Author: Jan

Gravity Field Data

Let us assume that Earth expands globally at a rate of 4 cm/year. The acceleration due gravity on Earth’s surface can be calculated as follows:

We know the Earth’s mass and its radius. The value of acceleration for radius 6,378,000 m is:

9.79841872 m·s^-2.

If we change the value of radius to 6,378,000.04 m, we get:

9.79841859 m·s^-2.

The ESA’s GOCE Probe (2009-2013) was able to detect the variations of gravity at levels of 1 mgal, which is quite high accuracy, but not for the purpose of expansion measurement.

Let us take the first value and mark the levels of GOCE’s accuracy:

9.79841872.

The red color marks GOCE’s accuracy, the green color marks the field of changing gravity due to expansion.

The next problem is that the gravity field has many temporal variations (atmosphere, water redistribution, sand, soils), which is another negative (noisy) effect. Thus the accuracy with respect to expansion would be even worse.

Geodetic Data

Another technique is a GPS measurement via vertical changes. Have a look at the DTRF2014 image made by the Technical University of Munich:

We see there no data from the oceanic floor. The data from Canada or Greenland (the same with Norway) indicate a clear expansion.

The problem of such data is that the Earth’s surface is in a constant motion (centimeters to meters). Another problem is the number of stations – one cannot cover the whole surface. One would also expect that the expansion would be noticeable primarily on the oceanic floor.

2017:

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/06/new-shelly-island-appears-cape-hatteras-north-carolina-coast-spd/

2016:

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/18/asia/nz-earthquake-pics/index.html

I also recommend a paper from Wen-Bin Shen et al. (2011):

http://www.annalsofgeophysics.eu/index.php/annals/article/view/4951

Although we don’t have suitable vertical data today, we have a lot of other tools like VGG maps or ocean floor ages that indicate the most probable scenario for Earth’s global dynamics – expansion.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_dont_we_immediately_stop_teaching_nonsense_aggregate_of_pseudoscientific_speculations_of_plate_tectonics

One can easily notice that the shape of continental blocks is often oblique = not perpendicular to the surface. Have a look at the scheme:

As the Earth expands, the hot basalts are ‘pushed’ to the surface. And thus the blocks logically ‘wear out’ from the bottom, which is leading to typical oblique shapes at the block/oceanic lithosphere boundaries.

Subduction is a process that makes physically no sense. Have a look at the P-wave tomography picture of a presumed subduction zone from Zhao, D. (2001) published in the journal Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors:

We see that the blue path strictly respects the oblique section of the continental block. The force of gravity is perpendicular to the surface. One would expect that if the subducting plate had sank down deep into the mantle thanks to gravity, it would have moved with respect to gravity. This is not the case.

For unknown reasons, the plate chooses the path that is adjacent to the continental block. The next thing is that such ‘choice’ results in overcoming the resistance force that is at the continental block/oceanic lithosphere boundary.

The better explanation for the observed relations in the picture would be a simple precipitation/solidification of basalt from the ‘basaltic bath’ at the boundary.

Tonga/Lau Region Experiment

‘Subduction is a geological process that takes place at convergent boundaries of tectonic plates where one plate moves under another and is forced or sinks due to gravity into the mantle. Regions where this process occurs are known as subduction zones.’ (Wikipedia)

These are the two first sentences from Wikipedia. But one can ask – Does subduction exist? Could the zones be just crustal zones of solidified basaltic material from depth at the oceanic/continental lithosphere boundary?

I decided to make a very simple experiment. I prepared a paraffin wax and created a wooden continental block. The block was inserted into the liquified wax.  The ‘oceanic crust’ was created in few minutes. But the most important part was the oblique section of the continental block. What will appear there?

This is an image of a ‘subduction zone’ via P-wave tomography from Zhao, D. (2001) published in the journal Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors:

We see there a sharp contrast between the continental block(s) and oceanic crust (blue color). As been already mentioned, the image should visualize the so called subduction zones, which are presumed parts of Earth where oceanic lithosphere should slowly slide into the deeper parts of the mantle.

My experiment showed that the wax cooling led to a creation of a thin layer at the surface (air/wax boundary – max. 2 mm) as well as at the continental block/oceanic lithosphere boundary (wooden block/wax boundary – max. 1 mm).

The reason for the observed phenomenon is that the wooden block became colder than the inner parts of the wax container.  So the wax could solidify there. The fastest wax solidification was seen at the container glassy walls. If the block was made from another material like glass or granite, we would probably see even thicker layer at the wax/continental block boundary.

I think that the first experimental results represent a very good reason to think about the ‘subduction zones’ in a quite different way, maybe even easier way. I hope that more detailed experiments will follow.

The Earth’s interior is hot – the temperature of the core is roughly the same as the temperature of the solar surface, which is more than 5000 K!

The planets, esp. bigger planets = gas giants, are heated by a process called Kelvin-Helmholtz mechanism. It is known for planets Jupiter and Saturn. Bigger celestial bodies like our Sun radiate also via fusion processes. The chthonian planets keep the heat produced by the mechanism.

Gravitational potential energy of a chthonian planet can be calculated as follows:

One can simply count all the ‘potentials’ from the center of the planet towards the surface R – mass of concentric spheres times mass of concentric shells.

Scientists Kelvin and Helmholtz tried to explain the energy emitted by our Sun via the potential energy in the late 19th century. However, Arthur Eddington showed that the mechanism would allow the Sun to shine only for millions of years. Later, the fusion processes were described.

Thus the Kelvin-Helmholtz mechanism is rather interesting for generation of heat deep inside gas giant planets and derived chthonian planets.

One has to understand the hydrostatic pressure when dealing with the Earth’s expansion. The hydrostatic pressure p in the center of the Earth can be calculated as follows:

The R-value is approximately 6378 km today, g– and ρ-values can be found for example in the PREM model.

We see that in order to compute the pressure, one must count all the products of acceleration due gravity and density towards the center of the Earth.

The today’s pressure in the center of Earth is approximately 360 GPa.

It is known that the Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old. The oldest known rocks found in Canada/Australia are almost as old as this age.

Creationism teaches us that our ‘world’ is only thousands of years old and thus tries to find an evidence for ‘young Earth’. Here, creationism is wrong. Conventional paleontology accepts that Earth is 4.6 billion years old, but strictly connects the age of the Earth and the age of life on Earth (evolution based on magmatic petrology). And here, conventional paleontology could be wrong.

What if life on Earth is much more younger than the age of our planet?

Re: Time Scales of Critical Events Around the Cretaceous-Paleogene Boundary

https://eps.harvard.edu/files/eps/files/renne.kt_.science.2013.pdf

Here I cite: ‘Mass extinctions manifest in Earth’s geologic record were turning points in biotic evolution. We present 40Ar/39Ar data that establish synchrony between the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary and associated mass extinctions with the Chicxulub bolide impact to within 32,000 years. Perturbation of the atmospheric carbon cycle at the boundary likely lasted less than 5000 years, exhibiting a recovery time scale two to three orders of magnitude shorter than that of the major ocean basins. Low-diversity mammalian fauna in the western Williston Basin persisted for as little as 20,000 years after the impact. The Chicxulub impact likely triggered a state shift of ecosystems already under near-critical stress.’

When reading the abstract, one would await at least one photo linking the obtained data and the fossilized mammalian fauna in the strata. There are no photos and thus we can easily conclude that the 65/66 Ma events do not belong to the fossils. The fossils may be much more younger with their fossilization at the 65/66 Ma basements. Each scientific paper operating with dating of mass extinction events has to provide a clear link.

Since the Earth’s expansion isn’t symmetric, one would expect latitudinal changes of continental blocks. The southern hemisphere contains a larger portion of oceanic lithosphere. The distance between India and Antarctica is quite big – Antarctica is located at the south pole whereas India is recently located on the northern hemisphere of the Earth.

The continental crust is adapting to the underlying spheres with slowly changing volume, which, due to the expansion asymmetry, led to a ‘move’ of India to the north. The ‘move’ was with fixed roots and thus India was always connected with Asia. There was no collision.

I already discussed the topic on Quora:

https://www.quora.com/How-would-you-explain-that-India-fits-Asia-perfectly-like-a-puzzle-according-to-the-plate-tectonics-theory-when-there-is-no-reason-for-it

One can also easily ask – Why did the Earth create a perfect and long ‘garage’ inside Eurasia? Eurasia was prepared perfectly so that India could fit it perfectly, is it just a huge coincidence? Does the nature of plate tectonics work as a perfect machine preparing perfect ports for distant continents over the tens of million years?

Here we can have a look at the ‘garage’ from the best map of the ocean floor we have ever had:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2014/oct/03/the-most-detailed-map-of-the-ocean-floor-ever-seen

Some paleomagnetic data can be found for example in the paper from Wentao Huang et al. (2015) in Geophysical Research Letters:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL063749/pdf

This paper:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136791201200048X

suggests that India’s NE corner was at least at 50°S.

Herndon’s Nuclear Planet

J. Marvin Herndon came with an idea that Earth was a Jupiter-like planet in his speculative manuscript in 2005. He tries to unify the plate tectonics theory (with subduction without mantle convection) and the expanding Earth theory. He accepts the ‘conventional geological eras’ (life on Earth older than 180 Ma) and doesn’t explain why did the rapid expansion begin approximately 180 million years ago. His explanation for Earth’s heat and geomagnetic field is done via ‘georeactor’. Herndon doesn’t provide any geometrical fit of continental blocks in Pacific. You can read more on his webpage:

http://nuclearplanet.com/

Mocquet et al. – The First Steps in 2014

The first steps towards understanding of exoplanetary gas giant cores relaxation was made by the scientists Mocquet, Grasset and Sotin in 2014. Here I cite from their paper:

‘Data extracted from the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia (see http://exoplanet.eu) show the existence of planets that are more massive than iron cores that would have the same size. After meticulous verification of the data, we conclude that the mass of the smallest of these planets is actually not known. However, the three largest planets, Kepler52b, Kepler-52c and Kepler-57b, which are between 30 and 100 times the mass of the Earth, have indeed density larger than an iron planet of the same size. This observation triggers this study that investigates under which conditions these planets could represent the naked cores of gas giants that would have lost their atmospheres during their migration towards the star.’

The authors showed that exoplanets could relax when getting back to more ordinary densities. You can find their paper here:

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roypta/372/2014/20130164.full.pdf