Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Earth's core far hotter than thought

crystalline earths core suns surface

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#16    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,269 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 27 April 2013 - 06:29 PM

View PostFrank Merton, on 27 April 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:


Unfortunately, waaaaay below.

There are places around where that heat makes it to the surface. If we could harness that then we might have something.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#17    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 7,635 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 27 April 2013 - 07:03 PM

View PostThe Silver Thong, on 27 April 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

There are places around where that heat makes it to the surface. If we could harness that then we might have something.
Yes, but hopefully not more Earthquakes.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#18    SewerRat

SewerRat

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 83 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2011

Posted 27 April 2013 - 10:07 PM

Silver Thong: Do you mean like they've been doing in countries like Iceland for years?


#19    GirlfromOz

GirlfromOz

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 153 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2011

Posted 28 April 2013 - 12:01 PM

As I see it,all stars & planets in the universe are all just larger & smaller masses of similar quantities of material.When matter coalesces,there are similar qualities but it depends on where the material coalesces.The stars are larger quantities of the faster moving particles of the surrounds that were drawn together when gravity produced a more rapidly imploding force,& the planets are the more denser moving particles that collected at a slower pace at a more distant area.The heat generated by a larger mass such as our suns & other stars etc generate higher quantities of heat due to friction,pressure & mass.The stars are examples of the pressure generated due to the higher amount of particles that were drawn together.In other words,with the earth being another planet that surrounds the sun,like many other planets,it cooled faster when the coming together of those particles began.It still has a high central temperature.Similar to the sun's regularly generated external temperature due to it's ever expanding mass & collectively continual pressure due to it's ever increasing gravitational forces,it still has similar properties.Such is the fact when every planet that distances itself further from the sun becomes a lighter material planet,liquid or gas,depending on where it was located at the time of it's formation & the molecular gravitational pull,due to the planetational  & gravitational forces of it's molecules.

Edited by GirlfromOz, 28 April 2013 - 12:37 PM.


#20    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,584 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 28 April 2013 - 12:33 PM

View PostThe Silver Thong, on 27 April 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

There are places around where that heat makes it to the surface. If we could harness that then we might have something.
Yes of course; that's how Iceland heats most of its buildings and gets most of its electricity.  It is a developing technology not expected to have a big impact but maybe.


#21    regeneratia

regeneratia

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined:20 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:All my posts are my own views, my own perceptions. Will not be finding links for why I think the way I do.

  • It is time to put the big guns down now, Little Boys!

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:24 PM

I think it is interesting that this has PROVED standard science wrong. I think people don't realize how dogmatic mainstream science is.


#22    Hawkin

Hawkin

    LiverEatenJohnson

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,851 posts
  • Joined:21 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • Some say he is dead.
    Some say he will never be.

Posted 29 April 2013 - 01:35 PM

View Postregeneratia, on 28 April 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

I think it is interesting that this has PROVED standard science wrong. I think people don't realize how dogmatic mainstream science is.

Agreed. When a new theory is presented the mainstream is quick to debunk it but if the theory
has been proven, then mainstream jumps on the bandwagon.

   It's good to have some skepticism so you won't be gullible & naïve.
But to much skepticism can make you narrow minded to extraordinary possibilities.

#23    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,584 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 29 April 2013 - 01:47 PM

I don't get where anything about all this proved standard science wrong.  What "standard science" are you referring to?  All it represents is an advance in our understanding.  This is what science is.


#24    regeneratia

regeneratia

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined:20 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:All my posts are my own views, my own perceptions. Will not be finding links for why I think the way I do.

  • It is time to put the big guns down now, Little Boys!

Posted 29 April 2013 - 05:19 PM

View PostHawkin, on 29 April 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

Agreed. When a new theory is presented the mainstream is quick to debunk it but if the theory
has been proven, then mainstream jumps on the bandwagon.

Well, I just heard from a person today that the core is heating up, not that the temp was miscalculated. I don't always agree with the source on this theory, so I sit on fence on this issue.
But mainstream science is dogmatic and incurious these days.

View PostFrank Merton, on 29 April 2013 - 01:47 PM, said:

I don't get where anything about all this proved standard science wrong.  What "standard science" are you referring to?  All it represents is an advance in our understanding.  This is what science is.

Oh sorry, the article I read was headlined something like how science got it wrong on core temps.

Truth is such a rare quality, a stranger so seldom met in this civilization of fraud, that it is never received freely, but must fight its way into the world
Professor Hilton Hotema
(quote from THE BIBLE FRAUD)

Robert Heinlein: SECRECY IS THE HALLMARK OF TYRANNY!

#25    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,584 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 29 April 2013 - 05:24 PM

You have a strange notion of what science does; numbers get changed all the time.

Of course I understand that you have an agenda and won't let any amount of common sense get in your way.


#26    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 8,409 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 01 May 2013 - 05:38 PM

View Postregeneratia, on 28 April 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

I think it is interesting that this has PROVED standard science wrong. I think people don't realize how dogmatic mainstream science is.
Everyday someone learns something new or finds something new, that's science


#27    Emma_Acid

Emma_Acid

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,621 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

  • Godspeed MID

Posted 02 May 2013 - 11:33 AM

View Postregeneratia, on 28 April 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

I think it is interesting that this has PROVED standard science wrong. I think people don't realize how dogmatic mainstream science is.

View PostHawkin, on 29 April 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

Agreed. When a new theory is presented the mainstream is quick to debunk it but if the theory
has been proven, then mainstream jumps on the bandwagon.

And in a couple of sentences, all that has been shown is just how much neither of you actually understand how science works.

Perhaps do a bit of reading before spouting off utter nonsense?

"Science is the least subjective form of deduction" ~ A. Mulder

#28    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,993 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 02 May 2013 - 06:04 PM

View Postancient astronaut, on 27 April 2013 - 06:26 PM, said:

So, the inner-earth theory isn't true????
There only needs to be a large enough cavern. Potentially using this very energy.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#29    Hawkin

Hawkin

    LiverEatenJohnson

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,851 posts
  • Joined:21 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • Some say he is dead.
    Some say he will never be.

Posted 02 May 2013 - 10:40 PM

View PostEmma_Acid, on 02 May 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:


And in a couple of sentences, all that has been shown is just how much neither of you actually understand how science works.

Perhaps do a bit of reading before spouting off utter nonsense?

When a new theory is presented science can at least give it consideration and be more open rather then quick to debunk.
Robert H, Goddard was ridiculed for his rocket experiments by his collegues of his day but a german named
Wernher von Braun admired Goddard's work and perfected his technology and created the V2 rocket which
was used durring WWII. It eventually led up to the Saturn 5 rockets that sent man to the moon. If von Braun didn't
pick up where Goddard left off, we would probably be decades behind then what we are now.

   It's good to have some skepticism so you won't be gullible & naïve.
But to much skepticism can make you narrow minded to extraordinary possibilities.

#30    Emma_Acid

Emma_Acid

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,621 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

  • Godspeed MID

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:16 AM

View PostHawkin, on 02 May 2013 - 10:40 PM, said:

When a new theory is presented science can at least give it consideration and be more open rather then quick to debunk.

Firstly, a theory is an established scientific model. What you're referring to is a hypothesis.

Science doesn't "debunk" new ideas. It rejects them until there is enough evidence to form a solid theory. This has to be the way - if any zany new idea was given the same consideration as an established theory, then all progress would grind to a halt.

A hypothesis has to do its time. It has to be tested, pulled apart, and trialed to within an inch of its life. It has to be supported by multiple bodies of evidence; it has to be falsifiable (ie there has to be a way of proving it wrong); and it has to be subject to repeatable experiments.


Another mistake people make is thinking that science is all about final, established, proven and correct facts. It isn't. Science is built on the process of proving established theories wrong. That's how science works.




View PostHawkin, on 02 May 2013 - 10:40 PM, said:

Robert H, Goddard was ridiculed for his rocket experiments by his collegues of his day but a german named
Wernher von Braun admired Goddard's work and perfected his technology and created the V2 rocket which
was used durring WWII.

Actually it was the press that ridiculed Goddard, not the scientific establishment.

The press has never done science any favors. It mis-reports stories, blows findings out of proportion, and is the first to lay the blame when these findings don't come to anything (as is usually the case) - leaving the general public with, at best, a dim view of scientists and absolutely no awareness of the scientific process.

At the end of the day - if the scientific establishment doesn't take something seriously, whether its alternative medicine or UFOs, there is one reason and one reason only - there is not enough evidence.

"Science is the least subjective form of deduction" ~ A. Mulder




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users