density. if the earths core is dense and it expands out there is still matter there that is expanding. You can squeeze a dry sponge and let go you see it expands. where did that matter come from? it was there the whole time.
Hmm, logically life as we know it, needs to exist on matter. so matter came first.
However, if large gravitational centers are growing, this would mean that there was no need for a "big bang" to make matter. and matter "creation" in an ongoing process, that i think, had no beginning and no end. This would mean that "life" has always been around, with matter, that has always been growing, and spreading.
The growing Earth theory overturns theories, and beliefs, we thought we knew to be correct.
Neal has explained what causes growth MANY times. How about reading a few weeks/ months worth of comments. This video is almost 5 years old and close to a million views. If you think youre the only one thats asked these questions then youre too dense to understand in the forst place.
@Yeshua3996 • Good point BUT...First of all I AGREE with the expanding theory. What I disagree with is that it's NOT expanding anymore. This happened suddenly. The data of the floorbed is somewhat correct the middle is the youngest. BUT ask to date yesterday's flow and they will tell you it’s millions years old. IF these 70 Millions years were true we would have Km's of beach to the shore line. So the crusts hardened and pressure will expel at the rings...upward formation not sideways anymore
@Yeshua3996 Good point BUT.... First all I AGREE will the expanding theory...What I disagree with is, that it's NOT expanding anymore (unless the SUN gets hotter, and if this happens we are all gone). This happened suddenly. The data of the floor bed is somewhat correct the middle is the youngest. BUT ask to date yesterday s flow and they will tell you it’s millions years old. IF these 70 Millions years were true we would have Km's of beach. So expansion no more, the only way is up not sideways
@Zed6t9r - 1. Nothing "expands", there is not such concept. 2. Earth has not stopped growing in any way. It is increasing in it's growth exponentially, as the universe is growing exponentially. You are saying things off the top of your head that are nothing but opinions, and not based o science in any way. We are not discussing opinions. We are discussing science. Go to continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth and read the student's letter there very carefully with the list.
@Zed6t9r - 3. The sun grows, between 10 and 25% each BY, according to science. The planets grow and move slowly outward on their electromagnetic lines, (Bode's Law), 4. Nothing happened suddenly, you don't know what you are talking about. We are not interested in jibberish. 5. Your's may be the most stupid letter this month. Study factual science, and don't come back here until you do, or I will block you.
@TAPriceCTR there has to be a matter manufacturing process somewhere. How else do we get matter? All matter that exists today made in a single expansion event or a natural ongoing process?
Neat idea. Putting the continents together like a puzzle isn't even close to enough though. Do you have any proposed mechanism for this idea? Is the Earth blowing up like a balloon? If so, what's replacing the rock? Is new matter being created? If so, what possible mechanism could be responsible?
Mars is a dead planet with no water to hide this expansion. You'd think someone would have noticed something going on over there.
@seeqer66 1. It was "ENOUGH" to launch the "Pangea Theory"! As well with the other PROOFS (Matching Flora and Fauna across all 7 continents. (So much for the common proofs. Be something tho if say complete fossils of Thalattosuchia ( fish-tailed Gator 205-145 MYA) were found in Japan,..AND Oregon? Earth, NOR the Universe "EXPANDS"! THERE IS NO SUCH PHYSICAL PROCESS AS "EXPANDS", without a separate force.) That would be "Stupid Science"
@nealadamsdotcom discovered the "Mechanism". Took 30 yrs. (This is where the nut-case spews out his Pseudo-Science Bulls**t, right?,...heh)
Skipping over that,.. Mars. No, not "DEAD"!?? (What a concept. Who put those words in your mouth? NASA? .....Figures. ...Well, they uh,..changed their, what I laughingly call, "minds". NOT quite "dead". Watch my 2 Mars Videos here. 10 years ago a class of 4th graders "noticed and all wrote to NASA using Earth and Mars Photos.
@nealadamsdotcom No... It wasn't. Some kind of mechanism was given for the movement of the continental plates. In addition, since then lots of physical evidence has been found to support it. As I said, nice idea, but that's all it is.
@nealadamsdotcom Even if you were right, the mechanism from movement of the tectonic plates is obvious & factual. The mechanism's right there. You still won't say a word about what's CAUSING the planet to grow. Unless you're willing to go there, this conversation's over.
@seeqer66 I just explained why Convection cannot and does not work. Why don't YOU explain how it DOES WORK and abrogates all of Physics along the way. I'm listening.
I've explained the growing process a dozen times. Look it up in the comments.
@nealadamsdotcom The volcanic activity of this planet does happen. That's the mechanism. You just saying "growth", doesn't qualify it as a mechanism. Energy/Matter cannot be created or destroyed. Only converted. Where is all this mass coming from? The pressures required for plate tectonics are very high, but they do seem to be there. You provided no evidence that I noticed, that they're not. Do you know of a single Geologist who DOESN'T believe in plate tectonics? let me know.
@seeqer66 - Volcanic activity is not the mechanism, volcanic activity is the result release of pressure from the rubbing of 2 plate sections together. Repeat the word result. Result is not a mechanism. It is a result OF the mechanism. Study your science.
Samuel Warren Carey, who wrote 2 books, James Maxlow, who wrote "Terra, non firma earth". Does truth need verification from someone with a degree? Fine, there you have it.
@seeqer66 Funny about the word "LOTS". Something people say, when they don't know what they're talking bout and they want to impress. Not' "Lots", and ALL of it is conjecture and NO FACTS!
I am talking about FACTS. For all of your sakes, I JUST stick to FACTS.
@nealadamsdotcom Go look in a geology book. I have no more desire to explain modern geology to you, than I have in explaining modern biology to a creationist.
1.There is NO DEEP OCEANIC plate that exists on the Earth that is older than 180 MYO! That 180 MYOld plate is in Both Atlantic AND Pacific,....like they began spreading at the same time.
2. This'll kill ya. Geologists insist DEEP OCEANS were extant on Earth for billions of years, YET,.. NO deep oceanic life is fossilized in any DEEP OCEANS that lived there before 70 Million Years Ago.
3. Bone density today is the same as 200 MYA! 60 TON Dino!
Before you ask where the "NEW" MATTER was "MADE", ( MATTER 'must' be "MADE"??, correct?.... or else it would not BE HERE,...yes?) YOU must deal with the question of "Where all the MATTER of the Universe came/comes from?" Because, you see, my answer would be. "By way of the SAME process/mechanism! It's hard to believe the very stupid universe came up with TWO SEPARATE PROCESSES FOR MATTER CREATION. ONE, is surely ENOUGH, yes?
I was responding to someone who has apparently removed their comment. and my reaction "I am not even going to touch the conciousness claim" is pretty much the same as your reaction "are you high"
so, you believe there is a matter manufacturing process at the core of the earth... once problem with your theory, mt everest (and many other mountains and their ranges) are growing, were the earth being filled like a giant rock balloon all peaks would be deminishing.
2.Engineer? Good. The CRUST spreads at the Basalt (denser) Oceanic Crust. Continents Do NOT SPREAD, but are held within the Basaltic skirt/plate.
Now as Earth grows and the crust gets ever thicker. the continents do not spread , the crust recurves to a flatter plane. What happens to the upper tiers of the 40 Mi thick crust?
according to mainstream science the young small rock size earth was rotating the sun, gathering dust, asteroids, comets, getting bigger & producing all sorts of stuff due to its materials & became the earth. billions of years later the solar system is still full of matter that can be attracted. the earth also has the same gravity. But by some mysterious court "STOP" order the earth has stopped all activity & is sleeping. all equations balanced. BULLSHIT!
@nealadamsdotcom Question, if the earth was half the size before as it is now, wouldn't the ocean cover much of the land masses(continents)? It covers 70% of the earth's surface area today. The ocean would carve the shorelines of the continents, changing their shape then the shorelines wouldn't fit anymore. And where did the materials that came out of the seafloor came from? inside the earth? Pressurizing that amount of matter would increase the earth's temp probably melting some of the crust.
@rodge1892 1. When Earth had grown to only the Size of Mars 200 Mil.Yrs.Ago (Where our Animation begins) There were NO DEEP OCEANS ON EARTH AT ALL. The water(1/6th of today) sat, as you learned in school RIGHT ON and covered TWO THIRDS of the Continental plates. Likely, where YOU live today was under 600 feet of water 200 MYA! That's why ALL ANCIENT FISH FOSSILS ARE FOUND,....on the land, NEVER the deep oceans. They DIDN'T EXIST!
One thing to support this theory is that dinosaurs would have been much better off on an earth with less gravity. A smaller earth would have allowed this
@assortedcorpses A smaller Earth would also mean less gravity, that also holds the atmosphere, meaning that there was less atmospheric pressure back then.
Dinosaurs had very efficient breathing abilities, and could live in very low pressure, like todays' birds.
@rongrite Interesting, I didn't know that one. I just remember one of my science teachers explaining why creatures tend to be smaller today, especially insects, and he gave increasing gravity over time as a possible reason.
@assortedcorpses i can't think of any other explanation that works, to explain how the maximum height and size envelope of land creatures, has decreased.
Even, 3x higher air pressure on a prehistoric Earth, cannot account for the leverage on the prehistoric bodies of flying creatures, from their huge wings!
The reasonable explanation is that the Earth must have had less mass, then!
i think that from this fulcrum point, one can lever the Earth
I do more than postulate when I conclude that the empirical evidence presented here is not only empirical indeed, but furthermore, brilliant and logical. Galileo suffered much ridicule in the face of empirical evidence which argued against the once widely accepted concentric view of the Universe; yet indeed, the process continues as we must yet again paradigm our thinking into yet another mold of newly discovered truth. Albeit painfully humbling, we should collectively marvel!
The Earth grew slowly when it was smaller, and as it grew bigger, it grew faster.
This is called "exponential growth".
i think, the rate of growth, stretching the surface, surpassed the elasticity of the old thicker crust, that split open long snaking rifts, world wide, then the deep oceans began to form, in those widening rifts. A seed germinates, grows into a shrub. but over the same time, a mature tree, will grow more material, than that seed to shrub did.
@fozzy0266 2/3rds of the crust was covered in water back then, before the continents were "created". Perhaps it looked similar with water when it was smaller, as it does today.
wow. talk about bubkis. mars is geologicaly dead, there is no molten core to cause anything to move.
this not only contains untrue premises but even were the premises true the conclusions are unsupported by the premises. the gas giants might be growing but the rocky planets are not growing beyond the rate of the mass of the meteorites which impact it.
@TAPriceCTR Watch the two Mars videos. Read lots of the comments and watch the other videos. You need to load up before discussing this. There's too much to explain.
@nealadamsdotcom you are speaking to a mechanical engineer. if my kind do not understand how the physical world operates machines do not work. you have no explanation of how the world is flat, you are just proving it by pointing to the ground and saying "does that look like a ball to you?" if you were not wrong then science could never have progressed as far as it has because we would know NOTHING of how things work.
@TAPriceCTR Ummm and,......so? I'm confused. I'd be happy to explain any part or all of this to ANYONE. I'm asking you to get past some Preliminaries, IF, you are INTERESTED only
. This is a NEW SCIENCE,...OR a RE-analysis of what is based on 10% FACT, and 90% theory and observation. It's the Theory and observation that I have completely re-examined. My tools are FACTS and deductions. For example:
We have a Universe of MATTER that once was, seemingly, NOTHING. (Whatever that is.)
Gents...The fervor to seek the complicated answer has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
nealadamsdotcom 13 hours ago
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
nealadamsdotcom 13 hours ago
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
nealadamsdotcom 13 hours ago
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
nealadamsdotcom 13 hours ago
The fervor to seek the complicated answer, has driven all of you to miss the correct answer. Pair production is the source of all matter. Pair production creates all atoms in perfect symmetry. They are the building blocks of quarks, and non-energized, they are neutrinos. You have run past the goal posts, and are running across an empty field. THINK.
nealadamsdotcom 13 hours ago
The attraction/repulsion between them is magnetic, gravitational, electro, weak & strong force. We've gone from nothing to matter. Physicists have the temerity to throw this away in favor of searching for other particles that the universe is too stupid to create. Besides electrons & positrons, explained and logical, you religiously believe in quarks, neutrons & other exotic particles. This is rot & nonsense. The question is, can a universe be made from electrons & positrons? The answer is yes.
nealadamsdotcom 13 hours ago
So now we have split and contained zero, into minus 1 and plus 1. Yet the force that holds them at a certain distance, is like stretched rubber bands, between the bubble and the point particle inside. Now nature drives energy through the bubble and strikes the point particle, knocking it from the core. It continues to attract, but now it attracts everything. The bubble, continues to repulse, but now everything. The first is a positron, the bubble is an electron.
nealadamsdotcom 13 hours ago
Physicists - Let us discuss a proposition. That the universe is stupid, and is not so clever that it can create different forms of matter. So it creates one form of matter. A kind of pre-matter tht has been processed in a way that we will never know in our life. To us this matter is zero. But it can be pulled on, by an outgoing force. Skin perhaps. This neutral force is pulled into doubles of less than nothing. At the center of each, a point particle, pulling back inward.
nealadamsdotcom 14 hours ago
There are "papers" worth, of "peer reviews" in the comments,
strangely interspersed with the same repeated criticisms of the artist,
rather than the subject.
rongrite 16 hours ago
Gather data, then publish a paper, that's it, We are the ones that make science
alandanweiss 17 hours ago
@alandanweiss Yeah,..hmmm Check the Videos this jerk puts up.
nealadamsdotcom 16 hours ago
@21youngpenfield Nonsense! We really don't have time here for this sort of gibberish. Please buzz off until you become informed.
nealadamsdotcom 22 hours ago
excuse me may I add that the title of this presentation is undisputably incorrect. The word conspiracy is difined as "an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot." What I am saying to you is that Americans so often mis use their own language until they sound uninteligent. The title for this presentation should be "Scientific theory of the Earth growing." Case and point.
21youngpenfield 1 day ago
@21youngpenfield You are correct,...except if I didn't have definers as in "OF SCIENCE",...which is not PEOPLE,..but a PROCESS,... which in turn is a RESULT of the actions of PEOPLE conscious or sub/un-conscious! The result is THE PROCESS.
1,500 yeas of teachers teaching that the sun orbits the Earth, is not a conscious conspiracy,...but a conspiracy never-the-less.
nealadamsdotcom 22 hours ago
@rongrite 3. when they will post HQ pics of the pols we will know for sure...we can just spaculate and most of the so call embraced theories are not proven, just a common embraced theory ...they can't tell u what is gravity!
TheDacians 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rongrite 2. For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction, Yet if the planets accreted from impacts of comets and falling rocks, how is it that the planets are all still on the same solar plane, and are not spread out, above and below and all around the sun?
Why the galaxies are spirals? The same way, a gravitational vortex (given by the sun axis rotation or huge black holes for galactic rotation)! Spiral arms can be associated with orbits!
TheDacians 1 day ago
@nealadamsdotcom pair production does produce matter but it also produces anti-matter. anti-matter annihilates matter thus no matter is produced.
rodge1892 1 day ago
@rodgeYou have added time. The first two pairs in the universe lasted for billions of years, with time and more Pairs the more likely they would meet.
What would the Pairs DO with all this time? Could the Positrons, in time attract the whole fields that they CAME FROM to join in a coating around the Positron to become Protons.
To become Hydrogen.
Then Gravity could join them, without "annihilation"
Could something else be used to keep the Pairs Apart for "LONG ENOUGH"?
EM?
nealadamsdotcom 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If the idiots how control nasa would show the pictures from the poles we could infirm or prove many theories!
TheDacians 1 day ago
Inconsistencies?
Explain accretion.
Explain how dinosaurs were so much bigger than land creatures today.
Explain how creatures with 14 foot long wings on each side, could even lift them off the ground?
Explain the force that supposedly pushes super heavy solid continents through miles thick ocean floor?
What keeps the solid core of the Earth from falling out of center?
All these things are simply explained with the growing Earth, increasing in volume and mass exponentially, over time.
rongrite 1 day ago
@rongrite the ocean floor moves too dumbass...
Madpolis7 18 hours ago
@Madpolis7 Moves like the bark of a tree, moves.
Perhaps, you think that trees don't grow, and all the bark drifts around on the surface?
rongrite 18 hours ago
@rongrite Well bark on a tree isn't exactly tectonic plates that are able to move because the Earth's lithosphere has a higher strength and lower density than the underlying asthenosphere if that's what you're implying.
Madpolis7 15 hours ago
@Madpolis7 Let's pretend that the trunk of a tree is the Earth, and the bark, is the crust. As the tree grows, the older bark, splits, and wrinkles up, over the new, younger, smoother, lower, growth of the tree.
The same thing with the continents upon the Earth, they are the older "bark" that splits, and wrinkles up, over the new, younger, smoother, lower, growth of the Earth.
The shape of the bark, like the shape of the continents, shows that both have grown.
Proof is the pattern.
rongrite 14 hours ago
@rongrite The earth isn't a tree! It has a liquid center, and the tectonic plates sit on top of it. I am NOT suggesting that the CONTINENTS sit on top of the magma. Its the PLATES. Proof is how we can literally identify these plates at fault lines, epicenters, and volcanoes. This is something we actually measure, while measurements with modern high-precision geodetic techniques show that the Earth is not currently increasing in size to within a measurement accuracy of 0.2 mm per year.
Madpolis7 12 hours ago
@Madpolis7 Well, hmm, why don't you explain Howdee Come massive Mountain Ranges
Began to rise up only about 60 Million Years Ago. That is "BEGAN",..after the Dinosaurs died off. If they rose up at the same rate for the last 600 Million Years, would have given us TEN TIMES as many Mountains as we have today. Turns out there was NONE!
How's THAT for your Precision MEASURING? 0,2 mm per year.
Another? 200 MYAgo Sea Level was over 800 feet deeper than today. Where's that water?
nealadamsdotcom 11 hours ago
@nealadamsdotcom Howdee Come Mountain Ranges? I don't seem to recognize that, and neither can the internet. Regardless, who ever said that the mountains grew at the same rate?
Do you have any proof at all that the Earth is growing? We can measure the plates moving, but like I said, measurements with modern high-precision geodetic techniques show that the Earth is not currently increasing in size.
Madpolis7 9 hours ago
@Madpoli 1. You can look up the ages of Earth's Mountain Ranges There were no mountain Ranges to impede the migrations of Dinosaurs to all 7 continents. Funny how Geologists don't actually "TALK" about that since they want you to believe their "THEORIES" that Mountain Ranges "MUST" have existed for billions of years!
I KNOW,...means nothing to you.
Means, to me that 200 MYA, the crust of Earth was just 3-4 miles thick. because there were no oceans,
Today that crust is 30-40 mi thick!
nealadamsdotcom 5 hours ago
@nealadamsdotcom You see, when the crust cracked and spread down to the molten Basalt level. The heated Gases migrated to the Rifts and deserted the continental plates. which got thicker and thicker, inviting DRAMATIC SEASONS and ICE AGES!
From 3 to 30 miles is dramatic.
Now the THICK broken apart pieces had to recurve to a flatter plane as the Earth grew. at 30 MI thick, The upper crust must BUCKLE into Mountain Ranges.
There is NO technology that measures EARTH'S GROWTH
nealadamsdotcom 4 hours ago
@nealadamsdotcom Do you remember contributing billions of dollars for technology to measure if the Earth is GROWING! What? To shut me up!.
I notice you didn't mention the added Sea Level. Over 800 feet of it? Covered two thirds of the continental plate. MOST of North America.
Where do we find ancient Sea fossils?
NEVER IN THE DEEP OCEANS!
They are found on the LAND! On folded land. NEVER the Oceans.
If I asked a 12 year old kid what that meant, he'd figure it out!.
nealadamsdotcom 4 hours ago
@Madpolis7 i think it is safe to say that a measurement of the diameter of the Earth taken from any point on the surface is never going to be the same,.as measured from any other point on the surface. Even with today's technology, it would be impossible to measure the thickness of the Earth from every point on the surface and average them all out. Satellites measure the distance from a point on the surface, and the altitude is measured from sea level, not the center of the Earth!
rongrite 8 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rongrite Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
marionetemanJ 8 hours ago
@Madpolis7 Well,...it spreads,..if you call that "moving". It certainly doesn't paddle across the OCEAN!
nealadamsdotcom 16 hours ago
WOW there are waaaaaaaaaay too many likes for this bullshit
hesmotit 1 day ago 7
@hesmotit Na, there aren't half enough. Unfortunately.
MrAjjdonnelly 17 hours ago
@KyIeMcCIeIIan NO! We all know, it's not enough!
nealadamsdotcom 1 day ago
@KyIeMcCIeIIan Yes. That's the first explanation that comes to mind!
But where are the debris??? There should be miles of space dust covering all the bedrock upon the Earth, if it has grown this much, in such a geologically short period of time. Also the amount of space debris that hit the Earth annually, is known pretty accurately, and it is nowhere near enough to explain this growth.
The new additional matter is growing from within, and that is causing the continents to spread.
rongrite 1 day ago
@KyIeMcCIeIIan youre an idiot, space dust falling to earth wouldnt cause the continents to spread apart. Also its not "countless tons". The earth is tremendously larger than the amount of stuff coming from space to make a difference
IDontKnowNorDoYou 1 day ago
Interesting hypothesis. Pair production on a large scale and counter modern theories but everyone said Copernicus was a whacko..
MrSpindonkey 1 day ago
this is really interesting, good video
vogagis 1 day ago
i really like this reason for the exponential growth of large gravitational centers suspended in space.
If the universe is infinite, then all parts of it must grow,
because infinity divided by anything,
is going to eventually, add up to infinity, too.
rongrite 1 day ago
@mryellow123 A pig-headed Professor is very much the same as a Pig-Headed student. Their ears are blocked. Their brains are dead and they think that LEARNING is for children. My memory saye he was a computer geek who studied Physics for that purpose. If he can't come up with a good argument, have him do an animation that proves th Pangea Theory.
nealadamsdotcom 1 day ago
@nealadamsdotcom Calling a Professor who wasted 2 hours on the phone with you talking through the details "Pig-Headed" just because he broke your theory, makes you look like an even bigger wanker if that is even possible.
Your theory is just backwards. It's easy to come to the conclusion you have when ignoring any and all evidence which doesn't fit .
Maybe if you censor a few more comments from those who point out the inconsistencies, it will become true.
eferinfirth 1 day ago
@eferinfirth AHHh, now I remember him. We spoke for about 20 minutes. He offered little or nothing to the discussion,..expect he asked if I thought, in Beta Decay, if the Positron that flew out was in there all along? I said Yes, obviously!
Actually, I got the feeling that he thought so too, but was ashamed to admit it!
Turns out many physicists feel there is a core positive something at the core of the Proton.
nealadamsdotcom 1 day ago
@mryellow123 I would like a crack at Doctor Hsu.
Picking a conclusion and Backfilling is a standard methodology. Einstein used it.
As to the creation of matter. To discover there is only one form of MATTER CREATION discovered by man in the last 100 years, one doesn't have to be the best technical Physicist in the world to logically conclude that Pair-Production is likely MORE PROFOUND than Physics has treated it in the last 70 years, and FINALLY has turned their attention there.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
Comment removed
mryellow123 2 days ago
@mryellow123 I'd like another crack. He's older. I believe he was a student at the time. Perhaps he's learned a few things. Like about Pair-Production and QUARKS!
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
What I don't understand is where all the mass and volume came from for the earth to grow
fadedflage 2 days ago 9
@fadedflage The new matter is MADE/ converted from Prime Matter in a process called Pair-Production.
nealadamsdotcom 1 day ago
@nealadamsdotcom New matter cannot be created. They teach you that in eighth grade science. It is also quite simple to prove. And I doubt you can provide an ounce of evidence for the production of matter.
shadow6k 1 day ago
@shadow6k 'Kay. Pair-Production (MATTER CREATION) was first observed by Carl David Anderson in 1932.
Physicists currently can keep positrons isolated from Electrons using magnetic fields and are experimenting with Positron fueled engines. Positrons and Electrons are MATTER!
BASIC MATTER!
nealadamsdotcom 1 day ago
@fadedflage From matter that hit the earth ever day., or the mass is the same but volume increase.
larsiemannen 10 hours ago
@mryellow123 There IS Compressive Subduction at the Ring of fire. If you examine the map at continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth you will see it began 60 MYA!
"If course they fit together?"
I'm sorry? Are you aware that you conceded the whole argument? HELLLOOO.
Only the oceanic plate SUBDUCTS! The continental plate is TOO LIGHT!
Thank you
Neal Adams
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
Comment removed
mryellow123 2 days ago
@mryellow123 No, once you discover Subduction, Obduction and Mountain Building as a result of the compressive forces of the crust, then you must investigate exactly HOW MUCH each accounts for.
Subduction accounts for 1/20 of the spreading. Now you can go and account for the rest ! You have "demonstrated" one if the falacies of the Pangea Theory!
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
Comment removed
mryellow123 2 days ago
@mryellow123 While I would like to take credit for it, that HONOR goes to Professor of Geology Samuel Warren Carey. who first presented in the 60's.
His are the "giant" shoulders that I stand on. I merely did that incredible map animatiom. with the help of my brilliant daughter. AND I DID THE physics!
You,...are merely an ignorant internet troll. FACT! Hie thee back to the Cat Fart videos, deadbrain, where you belong. We are adults here, and we're talking Adult stuff.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@TheHeraldic You are TRYING to talk about "Convection" dummie.
Yet you are taalking about the core and outer core.
Between the core/outer core and the asthenosphere and CRUST is the 7 THOUSAND MILE THICK MANTLE.
The Spreading Crust has to do with the CRUST and the Asthenosphere. on which the continents sit!,...and here, Convection CANNOT EXIST.
CRACK A BOOK. THINK!
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Yea it's convection and I'm not going to explain it in detail on youtube, thank you very much... what's your point anyway? The asthenosphere is in a liquid condition due pressure. Why can't there be convection? I still don't see the problem?
TheHeraldic 2 days ago
@TheHeraldic 4% of the Asthenosphere is liquid. The remainder is DUCTILE to SOLID and the MANTLE 7,000 Miles Thick is SOLID!
Read my notes on CONVECTION AGAIN UNTIL you understand it!
YOU don't understand the CONCEPT.
If you come back, and still don't understand, I will BLOCK YOU! It's 4-5th grade science!
nealadamsdotcom 1 day ago
@seeqer66 Sorry to have disagreed with such a devout Religious fanatic. Perhaps GOD did make a doubularity, or singularity thing with his magic wand,..out of ,..um,..the Holy Trinity or Allah's nether regions. I get confused, because there are about 5 Big Bang Theories. The latest talks about Pair-Production. Another, Doubularity. Another all the matter packed into an object the size of a football/an acorn/ or a Barn. Then we found it's accelerating OUTWARD!.
Hard to track the screwballs!
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom What are you trying to distract me with now? Religious fanatic???
There's all sorts of speculation about what happened before the "Big Bang". Most having to do with a lot of fancy math. NONE have one ounce of evidence to back them up. Thus my statement of fact that scientists have no idea what caused the "Big Bang". According the evidence provided so far. Our Universe (as is now) came from a point in space. In all likelyhood, the energy/matter existed before.
seeqer66 1 day ago
@mczeljk No, THE MORONS believe that all the straight sided continental pieces differentiated to the crust by GOD in Jigsaw puzzle molds and traveled around the world like bumper Cars in a carnival, to JOIN (Sans basaltic sutures,) in a big giant island, leaving the other two-thirds of Earth, WATER, 3 miles thick. . An Island which, after 200 Million Years Broke into pieces to spread over the Earth and then REJOIN EXACTLY where they broke apart.
THIS is what Morons believe.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom
Who told you that the continents rejoined exactly where they broke apart? For example how does India fit in your claim when India was ones joined to what now is Africa and then travelled north an collided with Asia to form the Himalayas.
And that the continental plates move has been measured and therefore proven.
mczeljk 2 days ago
I'm prepared here to keep an open mind, and I've read many comments about Pair Production.
When water cools down it solidifies into ice, it also grows in volume. Maybe this effect is also happening on Earth? Also if Earth is in a liquid state shouldn't the centripetal forces of the Earths rotation also create an elliptical effect? Also what effects do we know about the Earths magnetic field having on the volumetric size of Earth? This is an interesting theory.
euandykes 2 days ago
@euandykes Water is one of the few liquids that decreases in density when frozen.
Most solids, are denser than their liquid forms.
However, "metaphorically", we can't see mass without matter, and matter has volume. And matter grows in large gravitational centers.
So, the growth of matter, is like a densefication of a portion of the mass of the universe. Another way to look at it, if the universe is infinite, then all parts of it must grow, because infinity divided by anything is ∞.
rongrite 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do you say there is no subduction? You can't just claim that...you need to back that up or your theory doesn't hold any credibility.
andyherts80 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do you say there is no subduction? You can't just claim that...you need to back that up or your theory doesn't hold any credibility.
andyherts80 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do you say there is no subduction? You can't just claim that...you need to back that up or your theory doesn't hold any credibility.
andyherts80 2 days ago
Why do you say there is no subduction? You can't just claim that...you need to back that up or your theory doesn't hold any credibility.
andyherts80 2 days ago
Comment removed
misterwrigley 2 days ago
Comment removed
misterwrigley 2 days ago
I am not scientist but I do read and I think neutrino or something else is being captured by our thermonuclear core of the earth. During last 200 million or so, it started to grow more faster due to our sun's dynamic. Our Sun is dying star. And our planet leaving this some kind of magnetic zones in relations to Sun's sphere of influences. Thus in the last, certain period of Sun's deactivation, it started to enable planet earth to grow exponentially, thru neutrino or some exotic particle capture
symmetry08 2 days ago
Hey guys, I think we can get it to 1,000,000 by end of day Sunday. That's going to send a message out there.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
Pair production is sometimes seen in a cloud chamber.
The production of a positron and an electron condensing trails of vapor.
rongrite 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom I don't mean to disrespect you, but how can you say that Black holes generate new matter when we know so little about them? Almost all of your arguments are based on assumptions and its rather frustrating.
Madpolis7 2 days ago
@Madpolis7 - None of my arguments are based on assumptions. MY arguments are are based on facts and deductions from these facts.
You wrote before you looked at, from either hub, of every black hole in the universe, electrons are fired from one side, and positrons are fired from the other side, in massive streams of matter particles. So massive, that they are a great subject of discussion in the fields of physics and cosmology. Research, research, research.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Well I'm not exactly an expert in this field, and if it is such a greatly discussed subject, then perhaps you could send me a link to an article about it? My Google searches are failing.
Madpolis7 2 days ago
@Madpolis7 That's because it is a conspiracy of science.
LOL.
Actually this is entirely Neal Adams theory, (though it has grown, too)
so you have found the source.
There have been others, who have noticed that the Earth has gotten bigger, because the continents fit together on a smaller globe without any deep ocean floors. But they have not been able to explain the reasons for this.
But Neal has nailed the only possible cause for this!
And he explains how matter comes to exists.
rongrite 2 days ago
@rongrite Well, he didn't explain it to me so I don't know what your talking about..
Madpolis7 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Are you referring to pair production in black holes creating electrons and positrons? You need to have a temperature of 6x10^9 Kelvin for that, I'm not sure about black holes but you certainly can't reach that temperature in the center of the Earth.
Madpolis7 2 days ago
@Madpolis7 - You can reach it in a lightning bolt. High energy photons strike the earth all the time. Pair production is happening in your room, all the time, as you type. In the time it takes to write your next note, pair production may happen 100 times in your room. We have no idea how much energy is at the core of the earth. What we do know is that it can be produced in a laboratory, in colliders, and as science is discovering, it is the most common event in the universe.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Errr pair production doesn't occur in temperatures under less than 10^9 K.
en . wikipedia . org/wiki/Matter_creation
Madpolis7 2 days ago
@Madpolis7 - Pair production happens in space. What you are speaking of is the temperature it seems to take to create a high energy photon. However, in magnetic fields, like at the earth's core, other factors enter.
I recommend you do much more reading on pair production, rather than pronounce the limited knowledge that you have.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom What? Its takes 10^13K to create a Photon, 6x10^9K to create electrons and positrons, and pair production simply doesn't occur at any temperature under 10^9K.
My own research isn't doing so well so maybe you could help me with some links? I found articles proving that magnetic fields influence pair production, but I found nothing about it being possible in the center of the earth, can you please provide me with links proving your hypothesis?
Madpolis7 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom The core of the sun isn't even that hot...
Madpolis7 2 days ago
Does this mean the earths mass increased proportionally to the increasing surface area? Is earth just less dense now? Could this be the result of small particles of interstellar dabrye contributing to earths mass?
gdykes 2 days ago
@gdykes - No, the earth's mass increased. New matter was made. That is the whole point of this.The growing earth is the smallest tip of the iceberg. What we learned in science, is one atom is exactly like every other atom in the universe. The earth is exactly like every other suspended body. Understand our little earth, and we understand the universe. In the beginning, there was just the universe. From it, we make the matter universe.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@gdykes Accretion cannot account for this amount of growth in only the last 70 million years. And there is no sign of much on the surface. So, growth of matter is internal to the planet. The additional material is pushed out of the Earth at the mid ocean rifts, widening the newer, lower,deep ocean floors. The growth is accelerating to a factor of mass, i think. But volume also increases. Density generally increases, towards the center.
And, out of all the planets, we are the densest.
rongrite 2 days ago
If the universe in motion, grows more mass,
wouldn't that increase its energy, causing its growing parts, further apart?
rongrite 2 days ago
Great theory, more logical than the Pangea Continental Drift embraced by most scientists.. I wonder can an expanding universe be one of the reasons or cause of the growth of almost everything?
joelomarmendoza 2 days ago
@joelomarmendoza - The universe does not expand. There is no such physical process. It's like talking about elves and fairies. Growth exists and we understand it. Now we need to understand the science behind it. Growth is conversion of one thing to another, so that it can be added to another.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
I find it amusing that this video used the themesong from The Lone Ranger.
nakyer 2 days ago
People who care: We are rapidly headed for 1,000,000 views. You can accelerate this process. I know, 1,000,000 views means nothing to a cat fart video, or a posting of cute puppies. But when a science posting goes into the millions, people sit up and take notice. People are beginning to invite me on more radio shows and more lecture tours. This theory is gaining a "voice", thanks to all of you.
This is important. Some of you already know this. Push the numbers in any way you can. Thank you.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom I've heavily supported and spread this idea. I even purchased your video collection back a few years ago. Very cut & dried perfect explanation of everything I ever wondered in high school. Thank you for thinking outside the box
Idkfawin32 2 days ago
@Idkfawin32 - Thank you for responding so very nicely. The future holds great answers and an incredible adventure for all that are interested in science. Remember, science is not rocket science. It belongs to people, and the language of science should be for the people.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Slightly star-struck that you responded :) anyways I agree fully. It's a shame the science seems to be accepted through hierarchy. The reason seems to be that the higher-up scientists have the tools and access/money necessary to prove or interrogate their theories a bit more. Science should be more open, only then can it flourish(Ex. Computer Science)
Anyway its glad to see you are getting more publicity, hopefully one day everyone will understand your theories.
Idkfawin32 2 days ago
@Idkfawin32 - I don't believe the system is unfair. I have always had to battle to get the truth out there. I don't want or need an advantage, and if my view prevails, it will be because I have done my homework better and more completely, and because I am right. New ideas start with one person. Any help is appreciated. But in the end, it's all about truth.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom I don't really know if I phrased it right but what I was saying is people should be more open to new ideas. Do you think you will have any more videos coming out any time soon?
Idkfawin32 2 days ago
Comment removed
Madpolis7 2 days ago
@Idkfawin32 - Yes, I will. I also am planning on speaking tours, as well as the revamping of the book that I never released. I didn't release it at the time, because it constantly needed updating.
You understand, I'm fitting the science in between Batman Odyssey, and all the other work I do.
Thanks again for your interest.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
i don't know if "science fiction" is the best descriptor. The best science fiction is based on scientific fact. Some science fictions are based on scientific theories but they are never as good, and really should be in the category of fantasy.
rongrite 2 days ago
And if there's no subduction, what's your explanation for "subduction zones" such as the one that caused the 2009 Tsunami?
seeqer66 2 days ago
@seeqer66 - There is subduction at The Ring of Fire. It began 60MYA. It was caused by the Australian plate rifting from the Antarctic Plate at that time, shattering the oceanic plate above it, and giving purchase to the only subduction on earth, the Ring of Fire.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
nealadamsdotcom What happened to my earlier post?
THEORIGINALEXSCAPER 3 days ago
@israphel22 If MATTER cannot be Made or destroyed,..How did we get this massive MATTER UNIVERSE from "NOTHING"!
There's nothing worse than "a little bit of knowledge".
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Matter cannot be created or destroyed. This is a fact, in the Universe we now inhabit. Who has ever said the Universe came from nothing? We don't know what happened before the "Big Bang". We have no way of knowing WHAT the Universe came from, at this time.
seeqer66 2 days ago
@seeqer66 - At some point, the matter universe came from what we call nothing. That is the conclusion of all of science. Those who believe the matter universe always existed, are deluded religionists. Or, believe in magic. If this is you, you have no reason to be here in this discussion. We are talking science. There is one and only one method of matter creation from seemingly nothing.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom You really need to research the big bang. its obvious you do not understand it. there was a point of singularity where everything was compacted into an infinitely small, infinitely hot, infinitely cold, infinitely dense point. all the matter was there and when the big bang happened it expanded and cooled leaving what we see now as the current universe. And is still cooling and expanding.
imus1426 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
planet core = Hydrated ionic compounds
"new matter" is not a new material. It is the same material that expands chemically.
The idea of this video is taken from here: youtube.com/watch?v=_0RCOcFYJ2I
SergueiPevzner 3 days ago
Comment removed
SergueiPevzner 3 days ago
Wouldn't Earth growing explain those giant sinkholes?
simonnaylor 3 days ago
@simonnaylor i wonder if some "craters" actually resulted from growth, not from meteors.
rongrite 3 days ago
@simonnaylor Yes, they do.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
at first i was gonna write you off as a crazy kook. but i decided to watch anyways and listen before passing judgement, and i gotta say you kinda make a point. but what if it does both. expands at a greater rate than subduction. subduction can take place as long as there is heat and pressure and it has to be really slow. expansion can happen faster since there is no opposing force and can still use matter from subduction. this would explain why so little has happened in such a long time.
imus1426 3 days ago
@imus1426 1. NO, NOTHING "EXPANDS" ! Things GROW! There is no such Physical phenomenon as EXPAND!
2." LONG TIME" in a human life is a JOT in time. Earth is growing Exponentially FASTER with time. In 400 million years Earth will be the size of Saturn!
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@Yeshua3996 this is a decent theory. is it real? who knows. but scietifically speaking things can expand. its a simple matter of density. if the earths core is dense and it expands out there is still matter there that is expanding. You can squeeze a dry sponge and let go you see it expands. where did that matter come from? it was there the whole time.
TrollinOnMyFace 3 days ago
@TrollinOnMyFace 1. It is real!
2. NO, "THINGS CANNOT "EXPAND". It's NOT a "simple" matter of density.
3A sponge may go BACK to it's original SIZE after an "OUTSIDE FORCE" is applied. But once there it DOES NOT EXPAND! It may GROW!
Please do not write ignorant notes here.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
Hmm, logically life as we know it, needs to exist on matter. so matter came first.
However, if large gravitational centers are growing, this would mean that there was no need for a "big bang" to make matter. and matter "creation" in an ongoing process, that i think, had no beginning and no end. This would mean that "life" has always been around, with matter, that has always been growing, and spreading.
The growing Earth theory overturns theories, and beliefs, we thought we knew to be correct.
rongrite 3 days ago
Neal has explained what causes growth MANY times. How about reading a few weeks/ months worth of comments. This video is almost 5 years old and close to a million views. If you think youre the only one thats asked these questions then youre too dense to understand in the forst place.
IDontKnowNorDoYou 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Yeshua3996 • Good point BUT...First of all I AGREE with the expanding theory. What I disagree with is that it's NOT expanding anymore. This happened suddenly. The data of the floorbed is somewhat correct the middle is the youngest. BUT ask to date yesterday's flow and they will tell you it’s millions years old. IF these 70 Millions years were true we would have Km's of beach to the shore line. So the crusts hardened and pressure will expel at the rings...upward formation not sideways anymore
Zed6t9r 3 days ago
Comment removed
Zed6t9r 3 days ago
Comment removed
Zed6t9r 3 days ago
@Yeshua3996 Good point BUT.... First all I AGREE will the expanding theory...What I disagree with is, that it's NOT expanding anymore (unless the SUN gets hotter, and if this happens we are all gone). This happened suddenly. The data of the floor bed is somewhat correct the middle is the youngest. BUT ask to date yesterday s flow and they will tell you it’s millions years old. IF these 70 Millions years were true we would have Km's of beach. So expansion no more, the only way is up not sideways
Zed6t9r 3 days ago
@Zed6t9r - 1. Nothing "expands", there is not such concept. 2. Earth has not stopped growing in any way. It is increasing in it's growth exponentially, as the universe is growing exponentially. You are saying things off the top of your head that are nothing but opinions, and not based o science in any way. We are not discussing opinions. We are discussing science. Go to continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth and read the student's letter there very carefully with the list.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@Zed6t9r - 3. The sun grows, between 10 and 25% each BY, according to science. The planets grow and move slowly outward on their electromagnetic lines, (Bode's Law), 4. Nothing happened suddenly, you don't know what you are talking about. We are not interested in jibberish. 5. Your's may be the most stupid letter this month. Study factual science, and don't come back here until you do, or I will block you.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@Yeshua39961. The NEW MATTER is being MADE by a matter creation process. Do you know one?
2. Nothing "EXPANDS"! There's no such process.
3. Subduction, Obduction and Mountain building are all a result of the compressive forces of the Growing Earth!
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom matter creation process? can you give us an example?
keithmoonfan1 3 days ago
@keithmoonfan1 There's only one. It's called Pair-Production.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@Yeshua3996 Plate boundries is where the action is.
ONE COMPRESSIVE SUBDUCTION area exists on Earth,..at the Ring of Fire. That's IT!
This area has subducted One Twentieth of the SPREAD of the last 200 Million Years.
Sorry, but you're incorrect.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
the matter comes from the same place all the dark matter comes from in space that's why the galaxies are speeding up not slowing down.
mikalmillion 3 days ago
@TAPriceCTR there has to be a matter manufacturing process somewhere. How else do we get matter? All matter that exists today made in a single expansion event or a natural ongoing process?
IDontKnowNorDoYou 3 days ago
Comment removed
Maczekdum 4 days ago
Neat idea. Putting the continents together like a puzzle isn't even close to enough though. Do you have any proposed mechanism for this idea? Is the Earth blowing up like a balloon? If so, what's replacing the rock? Is new matter being created? If so, what possible mechanism could be responsible?
Mars is a dead planet with no water to hide this expansion. You'd think someone would have noticed something going on over there.
Neat idea. Wrong, but a neat idea just the same.
seeqer66 4 days ago
@seeqer66 1. It was "ENOUGH" to launch the "Pangea Theory"! As well with the other PROOFS (Matching Flora and Fauna across all 7 continents. (So much for the common proofs. Be something tho if say complete fossils of Thalattosuchia ( fish-tailed Gator 205-145 MYA) were found in Japan,..AND Oregon? Earth, NOR the Universe "EXPANDS"! THERE IS NO SUCH PHYSICAL PROCESS AS "EXPANDS", without a separate force.) That would be "Stupid Science"
Yes, I found/discovered the Mechanism.
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom discovered the "Mechanism". Took 30 yrs. (This is where the nut-case spews out his Pseudo-Science Bulls**t, right?,...heh)
Skipping over that,.. Mars. No, not "DEAD"!?? (What a concept. Who put those words in your mouth? NASA? .....Figures. ...Well, they uh,..changed their, what I laughingly call, "minds". NOT quite "dead". Watch my 2 Mars Videos here. 10 years ago a class of 4th graders "noticed and all wrote to NASA using Earth and Mars Photos.
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom No... It wasn't. Some kind of mechanism was given for the movement of the continental plates. In addition, since then lots of physical evidence has been found to support it. As I said, nice idea, but that's all it is.
seeqer66 3 days ago
@seeqer Um Nnno. There is NO mechanism for the "movement"! There IS a mechanism for the spreading of crust. GROWTH! Perfect!
20 years ago Geologists said "Convection". But Geologists are NOT Physicists.
Do you know how convection works?
Super-hot at the bottom. open to COOL at the top. Heated gases rise, cool at the top,..sink down= convection.
Earth. HOTTEST-molten is JUST under the CRUST! Cooler going DOWN!
CRUST is sealed keeping the HEAT from cooling!
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Even if you were right, the mechanism from movement of the tectonic plates is obvious & factual. The mechanism's right there. You still won't say a word about what's CAUSING the planet to grow. Unless you're willing to go there, this conversation's over.
seeqer66 3 days ago
@seeqer66 I just explained why Convection cannot and does not work. Why don't YOU explain how it DOES WORK and abrogates all of Physics along the way. I'm listening.
I've explained the growing process a dozen times. Look it up in the comments.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom The volcanic activity of this planet does happen. That's the mechanism. You just saying "growth", doesn't qualify it as a mechanism. Energy/Matter cannot be created or destroyed. Only converted. Where is all this mass coming from? The pressures required for plate tectonics are very high, but they do seem to be there. You provided no evidence that I noticed, that they're not. Do you know of a single Geologist who DOESN'T believe in plate tectonics? let me know.
seeqer66 2 days ago
@seeqer66 - Volcanic activity is not the mechanism, volcanic activity is the result release of pressure from the rubbing of 2 plate sections together. Repeat the word result. Result is not a mechanism. It is a result OF the mechanism. Study your science.
Samuel Warren Carey, who wrote 2 books, James Maxlow, who wrote "Terra, non firma earth". Does truth need verification from someone with a degree? Fine, there you have it.
nealadamsdotcom 2 days ago
@seeqer66 Funny about the word "LOTS". Something people say, when they don't know what they're talking bout and they want to impress. Not' "Lots", and ALL of it is conjecture and NO FACTS!
I am talking about FACTS. For all of your sakes, I JUST stick to FACTS.
You are incorrect!
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Go look in a geology book. I have no more desire to explain modern geology to you, than I have in explaining modern biology to a creationist.
seeqer66 3 days ago
@nealadams Couple of FACTOIDS:
1.There is NO DEEP OCEANIC plate that exists on the Earth that is older than 180 MYO! That 180 MYOld plate is in Both Atlantic AND Pacific,....like they began spreading at the same time.
2. This'll kill ya. Geologists insist DEEP OCEANS were extant on Earth for billions of years, YET,.. NO deep oceanic life is fossilized in any DEEP OCEANS that lived there before 70 Million Years Ago.
3. Bone density today is the same as 200 MYA! 60 TON Dino!
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@Cognition49
I grow by consuming matter, where does the planet get this matter which it consumes? I am not even going to touch the conciousness claim
TAPriceCTR 4 days ago
@TAPriceCTR Conciousness? Are you High?
Before you ask where the "NEW" MATTER was "MADE", ( MATTER 'must' be "MADE"??, correct?.... or else it would not BE HERE,...yes?) YOU must deal with the question of "Where all the MATTER of the Universe came/comes from?" Because, you see, my answer would be. "By way of the SAME process/mechanism! It's hard to believe the very stupid universe came up with TWO SEPARATE PROCESSES FOR MATTER CREATION. ONE, is surely ENOUGH, yes?
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom
I was responding to someone who has apparently removed their comment. and my reaction "I am not even going to touch the conciousness claim" is pretty much the same as your reaction "are you high"
so, you believe there is a matter manufacturing process at the core of the earth... once problem with your theory, mt everest (and many other mountains and their ranges) are growing, were the earth being filled like a giant rock balloon all peaks would be deminishing.
TAPriceCTR 3 days ago
@TAPriceCTR 1, Whatever.
2.Engineer? Good. The CRUST spreads at the Basalt (denser) Oceanic Crust. Continents Do NOT SPREAD, but are held within the Basaltic skirt/plate.
Now as Earth grows and the crust gets ever thicker. the continents do not spread , the crust recurves to a flatter plane. What happens to the upper tiers of the 40 Mi thick crust?
You tell me.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
according to mainstream science the young small rock size earth was rotating the sun, gathering dust, asteroids, comets, getting bigger & producing all sorts of stuff due to its materials & became the earth. billions of years later the solar system is still full of matter that can be attracted. the earth also has the same gravity. But by some mysterious court "STOP" order the earth has stopped all activity & is sleeping. all equations balanced. BULLSHIT!
nayanmalig 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Question, if the earth was half the size before as it is now, wouldn't the ocean cover much of the land masses(continents)? It covers 70% of the earth's surface area today. The ocean would carve the shorelines of the continents, changing their shape then the shorelines wouldn't fit anymore. And where did the materials that came out of the seafloor came from? inside the earth? Pressurizing that amount of matter would increase the earth's temp probably melting some of the crust.
rodge1892 4 days ago
@rodge1892 1. When Earth had grown to only the Size of Mars 200 Mil.Yrs.Ago (Where our Animation begins) There were NO DEEP OCEANS ON EARTH AT ALL. The water(1/6th of today) sat, as you learned in school RIGHT ON and covered TWO THIRDS of the Continental plates. Likely, where YOU live today was under 600 feet of water 200 MYA! That's why ALL ANCIENT FISH FOSSILS ARE FOUND,....on the land, NEVER the deep oceans. They DIDN'T EXIST!
2.Oceans do not "Carve" shorelines"!
3. Yes!
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
One thing to support this theory is that dinosaurs would have been much better off on an earth with less gravity. A smaller earth would have allowed this
assortedcorpses 4 days ago
@assortedcorpses A smaller Earth would also mean less gravity, that also holds the atmosphere, meaning that there was less atmospheric pressure back then.
Dinosaurs had very efficient breathing abilities, and could live in very low pressure, like todays' birds.
rongrite 4 days ago
@rongrite Interesting, I didn't know that one. I just remember one of my science teachers explaining why creatures tend to be smaller today, especially insects, and he gave increasing gravity over time as a possible reason.
assortedcorpses 4 days ago
@assortedcorpses i can't think of any other explanation that works, to explain how the maximum height and size envelope of land creatures, has decreased.
Even, 3x higher air pressure on a prehistoric Earth, cannot account for the leverage on the prehistoric bodies of flying creatures, from their huge wings!
The reasonable explanation is that the Earth must have had less mass, then!
i think that from this fulcrum point, one can lever the Earth
growth theory to accepted fact!
rongrite 3 days ago
@super7dsmom Good point. i had to search yt because of their faulted new design.
The video is called "Mountains Rise Before Your Eyes"
watch?v=3vznUwLAq14
rongrite 4 days ago
I do more than postulate when I conclude that the empirical evidence presented here is not only empirical indeed, but furthermore, brilliant and logical. Galileo suffered much ridicule in the face of empirical evidence which argued against the once widely accepted concentric view of the Universe; yet indeed, the process continues as we must yet again paradigm our thinking into yet another mold of newly discovered truth. Albeit painfully humbling, we should collectively marvel!
CWJournal 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@super7dsmom go to neals youtube page for more videos
IDontKnowNorDoYou 4 days ago
The Earth grew slowly when it was smaller, and as it grew bigger, it grew faster.
This is called "exponential growth".
i think, the rate of growth, stretching the surface, surpassed the elasticity of the old thicker crust, that split open long snaking rifts, world wide, then the deep oceans began to form, in those widening rifts. A seed germinates, grows into a shrub. but over the same time, a mature tree, will grow more material, than that seed to shrub did.
rongrite 4 days ago
Why did it start growing all of the sudden at 70 million years ago? Why didn't it start billions of years ago as soon as Earth became solid?
QuantumDisciple7 4 days ago
@MrStoneClark With the "electric model", as anyone figured out how electricity makes matter?
rongrite 5 days ago
@fozzy0266 2/3rds of the crust was covered in water back then, before the continents were "created". Perhaps it looked similar with water when it was smaller, as it does today.
rongrite 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This vid is popular on Rangoon
brainbutler220 6 days ago
wow. talk about bubkis. mars is geologicaly dead, there is no molten core to cause anything to move.
this not only contains untrue premises but even were the premises true the conclusions are unsupported by the premises. the gas giants might be growing but the rocky planets are not growing beyond the rate of the mass of the meteorites which impact it.
TAPriceCTR 6 days ago 2
@TAPriceCTR Watch the two Mars videos. Read lots of the comments and watch the other videos. You need to load up before discussing this. There's too much to explain.
nealadamsdotcom 6 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom you are speaking to a mechanical engineer. if my kind do not understand how the physical world operates machines do not work. you have no explanation of how the world is flat, you are just proving it by pointing to the ground and saying "does that look like a ball to you?" if you were not wrong then science could never have progressed as far as it has because we would know NOTHING of how things work.
TAPriceCTR 5 days ago
@TAPriceCTR Ummm and,......so? I'm confused. I'd be happy to explain any part or all of this to ANYONE. I'm asking you to get past some Preliminaries, IF, you are INTERESTED only
. This is a NEW SCIENCE,...OR a RE-analysis of what is based on 10% FACT, and 90% theory and observation. It's the Theory and observation that I have completely re-examined. My tools are FACTS and deductions. For example:
We have a Universe of MATTER that once was, seemingly, NOTHING. (Whatever that is.)
nealadamsdotcom 5 days ago