From: James Rogers (jamesr@best.com)
Date: Mon Oct 27 1997 - 00:02:41 MST
At 11:41 PM 10/26/97 -0500, CALYK@aol.com wrote:
[...snip...]
>actually its how the continents fit, so its not about area, but about how
>they are shaped, and by seeing how they fit, the only way they can fit
>perfectly is if the earth was smaller than it is now, 80% smaller. So no the
>land doesnt affect the expansion of the earth necessarily, but it shows that
>it exists.
By your own admission (read above), the way the plates fit together have no
relation to the surface area. By extremely simple geometric principles,
this also means that the SIZE of the earth has no relation to the way the
plates fit together. You can't have one without the other. In fact, what
you are proposing doesn't really make much sense geometrically.
Free-floating plates (e.g. plate tectonics) will fit together
*irregardless* of any expansion or compression because all the components
are multiplied by the same growth factor in all dimensions. And this is
true whether or not the continents change size as the Earth changes size.
If you draw the continents on a balloon, they fit together equally well
whether the balloon is half-inflated or fully inflated.
>>as well as that there is no way
>>the earth could expand due to material from the core moving out.
>>Material flows in and out all the time, and the density is merely due to
>>the gravitationally induced pressure of the weight of all the mass in
>>the outer layers pushing in. By your logic, the earth should be smaller
>>since the outer layers have been pushing against the core for billions
>>of years, so they must have compacted it down more. (Y'know, like why
>>your cereal settles down in the box over time)
>
>This is your opinion, you dont know how the inner core/mantle relationship
>works. Havent you ever heard of an expanding sun? Things expand when they
>cool. Anyway, this is just a theory to back up the fact that the earth was
>smaller a long time ago. So, doesnt it seem obvious that the core is
>expanding into the mantle? The core is 3 times denser than the mantle. You
>say that the mantle flows in and out of the core, which of course you dont
>know for sure, but if this is true, at the same time couldnt less and less
>mantle be flowing back into the core? Think yourself!
First, an expanding sun is irrelevant to the mechanics of a large, solid
planetary object. Apples and oranges.
Secondly, your "possible" explanation of the mantle/core system violates
several basic principles of mechanics and thermodynamics. I strongly
recommend that make the effort to educate yourself in such areas as simple
mechanics (Newtonian physics) and thermodynamics. A strong foundation in
these subjects will go a long way towards immunizing yourself against the
plethora of pseudo-science proponents in the world. When addressing an
audience such as this, it is best to have at least a basic understanding of
the science that you are preaching, since the audience most surely does.
-James Rogers
jamesr@best.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:45:04 MST