@Nealadamsdotcom stop telling stupid shit you fucking moron. The heat of the core makes the layer above it rise, because that's how nature works, the cold part of the layer goes down until it gets back up when it's warmed up, it's a circular motion which makes the plates move. What's not logical about that?
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 ∞.
"No subduction" well.... your theory just went out the window.
So what if they fit together on a smaller planet, of course they do when you ignore the effects of subduction. If you ignore one side of the equation then the only solution is "it was smaller", if you include the known facts then things balance as they should.
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 No, that's not the conclusion of all of science. The "Big Bang" theory states that all matter & energy, in this universe originated from a single point. Before that, nothing is known. PERIOD. This conversation is boring me. If you REALLY feel that this even constitutes a hypothesis, write up your findings and send them to a peer reviewed journal. I feel very confident that I will never see this discussed anywhere but youtube.
@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!
@nealadamsdotcom our planet Earth grow probably has to do with Universe faster growing rate and due to our dyeing Sun's weakening magnetic sphere of influences.
@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.)
@nealadamsdotcom From a practical point of view, "NOTHING" can be many things, visually and really. It can be 2 inch thick glass that we cannot "SEE". It can be an electrical field, OR an Electro-magnetic field. "Nothing" can be Jello. "Nothing" can be Water to a fish. Air to a human, till it picks up your barn.
So, what is " Empty" space when it slows down ALL RADIATION to one speed? "Nothing-Space" IS 10 times as much Dark MATTER, as MATTER.
@dylbie84 Watch the Moon Video. Jupiter has grown to become the inner Planets Meteorite Umbrella, that's why we don't get hit by large Meteorites, while Jupiter get's hit by Planet killers all the time.
It's the nature of the Universe to grow! (Not "expand". There's no such physical concept as 'expand'.
I'm afraid I can't believe this 'theory'. Africa and South America do join up because they're were joined once and them moved apart because of the constructive plate boundary.Furthermore, this is a theory and not as you say 'the truth'. show me the scientific evidence to back this up, and I'll believe you.
@dylbie Like a Religionest, when one becomes trained to BELIEVE something, there IS NO "DEBATE", merely "BELIEFS"1
'Believers' will rage and insist they have 'open minds' and "just provide proof",.. but then they say,"That's not Proof!" Forgetting that "THEIR FAITH" is based on FAITH and THEORY!
Let me give you an example:
You begin with a Planet with an uneven surface and some water. I say as it increases it's Growth the thickened crust finally cracks and the crust pieces spread
I say. "Separate subject. Different level" We need to stick to geology"
""NO"" You say. "Too big to leap over!"
So, I say "Where do YOU BELIEVE WE GOT A MATTER UNIVERSE? And we're off to the races.
REWIND! Growing Earth vs JUST the Pangea Theory.
" Earth doesn't have a Granitic crust at all. Just BROKEN PIECES. We know theyre "BROKEN" because we have SOLID PROOF they were together in the Atlantic. The EXACT SAME PROOF
@neal EXACT SAME PROOF that applies perfectly to the pieces joining in the Pacific. THE SAME PROOF? YEP. Joined BROKEN edges, spreading oceanic plate, matching Flora and Fauna. ALL the same. EVERY PROOF, THE SAME.
EXCEPT...Pangea says they were broken in pieces then came together into an island, which after 150 MY's breaks apart , travels around the world like rafts and joins on the other side of earth into an island AGAIN, NEVER coating the Earth.
Another thought about continental shelves; if a continent is cupped over the surface of a small Earth, and the Earth grows bigger, wouldn't the edges of that solid curved continent be pushed down into the Earth forming the lower continental shelf's?
i remember a rather strange moment in class, when i was talking to some other student about how Africa and South America looked like they fit well together, And he said, with a twinkle in his eye, that the continental shelves fit even better.
Now i know why, the continental shelves were separated later,
so they are now, a closer fit, than the continental shorelines!
Satellites measure from the Earth to the satellite above.
As the Earth grows, this distance doesn't change much, and they seem to have to constantly raise the satellites to higher orbits...just wind resistance?
The sea floors and mountaintops are all rising together, and the mountaintops' growth, is augmented from the re-curvature of the crust. But if we measure everything from a mean sea-level, there is little, if any change, seen in everything.
Sorry to be a 'spoiler' or a 'nay sayer', but how do you explain the satellites that are monitoring the size of the earth? How do you explain where all t.e extra mass is coming from? And where was all the water when the earth was small?
@dylbie84 Geology Professor Carey was gaining much favor among world Geologists,..UNTIL A chunk of Oceanic plate was seismicaly spotted subducting under another in the western Pacific.
Geologists, already stunned and mildly terrified of the implications that Carey's Theory presented welcomed the news with great joy and RELIEF.
Extending the "Subduction Theory" to the complete solution of OCEANIC SPREAD and the NEED TO EXPLAIN the SPREAD.
@nealadams Humans have a Penchant to easily accept a planet that "SEEMS" part water and part land.
The truth is, according to this NEW theory, all suspended spheres have GROWING/SPREADING/CRUSTS that rise up from their insides to coat the growing sphere and fill in the cracks. The theory REJECTS the infamous concept that continents swirl about the Earth like Bumper Cars in a Carnival only to gather on one side of the Earth in a GIANT ISLAND, leaving 2/3s Ocean 2.5 miles deep
@dylbie841. There are no monitors monitoring the size of the Earth. Taxpayer money paying a billion dollars for measuring the size of the Earth? Are you high?
2. The MASS was made by the same process that made the MATTER Universe. The MATTER UNIVERSE WAS "made" ? Yes?
3. Mass is MATTER. Matter is Atoms. If Atoms are made, and they are,..Atoms include Hydrogen and Oxygen.
TELL PEOPLE ABOUT THIS VIDEO and challenge teachers to question. THAT'S HOW CHANGE HAPPENS!
@dylbie84 Oh, it's quite serious, and most likely true. When I was a kid, most kids looked at the Atlantic and said to our teachers and parents that the whole thing looked like it fit together. We were laughed at,...but incredibly it turned out it was TRUE.
Only one Geologist in the world wrote a book that declared that Geology had not done the WHOLE JOB, and the truth was that the WHOLE CRUST had broken and spread apart (as in the Animation.) as the Earth "EXPANDED". MANY joined him.
When you think of global growth locally, things already on the surface, have to warp and fold, a little, to fit, as the globe grows. this is how we get mountain ranges, and rifting valleys. The newest growth is at the lowest points, the mid ocean rifts. This is where the most newest matter is added to the surface of the crust. this causes the older crust, (the continents) to unbend to a flatter curvature. Unbending of the solid continents, caused them to wrinkle up mountain ranges, in places.
@TheSnowballEarth 2 points: no one has observed what goes on at the center of the Earth. Electrons and positrons follow separate magnetic field lines.
Magnetism is found in most, if not all planets, and even the moon.
It is conceivable that pair production, inside a large gravitational center, keeps separate the positron from the electron, for long enough, that the positrons, positive field attracts and shields itself in layers of "dark" matter, making a proton,+electron=H.
@TheSnowballEarth "Maybe more logical than "Joe's video", but completely nonsensical when one tries to find a valid, observed mechanism to explain it."
Exactly. We don't have a valid, observed mechanism to explain this growth of the Earth. So what is it then?
What process, do we know of, that can create matter,
where there was none?
Pair production. The emergence of a positron and electron from a flash of energy in empty space.
@rongrite "Pair production. The emergence of a positron and electron from a flash of energy in empty space. This is the beginning of matter assemblage." Don't the positron and electron then annihilate one another? Why even invoke matter generation, especially when terrestrial growth/expansion has never been observed? More logical to accept the existence of the non-growing Earth composed of 5.98E24 kg of baryonic matter that we do see, where crustal movement is explained by PT. SCIENCE!
How does a continent, with the mass of Africa, hold together while it moves through miles-thick ocean floor?
Please explain the forces driving the continents around, is it suction, friction? Explain how a winged dinosaur can land and take off with wings that extend at least 12 feet from each side of its body? These creatures could not fly under today's gravity, even with 3 to 4 times the air pressure. They can't lift their wings.
@TheSnowballEarth Look, We're here discussing this theory. If you've just come here as a spoiler and nay-sayer,..go home. You've been exposed to enough of this to know the ground rules. If you don't want to discuss it,..just blow....or I'll kick you out.
No one is asked to believe,..merely to discuss. We have gone to Pair-Production because, as Sherlock Holmes says, 'When you have eliminated every posibility but one, no matter how implausable it may seem, THAT'S IT!
@TheSnowballEarth As it turns out, Pair-Production EXACTLY and PERFECTLY fits the requirements of MATTER so perfectly that it's mind-boggling. Half the work needed is done right at the Pair-Production instant.
@nealadamsdotcom "Well, Positrons NEVER "join" their sister particle, since there are SOOOoo many Electrons lying around." So they hit some other electrons and annihilate each other. Simple, right?
"1. WHAT are they made of" They're elementary particles. They're makeup is described in string theory. Read up on that.
"2. What happens IF they don't JOIN!" Perform an experiment and find out.
i checked out "Joe's" video (and website BTW), from potholers video.
He blows up a balloon, with the continents stuck to it. It inflates to look like the Earth, spreading the continents as he blows air into the balloon.
His idea is that the Earth is hollow and was inflated causing the "flood" And will be inflated again, this time with fire. Joe still shows Earth got bigger.
i find Neals' explanation for growth, more logical. And evidence shows a more graduated rate of growth and mass increase.
i´m wondering where all the material come from to allow the earth to grow. conservation of mass you know. or is there any evidence that inside the earth there is a giant cave?
@nealadamsdotcom how does the dark matter know which kind of material is needed? it could turn into strawberry ice cream instead of rock. it could materialize as a second moon to the earth, where does the new material arrive? where is the energy coming from to allow the dark matter to become new matter?
@nealadamsdotcom What's dark matter made of? Is it some exotic type of matter or ordinary baryonic matter? How come this dark matter has never been detected on Earth? What experiments have you devised to test for it?
@Caeadas There is no requirement for your professor to think original thoughts or deduce, or, for that matter to teach you anything to make you better.
If there was such a requirement, then he would be paid MORE for your success and less for your failure.
Ask him, for me to look at the Crustal Age Map on continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth and at the Triangle of oceanic plate that is 180. 170 to 160 million Years Old and to explain why there's no 190 MYO plate in the middle
@nealadamsdotcom Don't criticize my professor. Deduction is based on fact, which he as a scientist incorporates into his livelihood. You present NO facts.
Were your unsupported and unsubstantiated claim actually viable, it would be at least considered with something other than derision by geologists, who have devoted their lives to learning everything there is to know about the subject you so casually pervert with your suppositions.
@Caeadas It was YOUR PROFESSOR WHO CRITICIZED ME, and MY WORK, behind my back. HE IS AN INTELLECTUAL COWARD!
Because you are a CHILD!, you don't know the history of the original battle in the 60's, that took place. When a battle takes place, the winner derides the challenger, when he THINKS the battle is done.
But if the supposed defeated rises from the ashes to bring new power to support EVERY aspect of the fray,
The challenger is NOW a REAL danger. He has FACTS and SCIENCE!
@nealadamsdotcom "...why there's no 190 MYO plate in the middle."
Because there doesn't have to be one in the middle. Oceanic plate in the pacific that is older than 180 Ma has already been subducted. The reason that oceanic plate in the N. Atlantic is younger than 180 Ma is because that's when the N. Atlantic basin opened.
Questions for you Adams: Why is oceanic plate in the S. Atlantic younger than 83 Ma? Is Earth "growth" or "expansion" asymmetric? Answer these truthfully.
@TheSnowballEarth Of course it's asymmetric. The MASSIVE Antarctic Ocean began to rift open about 60 Million Years Ago.(Just as the Dinosaurs became extinct. (Do you believe in coincidence.
Mars has begun deep rifting with ONE DEEP RIFT (Valles Marenaris)
Earth began deep rifting with TWO rifts either side of North America. One a two way, the other a three-way. ASYMMETRY is the way of nature. Don't you study? 190 MYO PLATE MUST be next to 180 MYO plate.
@nealadamsdotcom I asked about the Atlantic basin, NOT the Antarctic basin. Why don't you ever address the questions you are asked.
"Mars has begun deep rifting..." That's got f-all to do with the question you were asked. FAIL!
"Earth began deep rifting with TWO rifts either side of North America." Where is the western deep rift? Subducted beneath E. Asia? Shouldn't the oceanic crust adjacent to western margin of N. America be the same age as on the eastern margin (180 Ma)?
@TheSnowballEarth Your question was,...was spreading ASYMMETRICAL. I used The Antarctic as an example. They're are many variables. If you are too (fill in word) to understand your own questions, then read them over. How's that?
Read my comment again. My questions are: "Where is the western deep rift? Subducted beneath E. Asia? Shouldn't the oceanic crust adjacent to western margin of N. America be the same age as on the eastern margin (180 Ma)?"
Quit dodging the questions and answer them directly w/o dragging in extraneous crap and arguing by mental attrition.
@TheSnowballEarth Rather than explain BASIC SCIENCE, I'll simply say for any age plate, there MUST BE YOUNGER on one side, and OLDER on the other side! LOOK AT layers of sediment. Look at the whole Earth.
There is NO AREA even CLOSE to 180 Million Years old. ALL gets YOUNGER AND YOUNGER GOING OUT! Fail, fail, and FAIL!
Based on HARD FACTS! Look at map at continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth!
@nealadamsdotcom "There is NO AREA even CLOSE to 180 Million Years old." Oceanic crust. All oceanic crust >180 Ma has been destroyed by subduction. That's basic Science. How many times do you have to be told this?
BTW, how does your "theory" account for continental crust >180 Ma? What was the Earth doing prior to that? Remember that there are rock formations going back to >3 Ga.
@TheSnowballEarth NO,....NO, NO crust in the Atlantic OR Pacific has been destroyed, in spite of your rude and ignorant remarks. It's right there to be seen BY ALL! If there was subducted 190 MYO plate there would be some areas of increasing age moving toward a subducting edge. THERE IS NO SUCH THING! You are selling a fantasy that has NO BASIS IN FACT, deduction or common sense.
@nealadamsdotcom Actually, the subducted oceanic crust of the western Pacific that's been subducted hasn't been entirely destroyed. Some of it is on its way down into the upper mantle where it partially melts and gives rise to the observed back-arc spreading that forms the Sea of Japan. Should've made my self clearer. My apologies.
"...rude and ignorant remarks." HAH! Now that's the Gabbro calling the Basalt "mafic"! ;-P
@TheSnowballEarth However, if you look carefully at MY clearly Delineated Crustal age Map you will CLEARLY SEE the subducted areas are MUCH, MUCH YOUNGER , the examination of which will make ever more clear the LACK of OLDER OCEANIC PLATE!
EVERYONE, for this go to continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth LOOK. SEE. THINK
@TheSnowballEarth 180 MYO began deep rifting . Before that the same rifting was simply SHALLOW and made the basins of the shallow seas and even went to shallower Basalt,..all happening on what we now call the continental plate. It's merely a progressive process that goes deeper and deeper with time.
@nealadamsdotcom "There is no requirement for your professor to think original thoughts or deduce, or, for that matter to teach you anything to make you better." That's a lie right there. That's what dissertations are for. Your statements reek of neo-conservative anti-intellectualism. You're voting for Mitt Romney no doubt!
@Caeadas 2, Then ask your professor why it is, if DEEP OCEANS existed for Billions of Years, why is it that there is no fossil sign of deep oceanic life IN the Deep Ocean older than 70 Million Years Old. (Who didn't evolve to that depth for a hundred Million Years, unless he has another reason!)
Ask him if Shallow Seas were over 800 feet deeper than today covering two-thirds of the continental plate making Sea Level 800 feet deeper. WHERE IS THAT WATER?
@nealadamsdotcom The problem you have here is that the people who really run the show, want us all to get on the ''save the world'' band waggon tax. ie. Carbon Tax if you live in my country. Which is the testing ground for how other countries will comply. Your theory, which like you said, ''even a child can see''. And like I mentioned, I was able to come to that conclusion just by what I saw from google earth. Im positive your not the only one in the science sector that has seen this.
Do the continents still move in the growing earth theory? Or rather, how is GPS measurable continental drift of several centimeters per year incorporated into the growing earth theory with no measurable increase in the earth's overall size?
@Nealadamsdotcom stop telling stupid shit you fucking moron. The heat of the core makes the layer above it rise, because that's how nature works, the cold part of the layer goes down until it gets back up when it's warmed up, it's a circular motion which makes the plates move. What's not logical about that?
TheHeraldic 20 minutes ago
Are there really morons who believe this crap?
mczeljk 21 minutes 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 hours 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 1 hour 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 hours 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 hours 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 hours 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 hours ago
Comment removed
misterwrigley 4 hours ago
Comment removed
misterwrigley 4 hours ago
"No subduction" well.... your theory just went out the window.
So what if they fit together on a smaller planet, of course they do when you ignore the effects of subduction. If you ignore one side of the equation then the only solution is "it was smaller", if you include the known facts then things balance as they should.
mryellow123 5 hours 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 5 hours 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 6 hours ago
Pair production is sometimes seen in a cloud chamber.
The production of a positron and an electron condensing trails of vapor.
rongrite 7 hours 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 8 hours 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 8 hours 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 7 hours 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 7 hours ago
@rongrite Well, he didn't explain it to me so I don't know what your talking about..
Madpolis7 7 hours 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 7 hours 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 7 hours ago
@nealadamsdotcom Errr pair production doesn't occur in temperatures under less than 10^9 K.
en . wikipedia . org/wiki/Matter_creation
Madpolis7 7 hours 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 6 hours 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 6 hours ago
@nealadamsdotcom The core of the sun isn't even that hot...
Madpolis7 7 hours 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 9 hours 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 9 hours 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 9 hours ago
If the universe in motion, grows more mass,
wouldn't that increase its energy, causing its growing parts, further apart?
rongrite 10 hours 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 11 hours 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 9 hours ago
I find it amusing that this video used the themesong from The Lone Ranger.
nakyer 14 hours 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 15 hours 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 9 hours 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 8 hours 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 7 hours 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 7 hours 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 7 hours ago
Comment removed
Madpolis7 7 hours 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 7 hours 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 16 hours ago
And if there's no subduction, what's your explanation for "subduction zones" such as the one that caused the 2009 Tsunami?
seeqer66 18 hours 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 17 hours ago
nealadamsdotcom What happened to my earlier post?
THEORIGINALEXSCAPER 19 hours 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 20 hours 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 18 hours 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 17 hours ago
@nealadamsdotcom No, that's not the conclusion of all of science. The "Big Bang" theory states that all matter & energy, in this universe originated from a single point. Before that, nothing is known. PERIOD. This conversation is boring me. If you REALLY feel that this even constitutes a hypothesis, write up your findings and send them to a peer reviewed journal. I feel very confident that I will never see this discussed anywhere but youtube.
seeqer66 56 minutes 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 17 hours 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 20 hours ago
Comment removed
SergueiPevzner 20 hours ago
Wouldn't Earth growing explain those giant sinkholes?
simonnaylor 23 hours ago
@simonnaylor i wonder if some "craters" actually resulted from growth, not from meteors.
rongrite 22 hours ago
@simonnaylor Yes, they do.
nealadamsdotcom 20 hours 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 1 day 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 20 hours ago
@nealadamsdotcom our planet Earth grow probably has to do with Universe faster growing rate and due to our dyeing Sun's weakening magnetic sphere of influences.
symmetry08 5 hours 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 1 day 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 20 hours 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day ago
Comment removed
Zed6t9r 1 day ago
Comment removed
Zed6t9r 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day ago
@nealadamsdotcom matter creation process? can you give us an example?
keithmoonfan1 1 day ago
@keithmoonfan1 There's only one. It's called Pair-Production.
nealadamsdotcom 20 hours 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day ago
Comment removed
Maczekdum 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 20 hours 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 18 hours 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 17 hours 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 2 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 2 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 2 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 1 day 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 2 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 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@super7dsmom go to neals youtube page for more videos
IDontKnowNorDoYou 2 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 2 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 2 days ago
@MrStoneClark With the "electric model", as anyone figured out how electricity makes matter?
rongrite 3 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 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This vid is popular on Rangoon
brainbutler220 3 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 3 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 3 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 3 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 3 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom From a practical point of view, "NOTHING" can be many things, visually and really. It can be 2 inch thick glass that we cannot "SEE". It can be an electrical field, OR an Electro-magnetic field. "Nothing" can be Jello. "Nothing" can be Water to a fish. Air to a human, till it picks up your barn.
So, what is " Empty" space when it slows down ALL RADIATION to one speed? "Nothing-Space" IS 10 times as much Dark MATTER, as MATTER.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
Is the moon growing too? And how about Jupiter?
dylbie84 4 days ago
@dylbie84 Watch the Moon Video. Jupiter has grown to become the inner Planets Meteorite Umbrella, that's why we don't get hit by large Meteorites, while Jupiter get's hit by Planet killers all the time.
It's the nature of the Universe to grow! (Not "expand". There's no such physical concept as 'expand'.
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth most start with opposing views, only because we knew no other way of looking at it.
The thing is, the growing Earth view, makes more sense. And the opposing view to this growth, becomes more ridiculous than vice-versa.
rongrite 4 days ago
I'm afraid I can't believe this 'theory'. Africa and South America do join up because they're were joined once and them moved apart because of the constructive plate boundary.Furthermore, this is a theory and not as you say 'the truth'. show me the scientific evidence to back this up, and I'll believe you.
dylbie84 4 days ago
@dylbie Like a Religionest, when one becomes trained to BELIEVE something, there IS NO "DEBATE", merely "BELIEFS"1
'Believers' will rage and insist they have 'open minds' and "just provide proof",.. but then they say,"That's not Proof!" Forgetting that "THEIR FAITH" is based on FAITH and THEORY!
Let me give you an example:
You begin with a Planet with an uneven surface and some water. I say as it increases it's Growth the thickened crust finally cracks and the crust pieces spread
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@nealadamsdot "YOU" respond. "WAIT! GROW??? That's BULL.
I say. "Separate subject. Different level" We need to stick to geology"
""NO"" You say. "Too big to leap over!"
So, I say "Where do YOU BELIEVE WE GOT A MATTER UNIVERSE? And we're off to the races.
REWIND! Growing Earth vs JUST the Pangea Theory.
" Earth doesn't have a Granitic crust at all. Just BROKEN PIECES. We know theyre "BROKEN" because we have SOLID PROOF they were together in the Atlantic. The EXACT SAME PROOF
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
@neal EXACT SAME PROOF that applies perfectly to the pieces joining in the Pacific. THE SAME PROOF? YEP. Joined BROKEN edges, spreading oceanic plate, matching Flora and Fauna. ALL the same. EVERY PROOF, THE SAME.
EXCEPT...Pangea says they were broken in pieces then came together into an island, which after 150 MY's breaks apart , travels around the world like rafts and joins on the other side of earth into an island AGAIN, NEVER coating the Earth.
YOU BELIEVE THIS!?
nealadamsdotcom 3 days ago
Neal why do some stars grow larger than others? Why is our star going to be a white dwarf and others black holes?
IDontKnowNorDoYou 4 days ago
Another thought about continental shelves; if a continent is cupped over the surface of a small Earth, and the Earth grows bigger, wouldn't the edges of that solid curved continent be pushed down into the Earth forming the lower continental shelf's?
rongrite 4 days ago
i remember a rather strange moment in class, when i was talking to some other student about how Africa and South America looked like they fit well together, And he said, with a twinkle in his eye, that the continental shelves fit even better.
Now i know why, the continental shelves were separated later,
so they are now, a closer fit, than the continental shorelines!
rongrite 4 days ago
Satellites measure from the Earth to the satellite above.
As the Earth grows, this distance doesn't change much, and they seem to have to constantly raise the satellites to higher orbits...just wind resistance?
The sea floors and mountaintops are all rising together, and the mountaintops' growth, is augmented from the re-curvature of the crust. But if we measure everything from a mean sea-level, there is little, if any change, seen in everything.
The ground underneath is rising everything up.
rongrite 4 days ago
Sorry to be a 'spoiler' or a 'nay sayer', but how do you explain the satellites that are monitoring the size of the earth? How do you explain where all t.e extra mass is coming from? And where was all the water when the earth was small?
dylbie84 4 days ago
@dylbie84 Geology Professor Carey was gaining much favor among world Geologists,..UNTIL A chunk of Oceanic plate was seismicaly spotted subducting under another in the western Pacific.
Geologists, already stunned and mildly terrified of the implications that Carey's Theory presented welcomed the news with great joy and RELIEF.
Extending the "Subduction Theory" to the complete solution of OCEANIC SPREAD and the NEED TO EXPLAIN the SPREAD.
However, ...(cont)
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadams Humans have a Penchant to easily accept a planet that "SEEMS" part water and part land.
The truth is, according to this NEW theory, all suspended spheres have GROWING/SPREADING/CRUSTS that rise up from their insides to coat the growing sphere and fill in the cracks. The theory REJECTS the infamous concept that continents swirl about the Earth like Bumper Cars in a Carnival only to gather on one side of the Earth in a GIANT ISLAND, leaving 2/3s Ocean 2.5 miles deep
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@dylbie841. There are no monitors monitoring the size of the Earth. Taxpayer money paying a billion dollars for measuring the size of the Earth? Are you high?
2. The MASS was made by the same process that made the MATTER Universe. The MATTER UNIVERSE WAS "made" ? Yes?
3. Mass is MATTER. Matter is Atoms. If Atoms are made, and they are,..Atoms include Hydrogen and Oxygen.
TELL PEOPLE ABOUT THIS VIDEO and challenge teachers to question. THAT'S HOW CHANGE HAPPENS!
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
Is this actually serious?! I honestly can't believe what I'm watching. What a load of baseless rubbish!
dylbie84 4 days ago
@dylbie84 Oh, it's quite serious, and most likely true. When I was a kid, most kids looked at the Atlantic and said to our teachers and parents that the whole thing looked like it fit together. We were laughed at,...but incredibly it turned out it was TRUE.
Only one Geologist in the world wrote a book that declared that Geology had not done the WHOLE JOB, and the truth was that the WHOLE CRUST had broken and spread apart (as in the Animation.) as the Earth "EXPANDED". MANY joined him.
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
When you think of global growth locally, things already on the surface, have to warp and fold, a little, to fit, as the globe grows. this is how we get mountain ranges, and rifting valleys. The newest growth is at the lowest points, the mid ocean rifts. This is where the most newest matter is added to the surface of the crust. this causes the older crust, (the continents) to unbend to a flatter curvature. Unbending of the solid continents, caused them to wrinkle up mountain ranges, in places.
rongrite 4 days ago
You put my thoughts of a 6 grade afternoon day staring at a Geography book.
psyccoII 4 days ago
@psyccoII a Geography book is flat, I think it must have been a globe.
Chaanee 4 days ago
that does make sense. Never bought the drifting plate theory. This is more likely. thanks for taking time on this.
memoryhole1332 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth 2 points: no one has observed what goes on at the center of the Earth. Electrons and positrons follow separate magnetic field lines.
Magnetism is found in most, if not all planets, and even the moon.
It is conceivable that pair production, inside a large gravitational center, keeps separate the positron from the electron, for long enough, that the positrons, positive field attracts and shields itself in layers of "dark" matter, making a proton,+electron=H.
rongrite 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth "Maybe more logical than "Joe's video", but completely nonsensical when one tries to find a valid, observed mechanism to explain it."
Exactly. We don't have a valid, observed mechanism to explain this growth of the Earth. So what is it then?
What process, do we know of, that can create matter,
where there was none?
Pair production. The emergence of a positron and electron from a flash of energy in empty space.
This is the beginning of matter assemblage.
rongrite 4 days ago
@rongrite "Pair production. The emergence of a positron and electron from a flash of energy in empty space. This is the beginning of matter assemblage." Don't the positron and electron then annihilate one another? Why even invoke matter generation, especially when terrestrial growth/expansion has never been observed? More logical to accept the existence of the non-growing Earth composed of 5.98E24 kg of baryonic matter that we do see, where crustal movement is explained by PT. SCIENCE!
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth Explain the physics of PT?
How does a continent, with the mass of Africa, hold together while it moves through miles-thick ocean floor?
Please explain the forces driving the continents around, is it suction, friction? Explain how a winged dinosaur can land and take off with wings that extend at least 12 feet from each side of its body? These creatures could not fly under today's gravity, even with 3 to 4 times the air pressure. They can't lift their wings.
rongrite 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth Look, We're here discussing this theory. If you've just come here as a spoiler and nay-sayer,..go home. You've been exposed to enough of this to know the ground rules. If you don't want to discuss it,..just blow....or I'll kick you out.
No one is asked to believe,..merely to discuss. We have gone to Pair-Production because, as Sherlock Holmes says, 'When you have eliminated every posibility but one, no matter how implausable it may seem, THAT'S IT!
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth As it turns out, Pair-Production EXACTLY and PERFECTLY fits the requirements of MATTER so perfectly that it's mind-boggling. Half the work needed is done right at the Pair-Production instant.
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Until the electron-positron pairs annihilate each other creating single photons. Back where you started. :-\
Something Gained = Something Lost = Nothing Gained
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth Well, Positrons NEVER "join" their sister particle, since there are SOOOoo many Electrons lying around.
The questions are 1. WHAT are they made of, and 2. What happens IF they don't JOIN!
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nealadamsdotcom "Well, Positrons NEVER "join" their sister particle, since there are SOOOoo many Electrons lying around." So they hit some other electrons and annihilate each other. Simple, right?
"1. WHAT are they made of" They're elementary particles. They're makeup is described in string theory. Read up on that.
"2. What happens IF they don't JOIN!" Perform an experiment and find out.
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
Comment removed
rongrite 4 days ago
i checked out "Joe's" video (and website BTW), from potholers video.
He blows up a balloon, with the continents stuck to it. It inflates to look like the Earth, spreading the continents as he blows air into the balloon.
His idea is that the Earth is hollow and was inflated causing the "flood" And will be inflated again, this time with fire. Joe still shows Earth got bigger.
i find Neals' explanation for growth, more logical. And evidence shows a more graduated rate of growth and mass increase.
rongrite 4 days ago
i´m wondering where all the material come from to allow the earth to grow. conservation of mass you know. or is there any evidence that inside the earth there is a giant cave?
888HamilkarBarkas888 4 days ago
@888HamilkarBarkas888 NO. Rather than explain the whole theory. Suppose we add energy to dark Matter and make NEW MATTER. Simple???
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom how does the dark matter know which kind of material is needed? it could turn into strawberry ice cream instead of rock. it could materialize as a second moon to the earth, where does the new material arrive? where is the energy coming from to allow the dark matter to become new matter?
888HamilkarBarkas888 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom What's dark matter made of? Is it some exotic type of matter or ordinary baryonic matter? How come this dark matter has never been detected on Earth? What experiments have you devised to test for it?
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
I can capitalize stuff TOO! I can PRETEND that I know what I am TALKING ABOUT! My geology professor BURST OUT LAUGHING when we watched this in class!
Caeadas 5 days ago 2
@Caeadas There is no requirement for your professor to think original thoughts or deduce, or, for that matter to teach you anything to make you better.
If there was such a requirement, then he would be paid MORE for your success and less for your failure.
Ask him, for me to look at the Crustal Age Map on continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth and at the Triangle of oceanic plate that is 180. 170 to 160 million Years Old and to explain why there's no 190 MYO plate in the middle
nealadamsdotcom 5 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Don't criticize my professor. Deduction is based on fact, which he as a scientist incorporates into his livelihood. You present NO facts.
Were your unsupported and unsubstantiated claim actually viable, it would be at least considered with something other than derision by geologists, who have devoted their lives to learning everything there is to know about the subject you so casually pervert with your suppositions.
Caeadas 5 days ago
@Caeadas It was YOUR PROFESSOR WHO CRITICIZED ME, and MY WORK, behind my back. HE IS AN INTELLECTUAL COWARD!
Because you are a CHILD!, you don't know the history of the original battle in the 60's, that took place. When a battle takes place, the winner derides the challenger, when he THINKS the battle is done.
But if the supposed defeated rises from the ashes to bring new power to support EVERY aspect of the fray,
The challenger is NOW a REAL danger. He has FACTS and SCIENCE!
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom "...why there's no 190 MYO plate in the middle."
Because there doesn't have to be one in the middle. Oceanic plate in the pacific that is older than 180 Ma has already been subducted. The reason that oceanic plate in the N. Atlantic is younger than 180 Ma is because that's when the N. Atlantic basin opened.
Questions for you Adams: Why is oceanic plate in the S. Atlantic younger than 83 Ma? Is Earth "growth" or "expansion" asymmetric? Answer these truthfully.
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth Of course it's asymmetric. The MASSIVE Antarctic Ocean began to rift open about 60 Million Years Ago.(Just as the Dinosaurs became extinct. (Do you believe in coincidence.
Mars has begun deep rifting with ONE DEEP RIFT (Valles Marenaris)
Earth began deep rifting with TWO rifts either side of North America. One a two way, the other a three-way. ASYMMETRY is the way of nature. Don't you study? 190 MYO PLATE MUST be next to 180 MYO plate.
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom I asked about the Atlantic basin, NOT the Antarctic basin. Why don't you ever address the questions you are asked.
"Mars has begun deep rifting..." That's got f-all to do with the question you were asked. FAIL!
"Earth began deep rifting with TWO rifts either side of North America." Where is the western deep rift? Subducted beneath E. Asia? Shouldn't the oceanic crust adjacent to western margin of N. America be the same age as on the eastern margin (180 Ma)?
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth Your question was,...was spreading ASYMMETRICAL. I used The Antarctic as an example. They're are many variables. If you are too (fill in word) to understand your own questions, then read them over. How's that?
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nealadamsdotcom
Read my comment again. My questions are: "Where is the western deep rift? Subducted beneath E. Asia? Shouldn't the oceanic crust adjacent to western margin of N. America be the same age as on the eastern margin (180 Ma)?"
Quit dodging the questions and answer them directly w/o dragging in extraneous crap and arguing by mental attrition.
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth Rather than explain BASIC SCIENCE, I'll simply say for any age plate, there MUST BE YOUNGER on one side, and OLDER on the other side! LOOK AT layers of sediment. Look at the whole Earth.
There is NO AREA even CLOSE to 180 Million Years old. ALL gets YOUNGER AND YOUNGER GOING OUT! Fail, fail, and FAIL!
Based on HARD FACTS! Look at map at continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth!
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom "There is NO AREA even CLOSE to 180 Million Years old." Oceanic crust. All oceanic crust >180 Ma has been destroyed by subduction. That's basic Science. How many times do you have to be told this?
BTW, how does your "theory" account for continental crust >180 Ma? What was the Earth doing prior to that? Remember that there are rock formations going back to >3 Ga.
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth NO,....NO, NO crust in the Atlantic OR Pacific has been destroyed, in spite of your rude and ignorant remarks. It's right there to be seen BY ALL! If there was subducted 190 MYO plate there would be some areas of increasing age moving toward a subducting edge. THERE IS NO SUCH THING! You are selling a fantasy that has NO BASIS IN FACT, deduction or common sense.
In a word, it's "STUPID" coming and going.
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom Actually, the subducted oceanic crust of the western Pacific that's been subducted hasn't been entirely destroyed. Some of it is on its way down into the upper mantle where it partially melts and gives rise to the observed back-arc spreading that forms the Sea of Japan. Should've made my self clearer. My apologies.
"...rude and ignorant remarks." HAH! Now that's the Gabbro calling the Basalt "mafic"! ;-P
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth However, if you look carefully at MY clearly Delineated Crustal age Map you will CLEARLY SEE the subducted areas are MUCH, MUCH YOUNGER , the examination of which will make ever more clear the LACK of OLDER OCEANIC PLATE!
EVERYONE, for this go to continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth LOOK. SEE. THINK
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
@TheSnowballEarth 180 MYO began deep rifting . Before that the same rifting was simply SHALLOW and made the basins of the shallow seas and even went to shallower Basalt,..all happening on what we now call the continental plate. It's merely a progressive process that goes deeper and deeper with time.
nealadamsdotcom 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nealadamsdotcom "There is no requirement for your professor to think original thoughts or deduce, or, for that matter to teach you anything to make you better." That's a lie right there. That's what dissertations are for. Your statements reek of neo-conservative anti-intellectualism. You're voting for Mitt Romney no doubt!
TheSnowballEarth 4 days ago
@Caeadas 2, Then ask your professor why it is, if DEEP OCEANS existed for Billions of Years, why is it that there is no fossil sign of deep oceanic life IN the Deep Ocean older than 70 Million Years Old. (Who didn't evolve to that depth for a hundred Million Years, unless he has another reason!)
Ask him if Shallow Seas were over 800 feet deeper than today covering two-thirds of the continental plate making Sea Level 800 feet deeper. WHERE IS THAT WATER?
Last Laugh anyone?
nealadamsdotcom 5 days ago
Where does the extra matter come from????
A1nitak 5 days ago 2
very popular. And possiably riddiculed. But so was Darwin at some point.
TheOnebigmick 5 days ago
@nealadamsdotcom The problem you have here is that the people who really run the show, want us all to get on the ''save the world'' band waggon tax. ie. Carbon Tax if you live in my country. Which is the testing ground for how other countries will comply. Your theory, which like you said, ''even a child can see''. And like I mentioned, I was able to come to that conclusion just by what I saw from google earth. Im positive your not the only one in the science sector that has seen this.
TheOnebigmick 5 days ago
Do the continents still move in the growing earth theory? Or rather, how is GPS measurable continental drift of several centimeters per year incorporated into the growing earth theory with no measurable increase in the earth's overall size?
brocroft 5 days ago