Is the earth expanding?

[Motor Daddy]

The mass of the Earth includes the atmosphere.

If the atmosphere was so dense, how did the dinosaurs breathe? How did anything breathe? How dense was it? Does your "theory" give a number?

Fish seem to do just fine in very dense "water," wouldn't you say? Living things are a product of their environment. Living things adapt to changes. Living things evolve to better cope with their environment.

The density of the "atmosphere" is no different than any other matter in this universe, it is getting less dense over time.


When I say "earth" I mean the outer boundaries of the entire earth, including all surrounding atmosphere. So, we live IN the earth. When earth departed the sun, earth started transitioning into the natural density order of the universe, which is most dense at the core and least dense at the outer boundary. As earth cooled the volume increased. The outer part started cooling first creating a less dense area (surrounding atmosphere) and a more dense core area (terrestrial part of the planet). The process continues today as we travel away from the sun, continue to cool, and continue to get less dense by means of greater volume over time.

We are in fact evolving to space, just like all mass in the universe does, and the universe itself does.

 

[James R]

Fish seem to do just fine in very dense "water," wouldn't you say?

Land-based dinosaurs were air breathers. What did they do in your water-like atmosphere?

And where's that value for the atmospheric density/pressure from your "theory"?

The density of the "atmosphere" is no different than any other matter in this universe, it is getting less dense over time.

What's the mechanism that causes the decrease in density?

When I say "earth" I mean the outer boundaries of the entire earth, including all surrounding atmosphere. So, we live IN the earth.

Sure, but the atmosphere is only about 100 km thick - almost nothing compared to the Earth's overall radius.

Does your theory predict that the atmosphere used to be thicker? That wouldn't make sense because you claim it was denser in the past. So, what was its thickness 250 million years ago? Show me your calculations.

When earth departed the sun, earth started transitioning into the natural density order of the universe, which is most dense at the core and least dense at the outer boundary.

The universe has no core.

What mechanism caused the Earth to depart from the Sun?

As earth cooled the volume increased the outer part started cooling first creating a less dense area (surrounding atmosphere) and a more dense core area (terrestrial part of the planet).

Please present your evidence for this.

The process continues today as we travel away from the sun, continue to cool, and continue to get less dense by means of greater volume over time.

What is the rate of the Earth's travel away from the sun? Please post your calculations and results.

We are in fact evolving to space, just like all mass in the universe does, and the universe itself does.

I don't seem to be evolving to space as I sit here typing.

 

[James R]

PS Don't think I didn't notice all your evasions of my direct questions.

You know and I know that you have no theory so can't explain anything really.

 

[Motor Daddy]

Hey, maybe the dinosaurs couldn't breath anymore when the atmosphere got to a point where it was not dense enough, and that's what killed the dinosaurs!!!

If they needed a real dense carbon dioxide type of atmosphere that they were used to and it got less dense, they were like a fish out of water.

We're next! As earth gets further away from the sun, and the atmosphere gets much less dense, we will die off. It will be a cold miserable place, like mars. No atmosphere and coldddddddd! You wouldn't want to live here anyway!

 

[florian]

At what rate is it growing? Is the rate constant

The measurement give us an accelerating rate, with a rate for the last million years about 20 km increase in radius per My.

Do you seriously believe that the radius of the Earth has doubled in the past 250 million years? What are you on?

I believe nothing. It is what's coming out of the measurements.

Where does the extra matter come from? That was the question I started with. Remember?

And I answered already. It comes from inside, but I don't know how it got inside. Can't be clearer than that.

So, you're arguing that the Earth magically doubled in size in the blink of a geological eye, but you have no idea what could have caused the doubling and, moreover, you think that we'll never solve that problem.

NO. Do not misrepresent what I say.
There is nothing magic. I know that the doubling is due to an increase in amount of matter inside the planet and I'm 100% sure we will find how it works in the future even if we don't have the necessary observations to figure it out now.

Looking for rational explanations for yet unexplained observations is what research scientists do everyday! The fact that you associate unknown and magical strongly suggests that you never made any scientific research. Am I mistaken?

 

[Robittybob1]

If as they say the Earth increased in mass in the last 250 million years and with the study of the tidalites over the same period, giving us day length and moon orbital periods, one could look at how the Mass could increase so dramatically and yet the moon's orbital characteristics not change that dramaticlly to cope with the change of the Earth mass?

If the Mass of the Earth increased, the Moon would be attracted to the Earth and make it move in closer, it would orbit the Earth at a higher frequency and that frequency is directly proportional to the Earth mass.
5 times as massive implies the Moon's orbiting would be 5 times faster, the moon would be coming closer regardless of the tidal acceleration, which is just a fine adjustment compared to the application of the Gravitational attraction and centripetal force equations.

The Expanding Earth Theory is false if you say it is caused by a mass increase in the Earth.
You do the calculations and you will be convinced it is impossible.

 

[Motor Daddy]

The Expanding Earth Theory is false if you say it is caused by a mass increase in the Earth.
You do the calculations and you will be convinced it is impossible.

True. It's not Earth's mass that is increasing, it's Earth's VOLUME that is increasing. Earth is becoming less dense by means of the mass staying the same (generally speaking) and the volume increasing. The earth is expanding like the universe, along with the universe.

The DENSITY is decreasing, which means mass is evolving to space over time.

 

[origin]

Let me explain you how the science works.

First, we make geological observations leading to the firm conclusion that Earth is growing in surface.

There is no evidence what so ever that the earth is growing. Fail #1

We can quantify the growth in surface, thus in size.

You can't quantify something that does not exist. Fail #2

There are no postulate, just empirical evidence and this is fundamental.

This is 100% postulate (a loony tune postulate no less) with 0% empirical evidence.

Let me tell you how science does not work. You do not make up a postulate than then make up observations to support the postulate!

I think it is kinda cool (for some reason) when intelligent people latch onto a goofy idea and then use their intellect to defend that goofy idea, ignoring all logical reasons against it, when even a highschool student could immediately see how absurd the idea is.
It is really fascinating and I have seen it before a few times. It is typically when a PhD goes out of his area of expertise. I first saw it with Dr. Manuel and his theory that the sun is composed of iron and has a neutron star at it's core. Good stuff.

 

[origin]

True. It's not Earth's mass that is increasing, it's Earth's VOLUME that is increasing. Earth is becoming less dense by means of the mass staying the same (generally speaking) and the volume increasing. The earth is expanding like the universe, along with the universe.

The DENSITY is decreasing, which means mass is evolving to space over time.

I think your idea has just as much merit as florians idea.

 

[Motor Daddy]

I think your idea has just as much merit as florians idea.

I think you're wrong.

 

[florian]

If the Mass of the Earth increased, the Moon would be attracted to the Earth and make it move in closer

NO. Because the tidal effect transfer momentum to the moon and make it recedes.

Then you will answer: "in this case, the rotation rate of earth should dramatically decrease!"

Not necessarily, because the gained mass has certainly momentum and that additional momentum can slow the decrease, or maintain the rotation rate of Earth, or even increase it.

Compared to that, all evidence refute a higher density of Earth in the past.

 

[florian]

There is no evidence what so ever that the earth is growing. Fail #1

This is were you fail. That would be rather stupid to invent an increase in mass without the observations that the size of our planet increased. Remember You do not make up a postulate than then make up observations to support the postulate! . We start with observations and quantification of these observations. This is the part you deny.

 

[Robittybob1]

This is were you fail. That would be rather stupid to invent an increase in mass without the observations that the size of our planet increased. Remember You do not make up a postulate than then make up observations to support the postulate! . We start with observations and quantification of these observations. This is the part you deny.

I don't argue that the shape/size of the Earth hasn't changed, but the mass can only be decreasing not increasing.
You - "calculate the gravitational force = the centripetal force" and then vary the mass of the Earth. You will see that the Moon would be so close today it isn't funny.
If the Moon and the Earth are made form the same material why did the Earth Expand but not the Moon? Get real!

 

[florian]

I don't argue that the shape/size of the Earth hasn't changed, but the mass can only be decreasing not increasing.
You - "calculate the gravitational force = the centripetal force" and then vary the mass of the Earth. You will see that the Moon would be so close today it isn't funny.

I think that I already explained that the tidal effect, by accelerating the Moon, can counterbalance the effect of an increase of the gravitational attraction of Earth.

If the Moon and the Earth are made form the same material why did the Earth Expand but not the Moon? Get real!

And why is Mimas inactive whereas Enceladus is active? We simply don't know why planets are active.

 

[Robittybob1]

I think that I already explained that the tidal effect, by accelerating the Moon, can counterbalance the effect of an increase of the gravitational attraction of Earth.
.

You will never be able to transfer enough momentum to the Moon in 250 million years to counter a 5 fold increase in the mass of the Earth. You are really wrong!

 

[florian]

You will never be able to transfer enough momentum to the Moon in 250 million years to counter a 5 fold increase in the mass of the Earth. You are really wrong!

That is a 8 fold increase.
How can you predict that it won't be able to transfer enough momentum whereas you have no idea of the momentum of that additional 700% of mass?

The compression theory denies everything we know from the permian. It is not a working hypothesis.

 

[Trippy]

NO. Because the tidal effect transfer momentum to the moon and make it recedes.

Wrong, and I tried explaining this to you earlier. If there were no tidal braking, Earth loosing mass would cause the moon to spiral outwards, Earth gaining mass would cause it to spiral inwards (it relates back to the conservation of angular momentum). Think of it this way, orbital velocity (or a satelite) is related to the mass of the primary as well as the distance from the primary. If there is nothing to speed the moon up, and we add a little bit of mass to the Earth, then the moon will fall a little bit closer to the 'correct' position for it's velocity.

Not necessarily, because the gained mass has certainly momentum and that additional momentum can slow the decrease, or maintain the rotation rate of Earth, or even increase it.

More with the 'Just so' arguments.

 

[Robittybob1]

That is a 8 fold increase.
How can you predict that it won't be able to transfer enough momentum whereas you have no idea of the momentum of that additional 700% of mass?

The compression theory denies everything we know from the permian. It is not a working hypothesis.

Well if it is an 8 fold increase rather than just 5 that makes it even more difficult to explain.

If in the weirdest way you were correct the additional mass would have to have exactly the same angular momentum as the rest of the Earth for from the tidalite studies the year length (hours in day times number of days in a year has stayed constant).

If it were possible to increase mass like this there would have to be some word for it - what is it?

 

[universaldistress]

Hey, maybe the dinosaurs couldn't breath anymore when the atmosphere got to a point where it was not dense enough, and that's what killed the dinosaurs!!!

Birds, mammals, lizards, insects etc. all seemed to make the transition, LOL. And hold on! Birds ARE dinosaurs (descendants at least).

You need to realise this is all pure speculation bordering on funny-farm-fodder.

 

[universaldistress]

True. It's not Earth's mass that is increasing, it's Earth's VOLUME that is increasing. Earth is becoming less dense by means of the mass staying the same (generally speaking) and the volume increasing. The earth is expanding like the universe, along with the universe.

The DENSITY is decreasing, which means mass is evolving to space over time.

If that's true (i have read about this possibility somewhere, though i thought the distance from the centre of any given galaxy had an effect) then this increase in volume would spread across all matter, therefore rendering the air breathable to a slowly expanding man/animal?