So, planets might grow in mass. Why is that so impossible? Meanwhile, space itself expands without anyone able to explain that. Not being able to explain does not make it untrue.
Your numbers for the mare surface areas are completely bonkers. the moon itself is less than 40 million sq km (less than 8% of Earth) Oceanus Procellarum is only about 4 million sq km (10% of the moon, less than 1% of Earth). The US is over 9 million sq km. Serenitatis is only 300k sq km (though Iceland is only a bit more than 100k), and Mare Imbrium is 850k sq km while Europe is over 1 million. 1 minute in and your at 3 strikes... is the rest of this as "thoroughly" researched?
@nealadamsdotcom Can you summarize the mechanisms and models for mass increase ? There has been a thread running almost two years now over your video at rational skepticism forum, Google that with expanding earth and its 80 odd pages will appear. Some of us are genuinely curious. The forum is now getting more into taking apart sections from maxlows thesis so your opinion on that would be helpful also.
@FelixLanzalaco I've been describing the mechanism for assembly of higher count atoms for the last day on my main Video here for rongrite. Funny, anyone can collect the whole theory from parts on that site. You just have to go back a few months-weeks and nearly all will be there. Scoop it up. The last 20 hours or so has key components.
James has one key problem. "EXPANDING"! There's no such Physical Process, but foe "exploding".
The Process is Growth. James, like Carey is a Geologist.
@makkathran You are NOT MAKING SOUND SCIENTIFIC POINTS. Random speculation with no basis in fact, are NOT POINTS, at all. I am quite a likable person. I merely don't coddle igorance and foolishness. There are Learned skeptics and ignorant superstitionists. You would NOT KNOW which are contradictions or direct evidence. Why do you pretend you do? Because the rabble seems with the Nay-sayers??
Yet they scatter when I cast my gaze on them! WE do not have the Technology to measure growth
Neal. What you talk about on YouTube is very interesting, and there have been many, many people before you who have put forward ideas and had them blasted because of their 'heresy' or absurdness. I do not agree, however, with your claims that there is a conspiracy by science against your claims of expansion theory. There is massive evidence to support tectonic plate theory and collisions, and matter creation strains credibility to me.
HUH? How do we get a MATTER UNIVERSE, from NOTHING, then?
Science tells you the universe is "EXPANDING". What Physical process is that? I never, ever heard of such a process? Have YOU? There's "EXPLOSION"! ....but acceleration OUTWARD disproved that,....so?
What process? I know "GROWTH"! Growth is the perfect process that describes this.
We also know that MATTER CAN BE CREATED! It's called Pair-Production. ....so...what strains?
@nealadamsdotcom A universe 'from' nothing doesn't need a cause that is subject to universal laws and logic. Growth is not the 'perfect' way to describe expansion of celestial bodies or space itself. where does the energy come from necessary to provide expansion of an entire planet in a time scale of, what I believe to have been in your video, 180 million years? - Correct me if I'm wrong about the time scale. I need more convincing evidence. I haven't seen any yet. I think this is absurd.
@nealadamsdotcom I am asking you where the energy comes from to allow for anything to gain mass. It seems impossible on the scale you are putting forward, let alone on any scale. I can maybe see how growth would account for many geological features you show of the Earth and Moon, but I can't get around the mass gain. Enlighten me on how it actually happens please!
The moon has a thin tenuous atmosphere. Periodically a Solar Storm blows it completely away. Within a couple of weeks, that atmosphere is REPLACED!
Enceladus, moon of Saturn has deep crevices near the south pole,..from which Enceladus sprays gases and WATER ONGOING and since we discovered the sprays halo about 4-5 years ago.
We don't know exactly what's at the cores, but it's making stuff. As far as earth is concerned, it's increasing exponentially, Like the UNIVERSE.
@makkathran For Neal's theories to work, that energy that causes this does not come from anywhere, it just magically appears, and gravity - in particular the earths gravity - is either non-existant, or just not important enough to be factored in. I dunno why?
@xphreakyphilx i really don t know that , how does it come that one side faces all time the earth. isn t it so that the moon rotates arround the earth and arround its axis
@GonG108 You know the old saying "the dark side of the moon", it isn't that one side is always dark, it means that one side is always facing away from us. People had no idea what was on the other side of the moon until we went into space.
There is such a vast amount of fuzzy logic and questionable leaps after the word "if" that it's almost impossible to grab hold of individual elements to disagree with. The flaw is assume that because you can't pick out a splash trail then it isn't there. Larger impacts produce larger volumes of debris, and throw them further. They are also older impacts, possibly from a period when the moon still rotated relative to the earth. Their splash trails are under more recent impacts and debris
@nealadamsdotcom Science means dealing with measured truth, your site supports the idea that celestial bodies are increasing in mass magically. Exponential means having a derivative of another exponential function; in this manner the derivative increases faster and faster. An exponential function takes a number and raises it to the power of the abscissa.
@dEndiProductions No, The BIG BANG requires MAGIC or a GOD. My theory requires a simple, repeatable and universal scientific PROCESS. A process that is a result of the original simple structuring of the universe through processes we cannot yet understand,..As always, with science we must go to the point WE DO understand and work forward from THERE. The further back we can go, the more building blocks we can find. I have simply found more building blocks. MATTER MUST HAVE BEEN CREATED! FACT!
@nealadamsdotcom This concept you have strum up is not a theory. A theory requires several tested hypotheses supporting a similar phenomenon, id est you need to have multiple successful experiments in your favor.
@dEndiProductions - I have multiple growing suns, multiple growing planets and moons, over 20 videos, massive factual proof, and more scientific work in all the sciences, over 35 years.
@nealadamsdotcom If you have 'massive factual proof', you should be able to carry out my suggested experiment. Come on, it's rock. Look at the mudcracks of a dried mudpuddle. The portions of hard, dry mud become surrounded by cracks, not basins or holes.
@dEndiProductions - The mud you refer to is laced with water. But as the water evaporates, the particles of dirt seek to settle as crystals, near and even associated with, in temporary crystal bonds, the other particles there. Rocks are already attached to crystal bonds within the rock, and will not act like drying mud. A very foolish, "test". Study your science.
@nealadamsdotcom No, Neal, nobody claims that the mares on the moon are impact craters. They are flood basalts, a relic from the time when our moon was tectonically and volcanically active. The reason the far side is more heavily cratered (which disturbs and covers the mares) because it is more exposed than the near side.
@SoundOfScilence Incorrect.. MANY have written to me insisting they are Impact craters.
2. If they were from that FANTASY TIME they would be covered by Impact craters. Also they are below the common surface LIKE THE EARTH and Mars.
3. The most stupid response. BOTH SIDES are equally exposed as the other to all directions except for one tiny area, where we have the Earth. so small compared to the whole expanse of it's "sky" as to be insignificant.
@nealadamsdotcom Look, try to test if you can get anything to generate holes or 'basins' by applying an outward force to it. I promise you that lunar rock, which is similar in composition to tellurian rock, will not exibit this behavior. Prove me wrong. I'm open to ideas.
@dEndiProductions - If you study crystallography, you would know basalt, like all silicates, are crystal in nature. Basalt rising from the interior of the moon to the surface, would slowly bend to the lateral, and move outward. The moon is not hot enough to melt the basalt and reset it's clock, so it bends and pushes outward.
One has to study all the sciences to develop a theory of everything.
@dEndiProductions ON EARTH when the crust spreads we see fractures, and much later what do we see that fills with oceanic water???????? And what makes that spreading BASIN but volcanic activity???
@nealadamsdotcom It's not that oceanic crust is a growing fracture, it is that the continents are granite cratons that spread in place of the oceanic crust. Try pulling apart a piece of paper and getting holes instead of rips.
@nealadamsdotcom The granitic crust stopped spreading in the Precambrian, and the oceanic crust does not fill in. The moon, moreover, is tectonically dead and has been for a few billion years.
@dEndiProductions ON EARTH,..according to the U. S. Geological Survey The Granitic crust spreads to reveal enough square mileage in the last 10 Million Years to make the Area of Africa.
The MOON grows increasingly ACTIVE with time. It's newest spread "mares" are so "NEW" that they only receive the Very NEWEST smaller meteorites of the inner solar System compared to the Much OLDER and BIGGER Meteorites of several hundred million years ago.
@nealadamsdotcom The U.S. Geological Survey absolutely does not imply anything like your claim. Suppose that fact about the granitic crust were true. Seventy million years ago, there would have been no granitic crust at all with that rate. And yet, we have fossil evidence of rocks billions of years old on every continent.
@dEndiProductions YO,..YO YO! You LYIN' MOTHA. How DARE YOU! You just SAY S**T and it's okay???
WHO the hell are you ?
Go to continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth. Read the letter with the spread info. In case you can't do the Math, each of the last three 10 million year segments ,..area equal to Africa was MADE/revealed/spread.
Earth has GROWN exponentially (Greater with time.) STUDY,..THINK...STUDY...THINK!
@hoad47 I am an artist , a designer and I have done some Architecture work. I am a precision draftsman and Cartographer. Which measurements do you question?
isnt there about 50,000 tons of dust coming into the earth from space evry year ,so why cant the moon be still collecting dust and rocks from what made them in the 1st place only its not as chaotic now as it was when the planets started forming ,isnt that process just an extremly slow rate now?
@reksub10 Why LESS? Aren't Super Novas still blowing up? Why not MORE? More what? Giant ROCKS? From WHERE? Do Novas fire GIANT ROCKS?,..OR IONS?? Where are the ROCKS coming from? Rock and Roll heaven?
The scientists that finally bumble upon the truth, have stumbled over mounds of idiots on their pathway,.. all of which wore the same trappings, had the same instruments and reputations. It's a crap shoot at best and usually the truth comes from the most UNEXPECTED PLACES.
Respond These molten layers rose up and spread out for thousands upon thousands of flat layer upon flat layer but according to Geology, this same process magically did not happen to/for the remaining TWO THIRDS of the crust. Why shouldn't I believe the Earth could do this selective layered lathing of one third of the crust,...especially when Geology's OWN CRUSTAL AGE MAP has no deep oceans older than 180 Million Years old and the pieces fit together perfectly. I'm SO full of shit.
@ihr0ppa For any non-living body to GROW. there MUST BE A PROCESS,.. or MECHANISM of new matter creation, whether it's the MOON, SUN or UNIVERSE. One can hardly expect there to be TWO processes of MATTER CREATION.
I was simply commenting on your general ignorance of concepts and facts like these. Why don't you do some reading and then come back to the discussion minimally informed. You embarass both of us.
@ihr0ppa The SUN is running OUT OF HYDROGEN and getting ?BIGGER? It's MADE of Hydrogen!!
HELLO! Knock, knock.
If the Big Bang is a "MISSING PIECE" That pretty much stops the conversation, pal. THAT is the CREATION OF THE MATTER OF THE UNIVERSE. END,....FINS,......No next step!
You have NOTHING TO SAY after that now.
You see, I have the answer to the question. So I know all the rest, and the Moon GROWS! From the creation of NEW MATTER from the same process of the NON- BANG
Ok, let's ignore that all you just wrote was complete nonsens and once again showed me that you do not understand the machanics of the univers at all. I'm getting tired of pointing that out...
You know the answeres? Then please tell them to me.
P.S: Using capslock just makes you look even more desperate.
@ihr0ppa I suggest you go away. Why? You are a victim of generations of BULLS**T. Our sun GROWS and gets brighter by between 10 to 25 percent each BILLION YEARS. ONGOING. Today the sun ionizes 400 million tons of He and H and fires it into its' system EACH SECOND!
SCIENTISTS, unable to even comprehend the reality of this make up idiotic theories to sweep it away, blinding you with mumbo Jumbo.
The REAL answers are OBVIOUS but take a THEORY OF EVERYTHING that we don't KNOW! YET! I DO.
@Helge129 I don't have enough time in my life for this stupidity. 1. On the FAR side of the moon are CRATERS. Early in our Solar System, Scientists say Meteorites were BIGGER and now, smaller. 2. WE,..EARTH ARE NOT the source of Meteorites. Nor do they come from BEHIND THE EARTH! They come from many different directions, so that BEING "LOCKED".MEANS NOTHING to the impact of Meteorites to the MOON!
3. The Earth takes 1/2000 and less space in the moons sky.
@Helge129 i'm using the Perjorative because what you are saying is anti-intelligent and UN-scientific.
1.There are NO MARES on the opposite side of the moon.
The MOON rotates within the Earth-Moon system ONCE PER DAY,...facing , in that day ALL 360 degrees. It also ORBITS the Earth once a MONTH. Each portion of the MOON faces each and every portion of its radial side faces any portion of the sky equally. Why am I explaining this to someone who had at least a high school education?
@Huttate1 and Helge129 In that case where are the impacts of ongoing time as on the other side of the moon? The size of impacts are like a clock. Largest are the oldest. NEWEST are very small,..as those in the NEW SPREADING Mares
@nealadamsdotcom Oh, I don't know. Perhaps the fact that the moon is tidally locked and in synchronous orbit with the moon means that the near side is shielded from impacts whilst the far side is continually exposed. Perhaps also the late heavy bombardment created most of the lunar craters, as determined by luna rock sample analysis, and the later forming mares 'smoothed' the near side.
Hint: Capitalising bullshit simply turns it into BULLSHIT.
@Huttate1 O-kay. What you just said is capitalized BULLSHIT, and you're STUPID. Perhaps you think the little marble Earth is shaped exactly like the MARES? Or Jackie Gleason's face?
These are caused by very large impact while the moon was still geologically active, and material from the mantle rose up to fill the holes. Simple as that. Your explanation is ludicrous.
Doesn't explain where the extra mass comes from, and fails to recognize the fact that the moon ceased to be tectonically active several hundred million years ago. Tectonic mechanics can create large depressions like the Sea of Tranquility. Notwithstanding the fact that no study from NASA, JSA, or the ESA has ever found evidence supporting this absurd hypothesis.
@pringlex Go to the big discussion at the main video. read a couple of month's of comments.
I'm discussing it there NOW!
Yes, tectonic spreading GROWING Moon does indeed explain the Sea of tranquility, aand all the other spread mares of a GROWING MOON Like the oceanic spreads of Earth.
Oh,..NASA et al don't agree? The NASA that's looking for "SIGNS" of standing water on Mars? THAT NASA?
@nealadamsdotcom Yes, tectonic plates WOULD explain the sea of tranquility except THE MOON HAS NO TECTONIC PLATES! And I'm guessing all that magic mass that makes the moon grow came out of the same place as the bullshit coincidence about the far side of the moon.
I am wondering if the earth, moon, mars, in fact all planets, and the sun have a plasma core. If that were true, then magnetic particulate from the sun entering the north poles of these bodies could be the source of the matter that is causing expansion. If so, then the current activity of the sun could be the reason for so much earthquake activity on earth. As more material from the sun enters the north pole, the crust would be forced to expand. Thus the split at the Japan earthquake site.
Have you watched the Videos at nealadamsdotcom the science section?
I suggested, for this discussion to avoid the conspiracy angle. It began 50 years ago with Professor Sam Carey, and it's not worth the time in a scientific discussion. It's historical Geological Politics. If that's your interest.... I don't know why they seal it? I never asked, because I don't care.
"blow"???
Orbits?...tighten? I don't "BELIEVE", I deduce!
I 'deduce' that if the Earth Grows, there MUST BE A mechanism/process
@nealadamsdotcom I "deduce", that if there IS a mechanism for the creation of NEW matter, it must be, for MANY reasons,. at the core and outer core. If there is such a process, (AND there must be, or else we wouldn't have a MATTER universe.) the mechanism/process MUST BE Universal in nature. This would include Suns, Galaxies, black holes and the UNIVERSE,.. So,.. by simple deduction and extrapolation,. The UNIVERSE,.. like every thing we KNOW, GROWS, and does NOT EXPAND.
Do you have a link to the video? I had no idea that every single collector was in on the conspiracy. I sealant that perfectly mimicks the Widmanstätten pattern to cover up the obvious blow geode-like formations would have to the foundations of science. An imperative that all collectors know about.
I mention again that what we should find if mass increases is that orbits tighten over time. That's not we observer so it can't be.
A belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence
So it's not a transfer of angular momentum from the Earth to the Moon which is increasing it's orbital speed but an effect of the Earth's EM field? How can there be no transfer when Newtonian Physics tells us there must be?
Now the math AND the evidence are blurring. I'm needing a little help here.
@Ixions42 We're backing into this theory,.. and it very big,.. and it includes everything. You're being reasonable and not calling me a Nazi. so I want to tell you the whole thing,...BUT you've inserted into the MIDDLE. (sigh.) Hmmm. What if I told you that there's no such thing as MATTER,.....STUFF...E=mc2 and all that?
SO,....what is STUFF made of?
Energy. Einstein says.
Nnnnno. Not just!.....Energy AND very, very tiny EM fields ,...pulled in half. This CAN get back to the moon, I swear.
It just seems to me very unlikely that the Moon could have been expanding given it's physical relationship with the Earth. I don't really understand the physical or compositional thresholds for an object before it has a tendence to expand. Does an object have to be a certain size or have a core? Finally one of the things your videos don't seem to address is why? Why the conspiracy? Also how could we test the EE theory?
@Ixions42 - Don't bother with the conspiracy portion. It's a whole other discussion, and has very little to do with science, but politics.
Just a reminder. Nothing expands. That is unscientific in the extreme. It all grows. Of course a meteorite or tiny moon, is not going to create matter. But it can accrete externally and internally. Why do I say internally? Small meteorites and dust, with billions of atoms, will accrete to the surface of a meteorite. A single atom (gas) will slide
@nealadamsdotcom So one thing you suggest is that we could take meteorites which have landed on Earth and cut them open to study the geode-like center that we should find in some if not most of them.
I was refering to G times M1 plus M2 over R squared. If the orbital speed remains constant as mass increases R would decrease. Which means over time the planets move closer to the sun. You're saying they're moving away?
@Ixions42 Yeaaah,.. did that, I have a video that shows that. The collectors put some kind of sealant in there and get grumpy when you ask about the empty spaces.
Planets move away from the sun. Yep. Our moon moves aaaway from Earth. We know, because it's easy to measure. Re Newton, it Shouldn't. Should have found it's orbital long ago.
Ask yourself,..If Newton was alive today. would he adjust to NEW KNOWLEDGE? Like EM fields?
Do you believe in coincidence? We live in an EM universe..so
@Ixions42 - . A singe atom (gas) will slide down the crystal lattices to the meteorite's core, attaching crystalline bonds, and push outward, like a geode. This will empty the core, as the meteorite grows. In time, gases will collect, and at moon-size the process of new matter creation will begin. Very slowly at first. Gases and water, and so on.
The moon is tidally locked with earth. Meaning it rotates once for each orbit. Due to the conservation of momentum, if it were to grow in size it would change it's speed of rotation. Making it impossible to be tidally locked today.
@nealadamsdotcom I've watched quite a few videos you've made. I'm just trying to make a rational statement to refute the expanding Earth theory. If you've ever seen a figure skater spinning on the ice with their arms outstretched and then they pull them in you see what I'm talking about. It would be the same but in reverse. So an expanding moon wouldn't be able to maintain it's special relationship with the Earth because it's moment of inertia is changing over time. How can you explain it?
@Ixions42 Have you listened to the video? If there is no reasonable rotation, GROWTH HAPPENS predominetly on ONE SIDE Meaning the heaviest material/growth is greater on one side.
It is NO COINCIDENCE that the side that has the GROWING MARES ARE on the.... SIDE..... that.... FACES EARTH! So the HEAVY side swings like a Pendulum to the EARTH. And will continually, no matter how big it gets. However 400 MYA a day on Earth was 19 hours long.
@nealadamsdotcom What exactly is "no reasonable rotation". The moon has a rotational period of about 28 days, which is the same period as it's orbit. If some of the mass of a rotating object is pushed further from it's axis of rotation the net effect will be to slow the overall speed of rotation. ie (28 days+) By explaining to me that the heavy side swings like a Pendulum to the Earth are you saying that in fact a bowling ball and a feather dropped in a vaccum don't fall at the same rate?
@nealadamsdotcom Why then was there an initial tendency to expand towards the Earth when it's source of expansion is equi-distance with the lighter stuff? Why is the moon less dense then Earth since it's effectively being filled up with the same stuff? Why were shorter period ancient tides greater in amplitude then the tides we experience today? Comparing two theories always means you have to test each with the question. If this were true what would it look like? Then weigh the evidence.
@Ixions42 - I do not know the answer, and I don't like to speculate. There are several possible answers. But again, it's speculation. One would be, that the moon began as with some meteorites, and which may happen with Mars, with the annealing of 2 proto-moons of different size. The question of non-rotating bodies, may be because a very small rotation will lead to no rotation over time, because of imbalance. But as to how it began, I really don't know.
@nealadamsdotcom Samples show that the moon's composition is similar to that of the Earth's mantel and crust. Suggesting the material came from Earth. Less dense becuase it contains little to no core material. Enough about that theory though. If the Earth and Moon are both increasing in mass wouldn't that mean in the past they had less mass and therefore a longer orbital period with the sun? An ancient Earth farther from the sun isn't supported by climate evidence in the fossil records.
@Ixions42 - You're getting a little deeper into the theory. Which is a much broader and far reaching theory than is suggested by these videos. Orbits are created and maintained by the gravity and the EM spectrum. But orbital progression, is controlled subtly by the sun's electromagnetic field, as the moon's orbit is controlled by earth's magnetic field. As the fields get larger, the planets/moons move outward. It's impossible not to observe orbital progression of the planets and the moon.
@jannikmt If you would tell anybody in the past of our civilizations that people in the 20th century will be able to fly to space-they would call you an Idiot, moron and lunatic. Try to be more open minded. Just because we dont understand something fully doesnt mean that its impossible and we wont understand it one day.
I loved It! Thanks Neil, Also, I have been studing Walter Russel Theories in his books: in 1927 there was books. These books stated in pratical science about Expanding Plantes. EXOPLANETS (gigantic gas planets recent discovered) was like our planets today. As planets get further from sun, planets expand. Thanks, your videos make Walter Russel theories Reinforcement. "The universal one" "The secret of light" "A New Concept of the Universe" All Walter Russel books.
@nealadamsdotcom You realize I was not referring to you? But to your objectors. I fully embrace this concept and more.
Established modes of thinking are very hard for some to break free from. Hard on the ego. No one who thought they knew it all wants to suddenly realize they had been duped.
The same establishment is in power that wanted people to think the Earth was flat, though they knew differently.
@inademv Yes, I'm the Prime Matter guy. that everyone laughs at. Are you the religious nut that thinks the matter universe was created by GOD, in a religious MAGICAL act of faith and horror of science. FROM NOTHING!
Or perhaps you think GOD alway had matter here for us, ever and ever and ever, world without end A-MEN!
Do schools graduate nitwits like you or just pass you through, knowing you will never have one bit of effect on the world around you, so who cares if you're a pinhead or not.
@inademv Since you have a Patent on insanity, you just go ahead and tell us what created all the matter in the universe, and by WHAT PROCESS? (Without using the words GOD, MAGIC or MIRACLE!)
Lord, you guys are stupid. WHERE ARE THE SMART PEOPLE!
@nealadamsdotcom To be more precise, the phrase that you stick with of "prime matter" is antiquated and not supported by modern science. I'll defer to Hawking in matters of quantum physics, but please, stick to your Aristotelian pre-science model. Or present some peer reviewed papers if you want to be taken seriously by ANYONE.
@inademv I wish to be taken seriously by intelligent people. Of course there's no Prime Matter. To you its "DARK MATTER or DARK FORCE,...WAIT, MATTER that you can't see or know by common means is IMPOSSIBLE.
Lord, you people are stupid. Do you live in a tree?
@nealadamsdotcom Except what you describe as prime matter doesn't fit with anything that we know about dark matter. Furthermore, you describe things that we have no way of knowing currently about dark matter so you're either not talking about dark matter or you don't know what you're talking about. So which is it?
@nealadamsdotcom And you're not doing science. The scientists looking for WIMPs are doing science. You're just shitting up youtube and wasting bandwidth. Honestly I'd rather watch creationist videos, they're more logically consistent than yours. Hell, I only even came her because it somehow made it into my recommended videos. I guess youtube figured I needed more pseudo-science to laugh at.
@inademv Yes, I'm the Prime Matter guy. that everyone laughs at. Are you the religious nut that thinks the matter universe was created by GOD, in a religious MAGICAL act of faith and horror of science. FROM NOTHING!
Or perhaps you think GOD alway had matter here for us, ever and ever and ever, world without end A-MEN!
Do schools graduate nitwits like you or just pass you through, knowing you will never have one bit of effect on the world around you, so who cares if you're a pinhead or not.
There are, as you know, SEVERAL models. One says all the matter was Exploded into existence. The second, RELIGIOUS ONE says all the matter in the universe was collapsed into a thing the size of a Wallnut/football or barn , according to the preacher. implying all the matter ALWAYS EXISTED! Most recent was the massive Pair-Production MODEL combined with Asymmetry, for an Electron Universe.
All, nonsense. Ask me to find an experiment for a flat Earth.
If Newton had been able to study and add the suns and the planets magnetic fields into his calculations, his theories would be very different. Science moves forward. Even the greatest concepts are subject to change. Your argument should be based in logic and deduction, and not in theories and speculation. I understand totally, why you don't believe what I am saying. I have been through this process before. That's why one generation has to die off before new concepts are embraced.
Satellites are guided on magnetic lines, of our solar system. The solar system is a whole thing. The whole thing grows, just as the reasonable sized bodies within it grow. You are not about to understand this concept because you were trained to believe in your religious doctrine. So when something new comes along, even though it takes more things into consideration and looks at a bigger picture, you are blind to it. Not that you agree or disagree, you are simply blind to it.
I speak to modern Greeks every day, who believe earth and the moon are the most unique planet and satellite in the universe. Even though there are over 100 satellites in our system, somehow our satellite, is moving away from it's planet. Our planet magically got struck by a rogue planet that kicked our magic moon into orbit.
Once this theory easily explains the growth of suns, and the matter universe, it as easily explains a growing solar system. Satellites are guided on magnetic lines.
@nealadamsdotcom "somehow our satellite, is moving away from it's planet."
Correct, our moon's orbital distance is increasing. That's a fact verified by measurements. The explanation is newtonian mechanics under the influence of gravity, and the predictions match the measurements. It passes the ultimate test of a scientific theory--it works.
Theory works equally for sending robots to Mars and satellites into geosynchronous orbit, while completely ignoring irrelevant "magnetic lines".
@MrRichardQED But those MAINTAINED QUARKS will disapate in space. or ANYWHERE except a PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT, not unlike being IN THE PROTON ITSELF! A FALSE environment. YOU have trouble understanding a POINT. Or, you are simply dishonest.
YOU, sir, should learn some more about Particle Physics. What are YOUR credentials. I'd love to hear that you HAVE some, so that I can rip you a new asshole, and make it worth it.
NOTHING "Annihilates". We have LAWS. It's a 70 year old word
@MrRichardQED But those MAINTAINED QUARKS will disapate in space. or ANYWHERE except a PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT, not unlike being IN THE PROTON ITSELF! A FALSE environment. Apparently you have trouble understanding a POINT. Or, you are simply dishonest.
YOU, sir, should learn some more about Particle Physics. What are YOUR credentials. I'd love to hear that you HAVE some, so that I can rip you a new asshole, and make it worth it.
@nealadamsdotcom Yes i do have some, but what role do they play ? Science is about evidence, not about authority. I know my particle physics, whiole you make basic mistakes here. You dont even know what antimatter is and what it does and tell others they need to learn about this stuff ? REALLY ? Wow, talka bout arrogance. btw google physics&annihilation and see what you come up with, then come back and say sorry will ya ?
@MrRichardQED Lets turn this around. I will post some things I know about Pair-Production and YOU honestly tell me what parts you didn't know till you MET ME HERE. Pairs approach,...BOTH SLOW,... both orbit each other , becoming, for a nano-second a form of Hydrogen, we call Positronium,.. THEN NOTHING,...except the Energy that originally entered as one Photon , flies off as 2 gamma ray particles in opposite directions. The REST, if rest there is, disappears.
@nealadamsdotcom Pairs of WHAT ? CAN YOU AT LEAST FORM REAL SENTENCES THAT MAKE SENCE WHEN YOU AKS QUESTION ?
Now i assume that you mean an electron and a positron, since you talk about a positronium being built. Now since a positronium is built of matter and antimatter it is unstable and can annihilate, thereby producing gama ray particles. I have a hint for you, the gamma ray particles that fly away are PHOTONS, all em radiation particles are photons, no matter if its light or gama radiation
@MrRichardQED You are confused at what "Pairs" are? Hmmm.
Gamma ray particles are ???? What ELSE would they be?
Once more 60 year old stupid words are/continue to be STUPID. "Anti-matter" and "annihilation" have no place in a particle discussion. A Positron is as MUCH MATTER as an Electron. OR,.."In a Positron Universe, the Electron is the Anti-matter. MATTER CANNOT BE ANNIHILATED (Destroyed. WE-HAVE-LAWS-AGAINST-IT.
@MrRichardQED You are confused at what "Pairs" are? Hmmm.
Gamma ray particles are ???? What ELSE would they be? Once more 60 year old stupid words are/continue to be STUPID. "Anti-matter" and "annihilation" have no place in a particle discussion. A Positron is as MUCH MATTER as an Electron. OR,.."In a Positron Universe, the Electron is the Anti-matter. MATTER CANNOT BE ANNIHILATED (Destroyed. WE-HAVE-LAWS-AGAINST-IT.
Do you wish to stick to the topic, or just be bitchy?
@nealadamsdotcom well to be exact at hiogher energies also other particles can be produced, but i assume you where talking about the basic reaction, not high energy physics ^^ Do you need the feynman diagramm so you can imagine it better ? I think i have links for that somewhere ;)
Well as any 2 charged particles they could also interact by elastic scattering, by i assume you werent interested in that ^^
No. A Positron is NOT ANTI-MATTER. It is the opposite particle TO the Electron. Both are MATTER equally, and Each is the OTHER HALF of the other. Of course they CANNOT annihilate, because THAT, indeed is against the laws of Physics. Nor can they be TRULY created. That too is against the law.
When they draw near, they SLOW,..ORBIT one another (Becoming a FORM of Hydrogen called Positronium, for a nano-second,...throw off their energy in TWO gamma ray packets,..and disappear. Obviously JOINING,
Everyone who watches this should know that its not a really picture of the dark side of the moon, because knowone has every been to the dark side of the moon
@smalldudesam Listen, idiot. GOOGLE the "other side of the MOON and look at the Photos. What do you think NASA's cameras were doing when they orbited the MOON. Were they BROKEN???
There is NO Geologist on Earth that would argue 1. That the Mares are impact craters.
Or that meteor impacts breached the molten core. ....but my favorite comment of yours is that the fact that the impacts on the Earth side is a COINCIDENCE.
You , sir, is why Keyboards shouldn't be given to the dangerously ignorant..
@nealadamsdotcom Of course they won't argue they are caused by impact craters. But they won't argue they are caused by randomly generated matter either. Many intelligent lunar geologists have hypothesized that the maria were created in volcanic eruptions before the volcanic activity began do die down. You can't say that this is "proof," you haven't really given any evidence.
To the first point: think about it, when both the earth and the moon were much hotter volcanic activity could take place pretty much anywhere on the surface. INCLUDING THE DARK SIDE. Obviously, the volcanic eruptions are not the same explosive type you might be thinking of in some cases. Second, the only reason the maria aren't as visible on the dark side of the moon is because that side is much more prone to meteor strikes (since there's not a huge earth blocking the way.
@thealaskinwonder You have become too unscientific and ignorant of scientific processes to have a rational discussion with.
The MERE idea that Earth could Get in the way of incoming Meteorites is silly. 1.Meteorites come in from all angles, The MOON orbits the Earth once a month, available from ANY angle2, Earth covers 1/500 TH of the MOONS SKY at any given moment.Finally, Earth is not the shape of Jackie Gleason's face. THERE WAS NO VOLCANIC ACTIVITY on the MOON EVER. FIND ONE CRATER!
@nealadamsdotcom I was waiting for that, because that was the point. Anyone can make up some ridiculous theory with no real evidence. You clearly are familiar with scientific deduction however you ignore some undisputed facts. There is proof that there was volcanic activity on the moon. Look up Mons Rümker for example, a former shield volcano. Furthermore, rock samples taken from the moon have been analyzed. Maria rocks tend to have more iron, a characteristic of rock from the interior.
@thealaskinwonder I do not agree that your statements are based in FACT. When rock melts and erupts, as on Earth, It's CLOCK RESETS. The moon is simply not hot enough to MELT and RESET,.. however Rock can heat and DEFORM to rise and turn and FLOW in other directions. But because Scientists Specialize. Geologists ignore the deformation and response of silicates to heat and pressure. A rock does not have to melt in order to FLOW , Yet it's clock does NOT RESET!
@thealaskinwonder I have examined the whole surface of the moon in detail. I see no Volcanoes. Certainly not at the Maria. Wishful thinking controls Geologists Eyes and BRAINS. Look at how many times Geological teams SEE PROOF of standing water on Mars. They suffer a delusonal INSANITY. On Mars, there are no clouds. No clouds mean NO RAIN. No RAIN means NO STANDING WATER ....EVER!
Of course the Maria is lower spreading silicate from inside the moon. VOLCANIC? NO!
@thealaskinwonder If it had a iron core it would also have a magnetic field like the earth. Last time i checked it doesn't therefore stop talking out of your arse.
@nealadamsdotcom Have you ever heard of Dr. Paul A.M. Dirac? Read his paper predicting the existence of the positrion. He received the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on anti-matter. The positron is anti-matter! It cannot exist inside the electron which is normal matter. The rest of your argument is equally stupid.
@hmlakid YOU could NOT know if a Positron could exist inside an Electron,... because if it did, their combined field could NOT exit the Electron shell to extend to the space outward to BE identified.
Positron and ELECTRON are BOTH NORMAL MATTER. of opposite charge/field. And YOU, sir, are a nitwit!
@nealadamsdotcom The positron is the anti-matter counterpart of the electron. They cannot exist together as they will annihilate each other to produce the photon.
@lanaya38 - NO. They "annihilate to produce 2 gamma ray particles that travel off in opposite directions. Are you telling me you didn't even have the brains to look this up before you decided to type? What have things come to when people are too damn lazy to even Google. Don't post here unless your head is screwed on. I was gentle and didn't flame you. Don't try it again.
1. Gamma rays are high energy electromagnetic radiation. Electro magnetic radiation propagate through photons. Hence Gamma radiation is composed of photons.
2. The photons dont necessarily travel in opposite directions. This will depend on the initial conditions of the interaction. Only if there is a perfect head-on collision will they travel in opposite direction (by conservation of momentum)
@nealadamsdotcom No, a positron is antimatter, the nitwit are you. We know this since the 1930´s. We observe positrons on a daily basis in laboratories. If an electron and a positron come too close they destroy each other, You obviously have no idea of particle physics whatsoever. Also a proton consists of quarks, as does a neutron. btw NOTHING can be inside an electron, since an electron is a zero dimension point particle. Open a physics book and learn something
@MrRichardQED Quarks? from Quarkworld or Quark dimension??? AAAAAND how are quarks created? By Quark-triplicate -pProduction? Where DO they come from, really? Can we see/experience a QUARK? Outside of a Proton, or Neutron? No? UN-like the Eternal Electron or Positron?
No,.. A Positron is a Point Particle. An Electron can be a ZERO-DIMENSION bubble.
@nealadamsdotcom A Positron is the antiparticle of the electron. It is antimatter, not normal matter.
Go learn science.
Logic says that there should be far more impact craters on the far side, because it doesn't have the Earth to shield it.
Growth like that would result in a different shape of the moon, as the curved surface would need to turn into a larger curved surface with different curvature.
Also, don't geodes grow in? A shell is formed then Crystals grow in?
I'll try again. When you look at the MOON you do not SEE thre moon, but the detris of the crashed meteorites coating the moon, Imagine a smooth slate floor and smashing marbles of silicate material for weeks on that floor, In time you will see nothing of the smooth slate floor but crater upon crater, If you could wipe or vacuum all that cratered coating away, You'd be left with a smooth slate ball. The GROWTH/ spreading happens on that smooth ball, as on Earth or Mars sedimemts.
I can foresee you asking 'well how did the impacts make the depressions in the maria in the first place'... and that would be because the moon did rotate faster and didn't always have the same side facing Earth. Tidal deformation slowed the moon's rotation.
I'm just stating the current model... I think it's fine for you to postulate, but I don't think it's a matter of you needing to prove your theories - I think it's a matter of there already being proof to the contrary.
@jeffamarie - No, there is no proof of lava fields that create depressions. Or earth blocking the moon from meteors in a magical cookie cutter fashion.
Those spreads on the earth side are new, and we know that because they only have small new craters. You sir, are babbling.
@nealadamsdotcom Again - not saying lava creates depressions at all... are you sure you're reading what I'm saying at all? Depressions exists UNDERNEATH the maria - that's why lava, i.e. a molten material flowed into them???
No, YOU know that they are new - everybody else knows that rocks from the maria and ocean of storms are about 3.5 BILLION years old. Does that support your theory?
@nealadamsdotcom Again - not saying lava creates depressions at all... are you sure you're reading what I'm saying at all? Depressions exists UNDERNEATH the maria - that's why lava, i.e. a molten material flowed into them???
No, YOU know that they are new - everybody else knows that rocks from the maria and ocean of storms are about 3.5 BILLION years old. Does that support your theory?
@nealadamsdotcom Again, nowhere did I say that lava fields create depressions... they're lava fields - they are fields... flat areas. There are depressions UNDERNEATH them, though, and that is what I was referring to - either caused by geological formation or repeated gouging of meteoritic impact.
And no, the maria are still quite old for everybody else... rocks studied from the maria and the ocean of storms are about 3.5 BILLION years old. Does that support your theory?
But the lunar seas are basins where lava was deposited, not craters from impacts!
skinsvideos21 3 weeks ago 3
So, planets might grow in mass. Why is that so impossible? Meanwhile, space itself expands without anyone able to explain that. Not being able to explain does not make it untrue.
Vermilicious 1 month ago
Your numbers for the mare surface areas are completely bonkers. the moon itself is less than 40 million sq km (less than 8% of Earth) Oceanus Procellarum is only about 4 million sq km (10% of the moon, less than 1% of Earth). The US is over 9 million sq km. Serenitatis is only 300k sq km (though Iceland is only a bit more than 100k), and Mare Imbrium is 850k sq km while Europe is over 1 million. 1 minute in and your at 3 strikes... is the rest of this as "thoroughly" researched?
SarafanUnin 2 months ago
Check Thunderbolts.info. You may see a different perspective about what really happened.
stevethewsimpson25 2 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Can you summarize the mechanisms and models for mass increase ? There has been a thread running almost two years now over your video at rational skepticism forum, Google that with expanding earth and its 80 odd pages will appear. Some of us are genuinely curious. The forum is now getting more into taking apart sections from maxlows thesis so your opinion on that would be helpful also.
FelixLanzalaco 2 months ago
@FelixLanzalaco I've been describing the mechanism for assembly of higher count atoms for the last day on my main Video here for rongrite. Funny, anyone can collect the whole theory from parts on that site. You just have to go back a few months-weeks and nearly all will be there. Scoop it up. The last 20 hours or so has key components.
James has one key problem. "EXPANDING"! There's no such Physical Process, but foe "exploding".
The Process is Growth. James, like Carey is a Geologist.
nealadamsdotcom 2 months ago
where can i watch the entire movie for free? it should be free for people to watch (as most documentary these days).
yourmajezty 3 months ago
@makkathran You are NOT MAKING SOUND SCIENTIFIC POINTS. Random speculation with no basis in fact, are NOT POINTS, at all. I am quite a likable person. I merely don't coddle igorance and foolishness. There are Learned skeptics and ignorant superstitionists. You would NOT KNOW which are contradictions or direct evidence. Why do you pretend you do? Because the rabble seems with the Nay-sayers??
Yet they scatter when I cast my gaze on them! WE do not have the Technology to measure growth
nealadamsdotcom 4 months ago
Neal. What you talk about on YouTube is very interesting, and there have been many, many people before you who have put forward ideas and had them blasted because of their 'heresy' or absurdness. I do not agree, however, with your claims that there is a conspiracy by science against your claims of expansion theory. There is massive evidence to support tectonic plate theory and collisions, and matter creation strains credibility to me.
makkathran 4 months ago
@makkathran MATTER CREATION "strains" credibility?
HUH? How do we get a MATTER UNIVERSE, from NOTHING, then?
Science tells you the universe is "EXPANDING". What Physical process is that? I never, ever heard of such a process? Have YOU? There's "EXPLOSION"! ....but acceleration OUTWARD disproved that,....so?
What process? I know "GROWTH"! Growth is the perfect process that describes this.
We also know that MATTER CAN BE CREATED! It's called Pair-Production. ....so...what strains?
nealadamsdotcom 4 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom A universe 'from' nothing doesn't need a cause that is subject to universal laws and logic. Growth is not the 'perfect' way to describe expansion of celestial bodies or space itself. where does the energy come from necessary to provide expansion of an entire planet in a time scale of, what I believe to have been in your video, 180 million years? - Correct me if I'm wrong about the time scale. I need more convincing evidence. I haven't seen any yet. I think this is absurd.
makkathran 4 months ago 5
@makka If you lived in the 1960's would you believe the continents moved away from each other? If you didn't know about rifting and spreading?
By your attitude,,it's clear you wouldn't . You'd think it absurd. No surprise. Likely I wouldn't either. It would make me curious, however!
If Growth of BODIES and their increasing MAGNETIC FIELDS is not a perfect way to describe Expansion/growth,..what is?
If Earth differentiated a molten Granitic layered crust, how did it miss 2/3's of the surface?
nealadamsdotcom 4 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom I am asking you where the energy comes from to allow for anything to gain mass. It seems impossible on the scale you are putting forward, let alone on any scale. I can maybe see how growth would account for many geological features you show of the Earth and Moon, but I can't get around the mass gain. Enlighten me on how it actually happens please!
makkathran 4 months ago 4
@makkathran some FACTS:
The moon has a thin tenuous atmosphere. Periodically a Solar Storm blows it completely away. Within a couple of weeks, that atmosphere is REPLACED!
Enceladus, moon of Saturn has deep crevices near the south pole,..from which Enceladus sprays gases and WATER ONGOING and since we discovered the sprays halo about 4-5 years ago.
We don't know exactly what's at the cores, but it's making stuff. As far as earth is concerned, it's increasing exponentially, Like the UNIVERSE.
nealadamsdotcom 4 months ago
@makkathran i know, i don't get it either :S
manhateixeira 2 months ago
@makkathran For Neal's theories to work, that energy that causes this does not come from anywhere, it just magically appears, and gravity - in particular the earths gravity - is either non-existant, or just not important enough to be factored in. I dunno why?
fretlessbass26 2 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom
I believe the universe goes in cycles. The
Dark Energy. I've heard theories about the universe expanding because of that.
I looked up Pair Production. Apparently it happens when a photon comes in contact with a nucleus.
Is that really "creation?"
Anyway... Aren't the shades of the moon from different materials it's made of?
As I watched, I wondered if maybe the different types of craters may depend on the SPEED of the object that crashed into it.
DannyPhantomBeast 2 months ago
@DannyPhantomBeast You are not old enough to "BELIEVE " anything! Beware.
You "googled "Pair-Production, and you got crap. Has NOTHING TO DO WITH A NUCLEUS! Did you read the word "CONTACT"??? Too bad. Start over.
NOW, you have to go much deeper. Start with "Pair-Production in space."
Did you watch and listen to the MOON VIDEO? You REEEALLLY NEED TO PAY ATTENTION!
nealadamsdotcom 2 months ago
@GonG108 This guy is wrong, but one side of the moon always does face the earth.
xphreakyphilx 4 months ago
@xphreakyphilx i really don t know that , how does it come that one side faces all time the earth. isn t it so that the moon rotates arround the earth and arround its axis
GonG108 4 months ago
@GonG108 You know the old saying "the dark side of the moon", it isn't that one side is always dark, it means that one side is always facing away from us. People had no idea what was on the other side of the moon until we went into space.
xphreakyphilx 4 months ago
@GonG108 It's called gravitational locking and there's a whole bunch of research an theories to explain that. Just read them.
Mtaalas 3 months ago
There is such a vast amount of fuzzy logic and questionable leaps after the word "if" that it's almost impossible to grab hold of individual elements to disagree with. The flaw is assume that because you can't pick out a splash trail then it isn't there. Larger impacts produce larger volumes of debris, and throw them further. They are also older impacts, possibly from a period when the moon still rotated relative to the earth. Their splash trails are under more recent impacts and debris
MarwoodBramwell 4 months ago
@dEndiProductions It's NOT a conspiracy site. None of my sites are. Its a SCIENCE site.
Do you understand the word EXPONENTIAL" ??????? GREATER WITH TIME!
Lord, I'm talking to an idiot, again.
How do you guys survive in the real world? Do you live with your parents? Did you actually pay attention when teachers were trying to teach you?
EX-PO-NEN-TIAL
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Science means dealing with measured truth, your site supports the idea that celestial bodies are increasing in mass magically. Exponential means having a derivative of another exponential function; in this manner the derivative increases faster and faster. An exponential function takes a number and raises it to the power of the abscissa.
dEndiProductions 5 months ago
@dEndiProductions No, The BIG BANG requires MAGIC or a GOD. My theory requires a simple, repeatable and universal scientific PROCESS. A process that is a result of the original simple structuring of the universe through processes we cannot yet understand,..As always, with science we must go to the point WE DO understand and work forward from THERE. The further back we can go, the more building blocks we can find. I have simply found more building blocks. MATTER MUST HAVE BEEN CREATED! FACT!
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom This concept you have strum up is not a theory. A theory requires several tested hypotheses supporting a similar phenomenon, id est you need to have multiple successful experiments in your favor.
dEndiProductions 5 months ago
@dEndiProductions - I have multiple growing suns, multiple growing planets and moons, over 20 videos, massive factual proof, and more scientific work in all the sciences, over 35 years.
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom If you have 'massive factual proof', you should be able to carry out my suggested experiment. Come on, it's rock. Look at the mudcracks of a dried mudpuddle. The portions of hard, dry mud become surrounded by cracks, not basins or holes.
dEndiProductions 5 months ago
@dEndiProductions - The mud you refer to is laced with water. But as the water evaporates, the particles of dirt seek to settle as crystals, near and even associated with, in temporary crystal bonds, the other particles there. Rocks are already attached to crystal bonds within the rock, and will not act like drying mud. A very foolish, "test". Study your science.
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom No, Neal, nobody claims that the mares on the moon are impact craters. They are flood basalts, a relic from the time when our moon was tectonically and volcanically active. The reason the far side is more heavily cratered (which disturbs and covers the mares) because it is more exposed than the near side.
SoundOfScilence 4 months ago
@SoundOfScilence Incorrect.. MANY have written to me insisting they are Impact craters.
2. If they were from that FANTASY TIME they would be covered by Impact craters. Also they are below the common surface LIKE THE EARTH and Mars.
3. The most stupid response. BOTH SIDES are equally exposed as the other to all directions except for one tiny area, where we have the Earth. so small compared to the whole expanse of it's "sky" as to be insignificant.
Unless Earth looks like Jackie Gleson's face
nealadamsdotcom 4 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Look, try to test if you can get anything to generate holes or 'basins' by applying an outward force to it. I promise you that lunar rock, which is similar in composition to tellurian rock, will not exibit this behavior. Prove me wrong. I'm open to ideas.
dEndiProductions 5 months ago
@dEndiProductions - If you study crystallography, you would know basalt, like all silicates, are crystal in nature. Basalt rising from the interior of the moon to the surface, would slowly bend to the lateral, and move outward. The moon is not hot enough to melt the basalt and reset it's clock, so it bends and pushes outward.
One has to study all the sciences to develop a theory of everything.
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
How about Sun?
winaryor 5 months ago
@winaryor As wwe know, it GROWS!
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
If the moon's surface did in fact spread, we would see fractures, not mares. The mares were formed by volcanic activity.
dEndiProductions 6 months ago
@dEndiProductions ON EARTH when the crust spreads we see fractures, and much later what do we see that fills with oceanic water???????? And what makes that spreading BASIN but volcanic activity???
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom It's not that oceanic crust is a growing fracture, it is that the continents are granite cratons that spread in place of the oceanic crust. Try pulling apart a piece of paper and getting holes instead of rips.
dEndiProductions 5 months ago
@dEndiProductions PAY ATTENTION The Granitic crust spreads as the new oceanic plate fills and cools.
ON THE MOON,...the crust spreads revealing the new revealed spreading mare crust. SAME-SAME, except it's not MOLTEN . merely heated.
Same with Mars.
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom The granitic crust stopped spreading in the Precambrian, and the oceanic crust does not fill in. The moon, moreover, is tectonically dead and has been for a few billion years.
dEndiProductions 5 months ago
@dEndiProductions ON EARTH,..according to the U. S. Geological Survey The Granitic crust spreads to reveal enough square mileage in the last 10 Million Years to make the Area of Africa.
The MOON grows increasingly ACTIVE with time. It's newest spread "mares" are so "NEW" that they only receive the Very NEWEST smaller meteorites of the inner solar System compared to the Much OLDER and BIGGER Meteorites of several hundred million years ago.
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom The U.S. Geological Survey absolutely does not imply anything like your claim. Suppose that fact about the granitic crust were true. Seventy million years ago, there would have been no granitic crust at all with that rate. And yet, we have fossil evidence of rocks billions of years old on every continent.
dEndiProductions 5 months ago
@dEndiProductions YO,..YO YO! You LYIN' MOTHA. How DARE YOU! You just SAY S**T and it's okay???
WHO the hell are you ?
Go to continuitystudiosdotnetslashgrowth. Read the letter with the spread info. In case you can't do the Math, each of the last three 10 million year segments ,..area equal to Africa was MADE/revealed/spread.
Earth has GROWN exponentially (Greater with time.) STUDY,..THINK...STUDY...THINK!
nealadamsdotcom 5 months ago
Where does the extra matter come from?
97ginoVDB 6 months ago
Comment removed
hoad47 6 months ago
@hoad47 I am an artist , a designer and I have done some Architecture work. I am a precision draftsman and Cartographer. Which measurements do you question?
nealadamsdotcom 6 months ago
isnt there about 50,000 tons of dust coming into the earth from space evry year ,so why cant the moon be still collecting dust and rocks from what made them in the 1st place only its not as chaotic now as it was when the planets started forming ,isnt that process just an extremly slow rate now?
reksub10 6 months ago
@reksub10 Why LESS? Aren't Super Novas still blowing up? Why not MORE? More what? Giant ROCKS? From WHERE? Do Novas fire GIANT ROCKS?,..OR IONS?? Where are the ROCKS coming from? Rock and Roll heaven?
nealadamsdotcom 6 months ago
@ihr0ppa I draw the line at TRUTH!
The scientists that finally bumble upon the truth, have stumbled over mounds of idiots on their pathway,.. all of which wore the same trappings, had the same instruments and reputations. It's a crap shoot at best and usually the truth comes from the most UNEXPECTED PLACES.
In this case, history will have a very big laugh.
nealadamsdotcom 6 months ago
Respond These molten layers rose up and spread out for thousands upon thousands of flat layer upon flat layer but according to Geology, this same process magically did not happen to/for the remaining TWO THIRDS of the crust. Why shouldn't I believe the Earth could do this selective layered lathing of one third of the crust,...especially when Geology's OWN CRUSTAL AGE MAP has no deep oceans older than 180 Million Years old and the pieces fit together perfectly. I'm SO full of shit.
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@ihr0ppa Reason to disagree with EVERYONE, when EVERYONE IS ALWAYS RIGHT?
Like
1. Men believed God made man and he didn't evolve.
2. Cigarettes were okay to smoke and they didn't KILL YOU.
3. The SUN orbited the Earth which was center of the universe. THIS for 1,500 years.
4. The universes matter was magically created by God, or Zatatra the Magician in a Big bang.
5 and Earth differentiated layer upon layer of molten granitic rock to fill cookie cutter shapes that were spread on 1/3 of Earth
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
Holy shit. I was not really buying it until I saw the dark side of the moon.
But, I still don't believe that mass can increase. Or that this has happened to the moon recently. I'm keeping an open mind though.
Yoshi5020 7 months ago
@ihr0ppa 1. You don't "KNOW" me.
2, It's NOT expanding. Balloons and explosions expand. Well, explosions "expands". The moon and all bodies and the universe GROWS.
YOU TELL ME: What KNOWN physical process causes a BIG BANG explosion? (We KNOW GROWTH,...BUT "expand?")
What makes the sun GET BIGGER? Magic? Big Bang? MAGIC? Is that what you believe in? MAGIC? I prefer science.
YOU are like a voodoo Witch Doctor who believes the Shamans who tell him MAGIC MADE EVERYTHING and don't ask questions
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom
So I do not ask questions, hu?
What about my two questions you just ignored?
"- Where is the mass commimg from?
- What abut the gravity of the moon?"
It has nothing to do with the big bang explosion and nothing with the sun since the moon isn't any of those.
It looks like you rather insult me with some bullshit you cam up with instead of thinking about these questions.
Maybe I don't "KNOW" you. What I do know though, is that you're an ignorant fool.
ihr0ppa 7 months ago
@ihr0ppa For any non-living body to GROW. there MUST BE A PROCESS,.. or MECHANISM of new matter creation, whether it's the MOON, SUN or UNIVERSE. One can hardly expect there to be TWO processes of MATTER CREATION.
I was simply commenting on your general ignorance of concepts and facts like these. Why don't you do some reading and then come back to the discussion minimally informed. You embarass both of us.
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom
So, according to your logic moon = sun = big bang?
- the moon doesn't grow at all
- the sun isn't growing, it expands because it gets hotter while running out of hydrogen
- the matter creation process witch caused the big bang has not ben discovered yet and is one of the mssing pieces to complete the theory.
It looks like you have to to some reading yourself.
ihr0ppa 7 months ago
@ihr0ppa The SUN is running OUT OF HYDROGEN and getting ?BIGGER? It's MADE of Hydrogen!!
HELLO! Knock, knock.
If the Big Bang is a "MISSING PIECE" That pretty much stops the conversation, pal. THAT is the CREATION OF THE MATTER OF THE UNIVERSE. END,....FINS,......No next step!
You have NOTHING TO SAY after that now.
You see, I have the answer to the question. So I know all the rest, and the Moon GROWS! From the creation of NEW MATTER from the same process of the NON- BANG
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom
Ok, let's ignore that all you just wrote was complete nonsens and once again showed me that you do not understand the machanics of the univers at all. I'm getting tired of pointing that out...
You know the answeres? Then please tell them to me.
P.S: Using capslock just makes you look even more desperate.
ihr0ppa 7 months ago
@ihr0ppa I suggest you go away. Why? You are a victim of generations of BULLS**T. Our sun GROWS and gets brighter by between 10 to 25 percent each BILLION YEARS. ONGOING. Today the sun ionizes 400 million tons of He and H and fires it into its' system EACH SECOND!
SCIENTISTS, unable to even comprehend the reality of this make up idiotic theories to sweep it away, blinding you with mumbo Jumbo.
The REAL answers are OBVIOUS but take a THEORY OF EVERYTHING that we don't KNOW! YET! I DO.
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom
And why are you still ignoring my questions? Can't you answere them?
Well, let me help you:
If matter would be created inside the moon, it would contradict the first law of thermodynamics. => no matter creation inside the moon
When matter can not be created inside the moon, you could still assume that the moon is hollow.
But because of GRAVITY this is not possible either. => moon not hollow => no way for moon to grow => successfully disproved "growing moon theory"
ihr0ppa 7 months ago
@Helge129 I don't have enough time in my life for this stupidity. 1. On the FAR side of the moon are CRATERS. Early in our Solar System, Scientists say Meteorites were BIGGER and now, smaller. 2. WE,..EARTH ARE NOT the source of Meteorites. Nor do they come from BEHIND THE EARTH! They come from many different directions, so that BEING "LOCKED".MEANS NOTHING to the impact of Meteorites to the MOON!
3. The Earth takes 1/2000 and less space in the moons sky.
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@Helge129 i'm using the Perjorative because what you are saying is anti-intelligent and UN-scientific.
1.There are NO MARES on the opposite side of the moon.
The MOON rotates within the Earth-Moon system ONCE PER DAY,...facing , in that day ALL 360 degrees. It also ORBITS the Earth once a MONTH. Each portion of the MOON faces each and every portion of its radial side faces any portion of the sky equally. Why am I explaining this to someone who had at least a high school education?
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@Huttate1 and Helge129 In that case where are the impacts of ongoing time as on the other side of the moon? The size of impacts are like a clock. Largest are the oldest. NEWEST are very small,..as those in the NEW SPREADING Mares
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Oh, I don't know. Perhaps the fact that the moon is tidally locked and in synchronous orbit with the moon means that the near side is shielded from impacts whilst the far side is continually exposed. Perhaps also the late heavy bombardment created most of the lunar craters, as determined by luna rock sample analysis, and the later forming mares 'smoothed' the near side.
Hint: Capitalising bullshit simply turns it into BULLSHIT.
Huttate1 7 months ago
@Huttate1 O-kay. What you just said is capitalized BULLSHIT, and you're STUPID. Perhaps you think the little marble Earth is shaped exactly like the MARES? Or Jackie Gleason's face?
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
These are caused by very large impact while the moon was still geologically active, and material from the mantle rose up to fill the holes. Simple as that. Your explanation is ludicrous.
Helge129 7 months ago
Doesn't explain where the extra mass comes from, and fails to recognize the fact that the moon ceased to be tectonically active several hundred million years ago. Tectonic mechanics can create large depressions like the Sea of Tranquility. Notwithstanding the fact that no study from NASA, JSA, or the ESA has ever found evidence supporting this absurd hypothesis.
pringlex 7 months ago
@pringlex Go to the big discussion at the main video. read a couple of month's of comments.
I'm discussing it there NOW!
Yes, tectonic spreading GROWING Moon does indeed explain the Sea of tranquility, aand all the other spread mares of a GROWING MOON Like the oceanic spreads of Earth.
Oh,..NASA et al don't agree? The NASA that's looking for "SIGNS" of standing water on Mars? THAT NASA?
Fairy Tale Science does not impress me.
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Yes, tectonic plates WOULD explain the sea of tranquility except THE MOON HAS NO TECTONIC PLATES! And I'm guessing all that magic mass that makes the moon grow came out of the same place as the bullshit coincidence about the far side of the moon.
ARKillz3 7 months ago
@ARKillz3 You believe in coincidence? YOU'RE STUPID!
nealadamsdotcom 7 months ago
I am wondering if the earth, moon, mars, in fact all planets, and the sun have a plasma core. If that were true, then magnetic particulate from the sun entering the north poles of these bodies could be the source of the matter that is causing expansion. If so, then the current activity of the sun could be the reason for so much earthquake activity on earth. As more material from the sun enters the north pole, the crust would be forced to expand. Thus the split at the Japan earthquake site.
jeaniebob2007 8 months ago
Hey, nealadamsdotcom, I think you and GoodScienceForYou would make great friends......
iwrangleyou 8 months ago
Of course, look at Mimas.
NonstopRam 9 months ago
Have you watched the Videos at nealadamsdotcom the science section?
I suggested, for this discussion to avoid the conspiracy angle. It began 50 years ago with Professor Sam Carey, and it's not worth the time in a scientific discussion. It's historical Geological Politics. If that's your interest.... I don't know why they seal it? I never asked, because I don't care.
"blow"???
Orbits?...tighten? I don't "BELIEVE", I deduce!
I 'deduce' that if the Earth Grows, there MUST BE A mechanism/process
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom I "deduce", that if there IS a mechanism for the creation of NEW matter, it must be, for MANY reasons,. at the core and outer core. If there is such a process, (AND there must be, or else we wouldn't have a MATTER universe.) the mechanism/process MUST BE Universal in nature. This would include Suns, Galaxies, black holes and the UNIVERSE,.. So,.. by simple deduction and extrapolation,. The UNIVERSE,.. like every thing we KNOW, GROWS, and does NOT EXPAND.
NEW RULES.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
Do you have a link to the video? I had no idea that every single collector was in on the conspiracy. I sealant that perfectly mimicks the Widmanstätten pattern to cover up the obvious blow geode-like formations would have to the foundations of science. An imperative that all collectors know about.
I mention again that what we should find if mass increases is that orbits tighten over time. That's not we observer so it can't be.
A belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence
Ixions42 9 months ago
So it's not a transfer of angular momentum from the Earth to the Moon which is increasing it's orbital speed but an effect of the Earth's EM field? How can there be no transfer when Newtonian Physics tells us there must be?
Now the math AND the evidence are blurring. I'm needing a little help here.
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 We're backing into this theory,.. and it very big,.. and it includes everything. You're being reasonable and not calling me a Nazi. so I want to tell you the whole thing,...BUT you've inserted into the MIDDLE. (sigh.) Hmmm. What if I told you that there's no such thing as MATTER,.....STUFF...E=mc2 and all that?
SO,....what is STUFF made of?
Energy. Einstein says.
Nnnnno. Not just!.....Energy AND very, very tiny EM fields ,...pulled in half. This CAN get back to the moon, I swear.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
It just seems to me very unlikely that the Moon could have been expanding given it's physical relationship with the Earth. I don't really understand the physical or compositional thresholds for an object before it has a tendence to expand. Does an object have to be a certain size or have a core? Finally one of the things your videos don't seem to address is why? Why the conspiracy? Also how could we test the EE theory?
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 - Don't bother with the conspiracy portion. It's a whole other discussion, and has very little to do with science, but politics.
Just a reminder. Nothing expands. That is unscientific in the extreme. It all grows. Of course a meteorite or tiny moon, is not going to create matter. But it can accrete externally and internally. Why do I say internally? Small meteorites and dust, with billions of atoms, will accrete to the surface of a meteorite. A single atom (gas) will slide
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom So one thing you suggest is that we could take meteorites which have landed on Earth and cut them open to study the geode-like center that we should find in some if not most of them.
I was refering to G times M1 plus M2 over R squared. If the orbital speed remains constant as mass increases R would decrease. Which means over time the planets move closer to the sun. You're saying they're moving away?
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 Yeaaah,.. did that, I have a video that shows that. The collectors put some kind of sealant in there and get grumpy when you ask about the empty spaces.
Planets move away from the sun. Yep. Our moon moves aaaway from Earth. We know, because it's easy to measure. Re Newton, it Shouldn't. Should have found it's orbital long ago.
Ask yourself,..If Newton was alive today. would he adjust to NEW KNOWLEDGE? Like EM fields?
Do you believe in coincidence? We live in an EM universe..so
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@Ixions42 - . A singe atom (gas) will slide down the crystal lattices to the meteorite's core, attaching crystalline bonds, and push outward, like a geode. This will empty the core, as the meteorite grows. In time, gases will collect, and at moon-size the process of new matter creation will begin. Very slowly at first. Gases and water, and so on.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
The moon is tidally locked with earth. Meaning it rotates once for each orbit. Due to the conservation of momentum, if it were to grow in size it would change it's speed of rotation. Making it impossible to be tidally locked today.
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 Be--cause ,....you,...say so? I'm sorry? Are you the FINAL ARBITER? The Wizard of Oz?
The Earth and the MOON are both GROWING, Mister GOD. What do you say to that. Watch the other 6 videos,...just,...for fun, and THINK!
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom I've watched quite a few videos you've made. I'm just trying to make a rational statement to refute the expanding Earth theory. If you've ever seen a figure skater spinning on the ice with their arms outstretched and then they pull them in you see what I'm talking about. It would be the same but in reverse. So an expanding moon wouldn't be able to maintain it's special relationship with the Earth because it's moment of inertia is changing over time. How can you explain it?
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 Have you listened to the video? If there is no reasonable rotation, GROWTH HAPPENS predominetly on ONE SIDE Meaning the heaviest material/growth is greater on one side.
It is NO COINCIDENCE that the side that has the GROWING MARES ARE on the.... SIDE..... that.... FACES EARTH! So the HEAVY side swings like a Pendulum to the EARTH. And will continually, no matter how big it gets. However 400 MYA a day on Earth was 19 hours long.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom What exactly is "no reasonable rotation". The moon has a rotational period of about 28 days, which is the same period as it's orbit. If some of the mass of a rotating object is pushed further from it's axis of rotation the net effect will be to slow the overall speed of rotation. ie (28 days+) By explaining to me that the heavy side swings like a Pendulum to the Earth are you saying that in fact a bowling ball and a feather dropped in a vaccum don't fall at the same rate?
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 What a GREAT RESPONSE. Thank GOD, not every one here is an idiot. . Very good.
Anyway,..Gravities rate response depends on Weight? No.
Distance? Yes. Hmm.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Why then was there an initial tendency to expand towards the Earth when it's source of expansion is equi-distance with the lighter stuff? Why is the moon less dense then Earth since it's effectively being filled up with the same stuff? Why were shorter period ancient tides greater in amplitude then the tides we experience today? Comparing two theories always means you have to test each with the question. If this were true what would it look like? Then weigh the evidence.
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 - I do not know the answer, and I don't like to speculate. There are several possible answers. But again, it's speculation. One would be, that the moon began as with some meteorites, and which may happen with Mars, with the annealing of 2 proto-moons of different size. The question of non-rotating bodies, may be because a very small rotation will lead to no rotation over time, because of imbalance. But as to how it began, I really don't know.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Samples show that the moon's composition is similar to that of the Earth's mantel and crust. Suggesting the material came from Earth. Less dense becuase it contains little to no core material. Enough about that theory though. If the Earth and Moon are both increasing in mass wouldn't that mean in the past they had less mass and therefore a longer orbital period with the sun? An ancient Earth farther from the sun isn't supported by climate evidence in the fossil records.
Ixions42 9 months ago
@Ixions42 - You're getting a little deeper into the theory. Which is a much broader and far reaching theory than is suggested by these videos. Orbits are created and maintained by the gravity and the EM spectrum. But orbital progression, is controlled subtly by the sun's electromagnetic field, as the moon's orbit is controlled by earth's magnetic field. As the fields get larger, the planets/moons move outward. It's impossible not to observe orbital progression of the planets and the moon.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom if you belive it your stupid... where the hell dose the mass come from? why should it grow at the same rate propotinaly?
jannikmt 9 months ago
@jannikmt If you would tell anybody in the past of our civilizations that people in the 20th century will be able to fly to space-they would call you an Idiot, moron and lunatic. Try to be more open minded. Just because we dont understand something fully doesnt mean that its impossible and we wont understand it one day.
vobos 9 months ago
This is sad...
TheCopaceticMan 9 months ago
@TheCopaceticMan Nitwit,......and Knucklehead.
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Are you calling me that, or the maker of this video?
TheCopaceticMan 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom YOU,...THINK before you TYPE! You can READ???? nealadamsdotcom
Lord, send me some smart ones. I'm beggin'!
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
djdsfhakdfhlksdhklf 10 months ago
The Earth and Universe may be expanding but the brains here are not.
Better wrap this idea in a nice little package with a ribbon labeled no thinking required.
Why they don't get this is a joke.
LadyStonecut 10 months ago
@LadyStonecut You know that sound that you're hearing Slice-o-life. That's the wind whistling between your ears.
Move out of your mothers house and answer this quiz.
1. MATTER is made from..........?
nealadamsdotcom 10 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom You realize I was not referring to you? But to your objectors. I fully embrace this concept and more.
Established modes of thinking are very hard for some to break free from. Hard on the ego. No one who thought they knew it all wants to suddenly realize they had been duped.
The same establishment is in power that wanted people to think the Earth was flat, though they knew differently.
LadyStonecut 10 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom By the way. I moved out of mamas house 40 years ago. Please don't attack your supporters!
LadyStonecut 10 months ago
I wish I could flag this video for dangerously stupid. Are you the "prime matter" guy that everyone laughs at?
inademv 10 months ago
@inademv Yes, I'm the Prime Matter guy. that everyone laughs at. Are you the religious nut that thinks the matter universe was created by GOD, in a religious MAGICAL act of faith and horror of science. FROM NOTHING!
Or perhaps you think GOD alway had matter here for us, ever and ever and ever, world without end A-MEN!
Do schools graduate nitwits like you or just pass you through, knowing you will never have one bit of effect on the world around you, so who cares if you're a pinhead or not.
nealadamsdotcom 10 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom No, I'm quite the atheist but that whole prime matter thing is just patently insane.
inademv 10 months ago
@inademv Since you have a Patent on insanity, you just go ahead and tell us what created all the matter in the universe, and by WHAT PROCESS? (Without using the words GOD, MAGIC or MIRACLE!)
Lord, you guys are stupid. WHERE ARE THE SMART PEOPLE!
nealadamsdotcom 10 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom To be more precise, the phrase that you stick with of "prime matter" is antiquated and not supported by modern science. I'll defer to Hawking in matters of quantum physics, but please, stick to your Aristotelian pre-science model. Or present some peer reviewed papers if you want to be taken seriously by ANYONE.
inademv 10 months ago
@inademv I wish to be taken seriously by intelligent people. Of course there's no Prime Matter. To you its "DARK MATTER or DARK FORCE,...WAIT, MATTER that you can't see or know by common means is IMPOSSIBLE.
Lord, you people are stupid. Do you live in a tree?
nealadamsdotcom 10 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Except what you describe as prime matter doesn't fit with anything that we know about dark matter. Furthermore, you describe things that we have no way of knowing currently about dark matter so you're either not talking about dark matter or you don't know what you're talking about. So which is it?
inademv 10 months ago
@inademv In science we have this thing we call deduction. It's sort of like asking what is one and one. And you say "ONE AND ONE WHAT??
I say, Doesn't matter,.. what do you deduce from the facts given??? You don't NEED the two things! YOU DEDUCE!
YOU don't know what Dark Matter is because you don't have enough facts. You have ONE, so far. It does exist and it's everywhere
nealadamsdotcom 10 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom And you're not doing science. The scientists looking for WIMPs are doing science. You're just shitting up youtube and wasting bandwidth. Honestly I'd rather watch creationist videos, they're more logically consistent than yours. Hell, I only even came her because it somehow made it into my recommended videos. I guess youtube figured I needed more pseudo-science to laugh at.
inademv 10 months ago
@inademv Yes, I'm the Prime Matter guy. that everyone laughs at. Are you the religious nut that thinks the matter universe was created by GOD, in a religious MAGICAL act of faith and horror of science. FROM NOTHING!
Or perhaps you think GOD alway had matter here for us, ever and ever and ever, world without end A-MEN!
Do schools graduate nitwits like you or just pass you through, knowing you will never have one bit of effect on the world around you, so who cares if you're a pinhead or not.
nealadamsdotcom 10 months ago
There are, as you know, SEVERAL models. One says all the matter was Exploded into existence. The second, RELIGIOUS ONE says all the matter in the universe was collapsed into a thing the size of a Wallnut/football or barn , according to the preacher. implying all the matter ALWAYS EXISTED! Most recent was the massive Pair-Production MODEL combined with Asymmetry, for an Electron Universe.
All, nonsense. Ask me to find an experiment for a flat Earth.
Ask the right questions.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
If Newton had been able to study and add the suns and the planets magnetic fields into his calculations, his theories would be very different. Science moves forward. Even the greatest concepts are subject to change. Your argument should be based in logic and deduction, and not in theories and speculation. I understand totally, why you don't believe what I am saying. I have been through this process before. That's why one generation has to die off before new concepts are embraced.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
Satellites are guided on magnetic lines, of our solar system. The solar system is a whole thing. The whole thing grows, just as the reasonable sized bodies within it grow. You are not about to understand this concept because you were trained to believe in your religious doctrine. So when something new comes along, even though it takes more things into consideration and looks at a bigger picture, you are blind to it. Not that you agree or disagree, you are simply blind to it.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
I speak to modern Greeks every day, who believe earth and the moon are the most unique planet and satellite in the universe. Even though there are over 100 satellites in our system, somehow our satellite, is moving away from it's planet. Our planet magically got struck by a rogue planet that kicked our magic moon into orbit.
Once this theory easily explains the growth of suns, and the matter universe, it as easily explains a growing solar system. Satellites are guided on magnetic lines.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nealadamsdotcom "somehow our satellite, is moving away from it's planet."
Correct, our moon's orbital distance is increasing. That's a fact verified by measurements. The explanation is newtonian mechanics under the influence of gravity, and the predictions match the measurements. It passes the ultimate test of a scientific theory--it works.
Theory works equally for sending robots to Mars and satellites into geosynchronous orbit, while completely ignoring irrelevant "magnetic lines".
terrymorse 10 months ago
can someone explain what this means?
VanTerminatorX 11 months ago
@MrRichardQED But those MAINTAINED QUARKS will disapate in space. or ANYWHERE except a PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT, not unlike being IN THE PROTON ITSELF! A FALSE environment. YOU have trouble understanding a POINT. Or, you are simply dishonest.
YOU, sir, should learn some more about Particle Physics. What are YOUR credentials. I'd love to hear that you HAVE some, so that I can rip you a new asshole, and make it worth it.
NOTHING "Annihilates". We have LAWS. It's a 70 year old word
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@MrRichardQED But those MAINTAINED QUARKS will disapate in space. or ANYWHERE except a PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT, not unlike being IN THE PROTON ITSELF! A FALSE environment. Apparently you have trouble understanding a POINT. Or, you are simply dishonest.
YOU, sir, should learn some more about Particle Physics. What are YOUR credentials. I'd love to hear that you HAVE some, so that I can rip you a new asshole, and make it worth it.
NOTHING "Annihilates". We have LAWS
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Yes i do have some, but what role do they play ? Science is about evidence, not about authority. I know my particle physics, whiole you make basic mistakes here. You dont even know what antimatter is and what it does and tell others they need to learn about this stuff ? REALLY ? Wow, talka bout arrogance. btw google physics&annihilation and see what you come up with, then come back and say sorry will ya ?
MrRichardQED 11 months ago
@MrRichardQED Lets turn this around. I will post some things I know about Pair-Production and YOU honestly tell me what parts you didn't know till you MET ME HERE. Pairs approach,...BOTH SLOW,... both orbit each other , becoming, for a nano-second a form of Hydrogen, we call Positronium,.. THEN NOTHING,...except the Energy that originally entered as one Photon , flies off as 2 gamma ray particles in opposite directions. The REST, if rest there is, disappears.
Well?
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom Pairs of WHAT ? CAN YOU AT LEAST FORM REAL SENTENCES THAT MAKE SENCE WHEN YOU AKS QUESTION ?
Now i assume that you mean an electron and a positron, since you talk about a positronium being built. Now since a positronium is built of matter and antimatter it is unstable and can annihilate, thereby producing gama ray particles. I have a hint for you, the gamma ray particles that fly away are PHOTONS, all em radiation particles are photons, no matter if its light or gama radiation
MrRichardQED 11 months ago
@MrRichardQED You are confused at what "Pairs" are? Hmmm.
Gamma ray particles are ???? What ELSE would they be?
Once more 60 year old stupid words are/continue to be STUPID. "Anti-matter" and "annihilation" have no place in a particle discussion. A Positron is as MUCH MATTER as an Electron. OR,.."In a Positron Universe, the Electron is the Anti-matter. MATTER CANNOT BE ANNIHILATED (Destroyed. WE-HAVE-LAWS-AGAINST-IT.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@MrRichardQED You are confused at what "Pairs" are? Hmmm.
Gamma ray particles are ???? What ELSE would they be? Once more 60 year old stupid words are/continue to be STUPID. "Anti-matter" and "annihilation" have no place in a particle discussion. A Positron is as MUCH MATTER as an Electron. OR,.."In a Positron Universe, the Electron is the Anti-matter. MATTER CANNOT BE ANNIHILATED (Destroyed. WE-HAVE-LAWS-AGAINST-IT.
Do you wish to stick to the topic, or just be bitchy?
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom well to be exact at hiogher energies also other particles can be produced, but i assume you where talking about the basic reaction, not high energy physics ^^ Do you need the feynman diagramm so you can imagine it better ? I think i have links for that somewhere ;)
Well as any 2 charged particles they could also interact by elastic scattering, by i assume you werent interested in that ^^
MrRichardQED 11 months ago
No. A Positron is NOT ANTI-MATTER. It is the opposite particle TO the Electron. Both are MATTER equally, and Each is the OTHER HALF of the other. Of course they CANNOT annihilate, because THAT, indeed is against the laws of Physics. Nor can they be TRULY created. That too is against the law.
When they draw near, they SLOW,..ORBIT one another (Becoming a FORM of Hydrogen called Positronium, for a nano-second,...throw off their energy in TWO gamma ray packets,..and disappear. Obviously JOINING,
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
omg. i hope that everyone on the comments knows what they are talking about. because i think that this Conspiracy is a load of horse crap.
JuLiAzCrackers 11 months ago
@JuLiAzCrackers Two idiots in ONE DAY. Get the hell back to the cat fart videos, kid. Adults are talking in this room.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
Everyone who watches this should know that its not a really picture of the dark side of the moon, because knowone has every been to the dark side of the moon
smalldudesam 11 months ago
@smalldudesam Listen, idiot. GOOGLE the "other side of the MOON and look at the Photos. What do you think NASA's cameras were doing when they orbited the MOON. Were they BROKEN???
Keep these idiots OUT OF HERE!
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
Maybe the moon is a living thing and growing!
ZhakoT 11 months ago
There is NO Geologist on Earth that would argue 1. That the Mares are impact craters.
Or that meteor impacts breached the molten core. ....but my favorite comment of yours is that the fact that the impacts on the Earth side is a COINCIDENCE.
You , sir, is why Keyboards shouldn't be given to the dangerously ignorant..
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago 7
@nealadamsdotcom Of course they won't argue they are caused by impact craters. But they won't argue they are caused by randomly generated matter either. Many intelligent lunar geologists have hypothesized that the maria were created in volcanic eruptions before the volcanic activity began do die down. You can't say that this is "proof," you haven't really given any evidence.
thealaskinwonder 9 months ago
@thealaskinwonder1. Volcanos that covered 1/2 of the NEAR SIDE??? Flowing OVER new and OLD CRATERS??
Before volcanic eruptions,....I'm sorry,..WHAT Volcanic eruptions? On the MOON? There are Caldera??? Are they MAD?
2. Volcanoes that flowed the breadth of the UNITED STATES?? Do you know how cold it is there? FLOW?
I haven't given evidence?
A.The Maria are on ONE SIDE of the MOON.
B. the Maria don't sit on TOP Of the detris, but SPREAD BELOW.
C. As they spread they PUSH the detris. three!
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom
To the first point: think about it, when both the earth and the moon were much hotter volcanic activity could take place pretty much anywhere on the surface. INCLUDING THE DARK SIDE. Obviously, the volcanic eruptions are not the same explosive type you might be thinking of in some cases. Second, the only reason the maria aren't as visible on the dark side of the moon is because that side is much more prone to meteor strikes (since there's not a huge earth blocking the way.
thealaskinwonder 9 months ago
@thealaskinwonder You have become too unscientific and ignorant of scientific processes to have a rational discussion with.
The MERE idea that Earth could Get in the way of incoming Meteorites is silly. 1.Meteorites come in from all angles, The MOON orbits the Earth once a month, available from ANY angle2, Earth covers 1/500 TH of the MOONS SKY at any given moment.Finally, Earth is not the shape of Jackie Gleason's face. THERE WAS NO VOLCANIC ACTIVITY on the MOON EVER. FIND ONE CRATER!
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom I was waiting for that, because that was the point. Anyone can make up some ridiculous theory with no real evidence. You clearly are familiar with scientific deduction however you ignore some undisputed facts. There is proof that there was volcanic activity on the moon. Look up Mons Rümker for example, a former shield volcano. Furthermore, rock samples taken from the moon have been analyzed. Maria rocks tend to have more iron, a characteristic of rock from the interior.
thealaskinwonder 9 months ago
@thealaskinwonder I do not agree that your statements are based in FACT. When rock melts and erupts, as on Earth, It's CLOCK RESETS. The moon is simply not hot enough to MELT and RESET,.. however Rock can heat and DEFORM to rise and turn and FLOW in other directions. But because Scientists Specialize. Geologists ignore the deformation and response of silicates to heat and pressure. A rock does not have to melt in order to FLOW , Yet it's clock does NOT RESET!
There WAS NO VOLCANIC ACTIVITY!
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@thealaskinwonder I have examined the whole surface of the moon in detail. I see no Volcanoes. Certainly not at the Maria. Wishful thinking controls Geologists Eyes and BRAINS. Look at how many times Geological teams SEE PROOF of standing water on Mars. They suffer a delusonal INSANITY. On Mars, there are no clouds. No clouds mean NO RAIN. No RAIN means NO STANDING WATER ....EVER!
Of course the Maria is lower spreading silicate from inside the moon. VOLCANIC? NO!
nealadamsdotcom 9 months ago
@thealaskinwonder If it had a iron core it would also have a magnetic field like the earth. Last time i checked it doesn't therefore stop talking out of your arse.
stevefargher 8 months ago
@stevefargher I never said it came from the core. Plus an Iron core does not guarantee a magnetic field.
thealaskinwonder 8 months ago
that was pretty interesting. i couldnt stop watching :P
inuyashafananime1 11 months ago
ded itself in 150 years of DARK AGES of scientific STANDSTILL! 'Criminally Stupid". How's that?
If YOU knew ANYTHING about all of this. I would actually pay attention to your,...shall we call them "comments"?
NO,..."IGNORANT CHILDISH DIATRIBE"
YOU are an ignorant person, taking up valuable space on a planet that is not growing fast enough to support billions of people like you.
Get a BOOK! READ! THINK!
nealadamsdotcom 1 year ago
who compiled this information anyway?
flapjack914 1 year ago
@nealadamsdotcom Have you ever heard of Dr. Paul A.M. Dirac? Read his paper predicting the existence of the positrion. He received the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on anti-matter. The positron is anti-matter! It cannot exist inside the electron which is normal matter. The rest of your argument is equally stupid.
hmlakid 1 year ago 2
@hmlakid YOU could NOT know if a Positron could exist inside an Electron,... because if it did, their combined field could NOT exit the Electron shell to extend to the space outward to BE identified.
Positron and ELECTRON are BOTH NORMAL MATTER. of opposite charge/field. And YOU, sir, are a nitwit!
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom The positron is the anti-matter counterpart of the electron. They cannot exist together as they will annihilate each other to produce the photon.
lanaya38 11 months ago
@lanaya38 - NO. They "annihilate to produce 2 gamma ray particles that travel off in opposite directions. Are you telling me you didn't even have the brains to look this up before you decided to type? What have things come to when people are too damn lazy to even Google. Don't post here unless your head is screwed on. I was gentle and didn't flame you. Don't try it again.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom
1. Gamma rays are high energy electromagnetic radiation. Electro magnetic radiation propagate through photons. Hence Gamma radiation is composed of photons.
2. The photons dont necessarily travel in opposite directions. This will depend on the initial conditions of the interaction. Only if there is a perfect head-on collision will they travel in opposite direction (by conservation of momentum)
lanaya38 6 months ago
@lanaya38 TWO Photons and THEY disappear.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom No, a positron is antimatter, the nitwit are you. We know this since the 1930´s. We observe positrons on a daily basis in laboratories. If an electron and a positron come too close they destroy each other, You obviously have no idea of particle physics whatsoever. Also a proton consists of quarks, as does a neutron. btw NOTHING can be inside an electron, since an electron is a zero dimension point particle. Open a physics book and learn something
MrRichardQED 11 months ago
@MrRichardQED Quarks? from Quarkworld or Quark dimension??? AAAAAND how are quarks created? By Quark-triplicate -pProduction? Where DO they come from, really? Can we see/experience a QUARK? Outside of a Proton, or Neutron? No? UN-like the Eternal Electron or Positron?
No,.. A Positron is a Point Particle. An Electron can be a ZERO-DIMENSION bubble.
nealadamsdotcom 11 months ago
@nealadamsdotcom A Positron is the antiparticle of the electron. It is antimatter, not normal matter.
Go learn science.
Logic says that there should be far more impact craters on the far side, because it doesn't have the Earth to shield it.
Growth like that would result in a different shape of the moon, as the curved surface would need to turn into a larger curved surface with different curvature.
Also, don't geodes grow in? A shell is formed then Crystals grow in?
blackjeffrey1 8 months ago
this one has a more plausable explanation about certain types of surfaces in space
watch?v=V_T6__JDeyw&feature=player_embedded
dont get me wrong, i love your expanding earth theory. its just lunar surface looks more like mars
ActiveStorage 1 year ago
I'll try again. When you look at the MOON you do not SEE thre moon, but the detris of the crashed meteorites coating the moon, Imagine a smooth slate floor and smashing marbles of silicate material for weeks on that floor, In time you will see nothing of the smooth slate floor but crater upon crater, If you could wipe or vacuum all that cratered coating away, You'd be left with a smooth slate ball. The GROWTH/ spreading happens on that smooth ball, as on Earth or Mars sedimemts.
nealadamsdotcom 1 year ago
I can foresee you asking 'well how did the impacts make the depressions in the maria in the first place'... and that would be because the moon did rotate faster and didn't always have the same side facing Earth. Tidal deformation slowed the moon's rotation.
I'm just stating the current model... I think it's fine for you to postulate, but I don't think it's a matter of you needing to prove your theories - I think it's a matter of there already being proof to the contrary.
jeffamarie 1 year ago
@jeffamarie - No, there is no proof of lava fields that create depressions. Or earth blocking the moon from meteors in a magical cookie cutter fashion.
Those spreads on the earth side are new, and we know that because they only have small new craters. You sir, are babbling.
nealadamsdotcom 1 year ago
Comment removed
jeffamarie 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nealadamsdotcom Again - not saying lava creates depressions at all... are you sure you're reading what I'm saying at all? Depressions exists UNDERNEATH the maria - that's why lava, i.e. a molten material flowed into them???
No, YOU know that they are new - everybody else knows that rocks from the maria and ocean of storms are about 3.5 BILLION years old. Does that support your theory?
jeffamarie 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nealadamsdotcom Again - not saying lava creates depressions at all... are you sure you're reading what I'm saying at all? Depressions exists UNDERNEATH the maria - that's why lava, i.e. a molten material flowed into them???
No, YOU know that they are new - everybody else knows that rocks from the maria and ocean of storms are about 3.5 BILLION years old. Does that support your theory?
jeffamarie 1 year ago
@nealadamsdotcom Again, nowhere did I say that lava fields create depressions... they're lava fields - they are fields... flat areas. There are depressions UNDERNEATH them, though, and that is what I was referring to - either caused by geological formation or repeated gouging of meteoritic impact.
And no, the maria are still quite old for everybody else... rocks studied from the maria and the ocean of storms are about 3.5 BILLION years old. Does that support your theory?
jeffamarie 1 year ago