Did Earth coalesce from 2 medium sized planets?
- Thread starter preearth
- Start date
- Status
Why should it not be in Pseudoscience until you respond to post 20 demonstrating that you calculated falsely the energy released during the merger - Greatly underestimating it (I guess by about two orders of magnitude). I.e. the "falling together" merger of two half Earth mass would completely melt both.
Your theory is NONSENSE as it assumes preEarth's crust was not melted. It is "Certifiable pseudoscience."
No, just silly. The size of the earth did no change as the Atlantic opened. Reply to post 20 or go away.
I have grown tired of all the censorship on internet forums and have consequently started up one of my own, at:
http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/
The opening of the North Atlantic.
Yet another cool animation, eh?
From: http://preearth.net/
http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/
The opening of the North Atlantic.
Yet another cool animation, eh?
From: http://preearth.net/
So now you're just spamming this forum?
These sites deleted the article (the one that I posted here) immediately and banned me.
http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/
http://www.thescienceforum.com/
http://www.physicsforums.com
http://everything-science.com/sci/Forum
http://www.webegtodiffer.com/
http://www.wordforge.net/
http://bsforums.com/
http://vbulletin.thesite.org/
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/
http://boards.slackercentral.com/
http://forum.fok.nl/
This site (and others) just refused to publish it;
http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/
This site (and others) just locked it;
http://www.generalanytopic.com/
http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum
and of course there were many sites, like this one, that moved the thread to some dark corner where no one would read it. These included;
http://www.sciforums.com
http://www.thescienceforum.com
http://www.thenakedscientists.com
http://freeratio.org
One of the worst sites was;
http://www.bautforum.com/
which practiced an insidious, underhanded, form of censorship, while pretending that they never censored anything.
The above is not the entire list of sites that immediately banned me, just the one's that I kept a record of.
This was over 35% of the sites I published on.
So,...censorship is extremely common on bulletin boards.
http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/
http://www.thescienceforum.com/
http://www.physicsforums.com
http://everything-science.com/sci/Forum
http://www.webegtodiffer.com/
http://www.wordforge.net/
http://bsforums.com/
http://vbulletin.thesite.org/
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/
http://boards.slackercentral.com/
http://forum.fok.nl/
This site (and others) just refused to publish it;
http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/
This site (and others) just locked it;
http://www.generalanytopic.com/
http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum
and of course there were many sites, like this one, that moved the thread to some dark corner where no one would read it. These included;
http://www.sciforums.com
http://www.thescienceforum.com
http://www.thenakedscientists.com
http://freeratio.org
One of the worst sites was;
http://www.bautforum.com/
which practiced an insidious, underhanded, form of censorship, while pretending that they never censored anything.
The above is not the entire list of sites that immediately banned me, just the one's that I kept a record of.
This was over 35% of the sites I published on.
So,...censorship is extremely common on bulletin boards.
Last edited:
preearth
You are not being censored. IN fact, you have been well listened to.
However, this is a science forum and requires scientific thinking.
The scientific process requires data gathering, followed by hypothesis formation, which has been done with your idea. However, even more important are the following steps, which have not been done.
Making a prediction based on the hypothesis and running an objective, empirical test of that prediction, with the intent of falsifying the hypothesis if it is not right.
Now, several people have essentially done this by putting up extra information. This extra information has, indeed, falsified the hypothesis. Therefore, if you are a true scientific thinker, you will drop the now disproved hypothesis, or represent it for further testing in severely modified form.
You are not being censored. IN fact, you have been well listened to.
However, this is a science forum and requires scientific thinking.
The scientific process requires data gathering, followed by hypothesis formation, which has been done with your idea. However, even more important are the following steps, which have not been done.
Making a prediction based on the hypothesis and running an objective, empirical test of that prediction, with the intent of falsifying the hypothesis if it is not right.
Now, several people have essentially done this by putting up extra information. This extra information has, indeed, falsified the hypothesis. Therefore, if you are a true scientific thinker, you will drop the now disproved hypothesis, or represent it for further testing in severely modified form.
It's pretty straight forward really.
Just answer the questions.
Reconcile the discrepancies between your calculations and BillyT's calculations (something other than 'BillyT is wrong' because that proves nothing).
Reconcile the discrepancies between the evidence you present, and the contradictory evidence that has been presented by myself, and others.
Just answer the questions.
Reconcile the discrepancies between your calculations and BillyT's calculations (something other than 'BillyT is wrong' because that proves nothing).
Reconcile the discrepancies between the evidence you present, and the contradictory evidence that has been presented by myself, and others.
Actually Pseudoscience isn't the dark corner, that would be "The Cesspool", as for it being a location that nobody reads... Try doing some searches through an online search engine and you'll find posts located here aren't just readible but they are searchable.
So suggesting that your post is in a dark corner and no one would read it is actually intellectually dishonest. I hope that you realise this otherwise it will likely reflect on your theory as being also likely to be intellectually dishonest at least in the way you handle contradictory evidence.
Incidentally it is possible that if you publish on hundreds of forums, that some will flag it as spam by finding the same material posted elsewhere. This will likely cause to your posts to end up as a filter reference on a blacklist causing it to automatically be removed by some sites. So some of those ones that claim your posts just vanished, probably did have your posts just vanish.
No, that only reflects that many sites demand some consistency with known facts.
You ignore many and refuse to respond to proofs that your ideas are nonsense, for example post 20 here, where it is pointed out that your only including the energy released as heat when pre-Earth & Heaven merge from an initial contact position. Totally ignoring the ~100 times greater energy released and converted into heat by their fall together in their mutual gravitational field. I.e. the continents would not survive. Probably the current mass of earth would not only be melted but be a glowing dull red radiator, but I have not calculated that as have shown that your idea is pure NONSENSE as it neglects the main energy of heating.
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the points that keeps sticking in my craw is Herschel Crater on Mimas. It's generally accepted that the creation of Herschel Crater should have shattered Mimas, but it didn't, and one of the areas of ongoing research is understanding how Mimas survived.
Scaling Herschel crater up for Earth would be about 4000km (about the size of Canada I believe), but what is being proposed by pre-earth is 2 or 3 times bigger than that.
This has been posted to other sites since a couple of weeks back.
I didn't bother to post it here because you clearly aren't operating a level playing field. But then, neither are most sites.
As to the question of whether the energy released by the impact would melt the entire earth.
We will make the simplifying assumption of spherical planets with uniform density.
This makes the math simple and the argument easy to follow.
First we calculate the temperature rise caused by placing PreEarth next to Heaven and letting gravity transform them into the Earth.
The gravitational binding energy of a planet, U, is the energy released by the assembly of the planet from atoms which were originally an infinite distance away. Or, alternatively, it is the energy needed to disassemble the planet into atoms by moving each an infinite distance away.
The gravitational binding energy of a spherical planet with uniform density, is given by the formula;
U = 0.6GM^2/R, where
G = 6.67428 x 10^-20 km^3/(kg s^2) is the gravitational constant,
M is the mass of the planet in kg,
R is its radius in km.
U is here measured in megajoules, MJ.
Earth Radius R_E = 6371 km.
Earth Mass M_E = 5.97369 x 10^24 kg.
Approximate Earth Binding Energy = 0.6*G*M_P^2/R_P = 22.430 x 10^25.
PreEarth Radius R_P = 5200 km.
PreEarth Mass M_P = 3.48280 x 10^24 kg.
Approximate PreEarth Binding Energy = 0.6*G*M_P^2/R_P = 9.341 x 10^25 MJ.
Heaven Radius R_H = 4680 km.
Heaven Mass M_H = 2.48456 x 10^24 kg.
Approximate Heaven Binding Energy = 0.6*G*M_H^2/R_H = 5.282 x 10^25 MJ.
The energy necessary to separate PreEarth and Heaven to infinity, is:
G*M_P*M_H/(5200+4680) = G*M_P*M_H/9880 = 5.846 x 10^25 MJ.
The idea is to take PreEarth and Heaven at the point of first contact, that is, when they are just 9,880 kilometers apart, dissemble them to infinity, then bring everything back from infinity and assemble Earth.
So, the energy released from the point of contact through the formation of the Earth, is:
Energy Released = (22.430 - 9.341 - 5.282 - 5.846) x 10^25 = 1.961 x 10^25 MJ.
This is (1.961 x 10^25)/(5.97369 x 10^24) = 3.2827 megajoules per kilogram.
Suppose an average specific heat of 1330 J/kg°K.
Then we have a 3282700/1330 = 2,468 degree rise in the temperature of the entire Earth.
Note that, this is the energy released by just placing PreEarth next to Heaven and letting gravity transform them into the Earth. This does not incorporate any kinetic energy that the two original planets may have had.
And lets see if Billy T can handle the minimising of the kinetic energy. I doubt it.
I didn't bother to post it here because you clearly aren't operating a level playing field. But then, neither are most sites.
As to the question of whether the energy released by the impact would melt the entire earth.
We will make the simplifying assumption of spherical planets with uniform density.
This makes the math simple and the argument easy to follow.
First we calculate the temperature rise caused by placing PreEarth next to Heaven and letting gravity transform them into the Earth.
The gravitational binding energy of a planet, U, is the energy released by the assembly of the planet from atoms which were originally an infinite distance away. Or, alternatively, it is the energy needed to disassemble the planet into atoms by moving each an infinite distance away.
The gravitational binding energy of a spherical planet with uniform density, is given by the formula;
U = 0.6GM^2/R, where
G = 6.67428 x 10^-20 km^3/(kg s^2) is the gravitational constant,
M is the mass of the planet in kg,
R is its radius in km.
U is here measured in megajoules, MJ.
Earth Radius R_E = 6371 km.
Earth Mass M_E = 5.97369 x 10^24 kg.
Approximate Earth Binding Energy = 0.6*G*M_P^2/R_P = 22.430 x 10^25.
PreEarth Radius R_P = 5200 km.
PreEarth Mass M_P = 3.48280 x 10^24 kg.
Approximate PreEarth Binding Energy = 0.6*G*M_P^2/R_P = 9.341 x 10^25 MJ.
Heaven Radius R_H = 4680 km.
Heaven Mass M_H = 2.48456 x 10^24 kg.
Approximate Heaven Binding Energy = 0.6*G*M_H^2/R_H = 5.282 x 10^25 MJ.
The energy necessary to separate PreEarth and Heaven to infinity, is:
G*M_P*M_H/(5200+4680) = G*M_P*M_H/9880 = 5.846 x 10^25 MJ.
The idea is to take PreEarth and Heaven at the point of first contact, that is, when they are just 9,880 kilometers apart, dissemble them to infinity, then bring everything back from infinity and assemble Earth.
So, the energy released from the point of contact through the formation of the Earth, is:
Energy Released = (22.430 - 9.341 - 5.282 - 5.846) x 10^25 = 1.961 x 10^25 MJ.
This is (1.961 x 10^25)/(5.97369 x 10^24) = 3.2827 megajoules per kilogram.
Suppose an average specific heat of 1330 J/kg°K.
Then we have a 3282700/1330 = 2,468 degree rise in the temperature of the entire Earth.
Note that, this is the energy released by just placing PreEarth next to Heaven and letting gravity transform them into the Earth. This does not incorporate any kinetic energy that the two original planets may have had.
And lets see if Billy T can handle the minimising of the kinetic energy. I doubt it.
A simpler query would be,
"Has there been any planetary body observed that has done anything similiar to what you suggest occured on earth?"
If it's a natural occurance then it should be observed frequently in the universe, source some examples to help defend your reasoning.
To preearth: Thanks for finally responding to post 20. This post shows that the heating is 31 times greater than you calculated. I.e. After the collision, the newly formed Earth would be a glowing red liquid mass with NO crust surviving. Thus your whole idea of the crust re-arranging to form oceans etc. is NONSENSE.
I am amazed how you know the masses of Preearth and Heaven to six significant figures but I will accept your values:
Heaven mass = 2.48456 x 10^24 kg.
PreEarth mass = 3.48280 x 10^24 kg.
I will reduce them to only three significant figures (slightly decreasing the computed heating) and only use MKS units (meters, kg & seconds) so I can cease to explicitly specify the units. I also prefer the more compact notation where, for example, 10^9 is written E9. Also instead of your lengthy designations of these masses, I will simply call them M & m. Thus your mass values are: M = 3.48E24 & m = 2.48E24.
I am pleased that you now seem to recognize that the heating of your two postulated planets, Preearth and Heaven, (called P&H hereafter in this post) colliding to make Earth has two components, but unhappy that you continue to ignore the dominate heating component. I.e. you only consider the last stage of the process - the merger of P&H from the instant their surfaces are in contact.
You also falsely assume that at the start of this merger process they have no kinetic energy. This is nonsense as they were initially very far apart and fell towards each other, gaining kinetic energy, KE, equal to the gravitation potential, U, they were losing as the distance between their centers decreased from D down to d. According to you d = 9.88x10^6 meters, or in my simplified notation d = 9.88E6.
You are correct that the gravitational potential of two spherical masses, M & m, at any separation, S, between their centers is:
U = GMm/S where G = 6.62726 × 10-11 N-m^2/kg^2 or simply 6.63E(-11)
Thus the KE they gain falling together from S = D down to S = d is:
KE = GMm(1/d – 1/D) but as D is very very much larger than 9.88E6 we can neglect the negative term to better than three place accuracy (as you did).
Thus the KE acquired in the fall together, which you neglect is:
KE = 6.63E(-11) x 3.48E24 x 2.48E24 / 9.88E6 = 6.63 x 3.48 x 2.48E(48-17) = 57.22E31 Joules
Or converting to the mega Joules, MJ, you use the KE of the fall to surface contact is: 5.72E26 MJ.
You mistakenly computed this to be ten times smaller:
You calculated the energy release during the final merger from surface contact to be:
That is why YOUR IDEA IS TOTAL NONSENSE. – With 31 times more heating than you compute, the entire earth would be a liquid, probably a glowing red hot spherical mass. None of the crust would survive to be rearranged as you illustrate in your "cool animations" graphics of post 29.
PS, you did not tell the values of G you used. Mine given above came from:
http://www.askiitians.com/iit-jee-physics/mechanics/newtons-law-of-gravitation.aspx
Where you can find full discussion of the energy released in a fall together of two mass.
I am amazed how you know the masses of Preearth and Heaven to six significant figures but I will accept your values:
Heaven mass = 2.48456 x 10^24 kg.
PreEarth mass = 3.48280 x 10^24 kg.
I will reduce them to only three significant figures (slightly decreasing the computed heating) and only use MKS units (meters, kg & seconds) so I can cease to explicitly specify the units. I also prefer the more compact notation where, for example, 10^9 is written E9. Also instead of your lengthy designations of these masses, I will simply call them M & m. Thus your mass values are: M = 3.48E24 & m = 2.48E24.
I am pleased that you now seem to recognize that the heating of your two postulated planets, Preearth and Heaven, (called P&H hereafter in this post) colliding to make Earth has two components, but unhappy that you continue to ignore the dominate heating component. I.e. you only consider the last stage of the process - the merger of P&H from the instant their surfaces are in contact.
You also falsely assume that at the start of this merger process they have no kinetic energy. This is nonsense as they were initially very far apart and fell towards each other, gaining kinetic energy, KE, equal to the gravitation potential, U, they were losing as the distance between their centers decreased from D down to d. According to you d = 9.88x10^6 meters, or in my simplified notation d = 9.88E6.
You are correct that the gravitational potential of two spherical masses, M & m, at any separation, S, between their centers is:
U = GMm/S where G = 6.62726 × 10-11 N-m^2/kg^2 or simply 6.63E(-11)
Thus the KE they gain falling together from S = D down to S = d is:
KE = GMm(1/d – 1/D) but as D is very very much larger than 9.88E6 we can neglect the negative term to better than three place accuracy (as you did).
Thus the KE acquired in the fall together, which you neglect is:
KE = 6.63E(-11) x 3.48E24 x 2.48E24 / 9.88E6 = 6.63 x 3.48 x 2.48E(48-17) = 57.22E31 Joules
Or converting to the mega Joules, MJ, you use the KE of the fall to surface contact is: 5.72E26 MJ.
You mistakenly computed this to be ten times smaller:
(I note that my the 5.72 in my 5.72E26 MJ is slightly smaller than the 5.846 in your 5.846 x 10^25 MJ because I truncated all numerical values I used in the calculation down to only three significant figures.)
You calculated the energy release during the final merger from surface contact to be:
Thus, even by your own calculations you ignore 5.846 compared to 1.961, but when you correct for your factor of 10 computational error, you are ignoring 58.46 and keeping only the 1.961. Or in words, you are ignoring the fall together energy which is 30 times greater than the energy you do use to calculate the heat produced. I.e. the correct heating is 31 times greater than what you computed.
That is why YOUR IDEA IS TOTAL NONSENSE. – With 31 times more heating than you compute, the entire earth would be a liquid, probably a glowing red hot spherical mass. None of the crust would survive to be rearranged as you illustrate in your "cool animations" graphics of post 29.
PS, you did not tell the values of G you used. Mine given above came from:
http://www.askiitians.com/iit-jee-physics/mechanics/newtons-law-of-gravitation.aspx
Where you can find full discussion of the energy released in a fall together of two mass.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status