Is the earth expanding?
- Thread starter bgjyd834
- Start date
I'm afraid that is none of your business. All the private informations I want to share are in my profile.
Have a guess.
We are talking past expansion mostly. Do you call 0.25mm significant expansion? To me compared to the size of the Earth that is hardly anything.
I read through the debate but I didn't really get any good points from it.
@JamesR - please tell me this? Is an increase in the Earth's radius of only 0.25 mm per year a significant expansion or not?
You say the Earth is not expanding significantly. Does that 0.25 mm/annum increase challenge your view?
You say the Earth is not expanding significantly. Does that 0.25 mm/annum increase challenge your view?
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
James thinks his computer will remain the same density forever, because he can't see it getting less dense as he observes it. He thinks the same of a rock. James assumes if he can't see it happening it doesn't happen. What makes you think James will consider things expanding appreciably over greater time periods than his current attention span?
So are you pointing out that what seems to be an insignificant amount if multiplied by the aeons of time adds up to quite large quantities?
You and MotorDaddy are evidence that things are getting more dense.
I wonder what random goofy idea is going to pop into your head next and get you all giddy.
Well I for one , don't suffer from your light-headedness.You and MotorDaddy are evidence that things are getting more dense.
Source
He appears to be published in Enzyme chemistry (or to have co-authored papers) - I asked him once if that was him, he didn't reply. He's appealed to his own authority on numerous occasions, but in spite of being asked directly, several times, he's never actually clarified what his PhD is actually in.
He also claimes to have an h-index of 15 (source) but has provided no means with which to independently verify that claim.
Last edited:
I'm surprised that the moderators are tracking someone on the message boards. Surely he has a right to privacy.
Start to look like a witchhunt isn't it?
And of course, having looked at the links I provided, you have seen that the comemnts were made by him in a conversation I was actively participating in at the time (even if they weren't specifically directed at me).
The only thing that is required here is a reasonable memory on my part, and an understanding of how to use the forum's search features. No mod powers required.
Same goes with my comments regarding what I suspect to be his field of expertise.
Says the person who went as far as tracking down posts he believed to be made by me on other fora, and using what he believed to be my name in posts while addressing me.
There are some putative informations in the post you made that were not in the links.
Unless you can prove that these informations were provided by myself in the sciforums, it is considered as a violation of privacy.
Prove us that you did not cross the line Trippy.
What information florian? The only thing I have done is ask you to clarify what field your PhD is in (in fact, I've accorded you more privacy than you have ever accorded me).
So then you admit you violated my privacy?
Last edited:
Let's get back to the topic. Let the bygones be bygones. We want to know did the Earth expand or not?
Serious questions:
Moon capture or Giant Impact?
Water always here or brought by comets?
What level of expansion is significant? E.g. is 0.25 mm/year significant?
Moon capture or Giant Impact?
Water always here or brought by comets?
What level of expansion is significant? E.g. is 0.25 mm/year significant?
In the formal debate JamesR states:
http://www.sciforums.com/printthread.php?t=86898
In my hypotheses I am talking about a continual and significant increase in the Earth's overall diameter over, say, the past 4.5 billion years, over which time the terrestrial part of the Earth has perhaps increased its diameter by about 35%.
That means we are talking of an average yearly increase of 0.5mm/year.
Recent scientific measurements showed an increase in the order of half this at the current time.
Would you go so far as to say that 500 million years ago there was no dry land and the oceans covered the entire globe?
Would this not mean that either the amount of water has decreased or there has been an expansion of the ocean floor sufficient to expose the dry land (therefore promoting the evolution of of land based plants, trees and animals).
Very much incorrect.
http://earthsky.org/space/earth-as-seen-from-space-500-million-years-ago
Earth, southern hemisphere, 500 million years ago.
RE: wlminex Post #870:
Let's see . . . some simple math here . . . (please check for accuracy) . .
0.25 mm/yr (expansion rate)
that works out to about 820 ft per 1 my, doesn't it? (Note: I did the math/conversions roughly)
Did anyone confirm my 'math'?? Now, if expansion has gone on for 500 m.y. one would get:
(Assuming 0.25 mm/yr expansion rate)
. . . 820 ft/1 m.y. x 500 = 410,100 ft . . . seems a bit unrealistic to me . . . . my guess is that IF earth is expanding . . . the rate has varied over the earth's developmental history. My (second) guess is that the expansion rate has been greatly affected by more geologically-recent plate tectonics as a compensating (or process-balancing) mechanism.
Let's see . . . some simple math here . . . (please check for accuracy) . .
0.25 mm/yr (expansion rate)
that works out to about 820 ft per 1 my, doesn't it? (Note: I did the math/conversions roughly)
Did anyone confirm my 'math'?? Now, if expansion has gone on for 500 m.y. one would get:
(Assuming 0.25 mm/yr expansion rate)
. . . 820 ft/1 m.y. x 500 = 410,100 ft . . . seems a bit unrealistic to me . . . . my guess is that IF earth is expanding . . . the rate has varied over the earth's developmental history. My (second) guess is that the expansion rate has been greatly affected by more geologically-recent plate tectonics as a compensating (or process-balancing) mechanism.
Last edited: