Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Polar

Expanding Earth

70 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Polar

Hello,

I wanted to bring the hypothesis of an expanding earth to the discussion. It seems odd that if one decrease the earth's radium, continents seem to magically fit perfectly, why?

 

EarthGrowth.jpg

Fig. Continents around the Atlantic and Pacific oceans (left and right respectively) as they might have appeared at several points,

going back in history, under the expanding Earth hypothesis.

 

Quote

Expanding Earth

The expanding Earth or growing Earth hypothesis asserts that the position and relative movement of continents is at least partially due to the volume of Earth increasing. Conversely, geophysical global cooling was the hypothesis that various features could be explained by Earth contracting.

Although it was suggested historically, since the recognition of plate tectonics in the 1970s, scientific consensus has rejected any significant expansion or contraction of Earth.

Quote

Scientific consensus

The hypothesis had never developed a plausible and verifiable mechanism of action.[10] During the 1960s, the theory of plate tectonics—initially based on the assumption that Earth's size remains constant, and relating the subduction zones to burying of lithosphere at a scale comparable to seafloor spreading[10]—became the accepted explanation in the Earth Sciences.

The scientific community finds that significant evidence contradicts the Expanding Earth theory, and that evidence used in support of it is better explained by plate tectonics:[citation needed]

  • Measurements with modern high-precision geodetic techniques and modelization of the measurements by the horizontal motions of independent rigid plates at the surface of a globe of free radius, were proposed as evidence that Earth is not currently increasing in size to within a measurement accuracy of 0.2 mm per year.[20] The lead author of the study stated "Our study provides an independent confirmation that the solid Earth is not getting larger at present, within current measurement uncertainties".[21]
  • The motions of tectonic plates and subduction zones measured by a large range of geological, geodetic and geophysical techniques supports plate tectonics.[22][23][24]
  • Imaging of lithosphere fragments within the mantle supports lithosphere consumption by subduction.[23][24]
  • Paleomagnetic data has been used to calculate that the radius of Earth 400 million years ago was 102 ± 2.8 percent of today's radius.[25][26] However, the methodology employed has been criticised by the Russian geologist Yuriy Chudinov.[27]
  • Examinations of data from the Paleozoic and Earth's moment of inertia suggest that there has been no significant change of Earth's radius in the last 620 million years.[28]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carnoferox
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Polar said:

Hello,

I wanted to bring the hypothesis of an expanding earth to the discussion. It seems odd that if one decrease the earth's radium, continents seem to magically fit perfectly, why?

 

EarthGrowth.jpg

Fig. Continents around the Atlantic and Pacific oceans (left and right respectively) as they might have appeared at several points,

going back in history, under the expanding Earth hypothesis.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth

It's not odd that continents fit together. It's well understood why and it has nothing to do with an expanding Earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics

Edited by Carnoferox
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon101
Posted (edited)

Forgive my confusion, (I am elderly, being over forty), but are you suggesting the expanding Earth theory is correct or not?.

The quotes supplied in your op are mutually contradicting, with the lower quotation comprehensively debunking the upper. 

In any case the expansion, or otherwise, of the planet is governed by gravitational and internal pressures - neither of which appear to be amenable to significant change, even over geological epochs. 

Have a lovely day!. 

Edited by Jon101
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon101

And in a spirit of mischievousness, if the Earth's radium were decreased, perhaps M. and Mme. Curie would have lived quite a bit longer. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
khol
37 minutes ago, Polar said:

I wanted to bring the hypothesis of an expanding earth to the discussion

flat earths, expanding earths

back in the ol days there were sets of books called encyclopedias. If google isn't working out for you maybe try that method. Seriously, Im not being sarcastic. Some of these "hypothesis" are just plain ridiculous

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
freetoroam
Quote

Although it was suggested historically, since the recognition of plate tectonics in the 1970s, scientific consensus has rejected any significant expansion or contraction of Earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth

There you have it.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oniomancer

There's another thread or two on this here somewhere. Suffice it to say this notion was concocted before GPS sensors were a thing and the continents don't fit as neatly as claimed.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windowpane
2 hours ago, Oniomancer said:

There's another thread or two on this here somewhere. Suffice it to say this notion was concocted before GPS sensors were a thing and the continents don't fit as neatly as claimed.

Shame ...  I've often wondered whether Australia might fit into the Black Sea (except for the scale, I suppose ...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
9 hours ago, Polar said:

Hello,

I wanted to bring the hypothesis of an expanding earth to the discussion. It seems odd that if one decrease the earth's radium, continents seem to magically fit perfectly, why?

Stupidest idea ever (I know that it's not yours.)

It "works" if you don't stop to think about layers of rock and why they're different, about why some mountains are growing and some aren't, about why there are salt domes in the middle of all sorts of areas, and if you don't stop and look at where fossils are found and what kind of fossils are found and at what depth they are found.

The minute you learn something about what types of rocks are in your area and how the beds tilt and what fossils are there, the more idiotic the idea becomes.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Oniomancer said:

There's another thread or two on this here somewhere. Suffice it to say this notion was concocted before GPS sensors were a thing and the continents don't fit as neatly as claimed.

Actually, it was popularized long after that.  Artist Neal Adams decided that it was a brilliant idea (and possibly his own idea, he thought) and made an animated movie of it, explaining his brilliance.  Amost everyone who saw it (except for rockhounds land anyone who took geology) loved it and felt he was right.

Edited by Kenemet
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oniomancer
2 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Actually, it was popularized long after that.  Artist Neal Adams decided that it was a brilliant idea (and possibly his own idea, he thought) and made an animated movie of it, explaining his brilliance.  Amost everyone who saw it (except for rockhounds land anyone who took geology) loved it and felt he was right.

Popularized, but it pre-dates him, and he was throwing around his personal version at least as far back as the early 80's when the tech was still getting off the ground so to speak for research purposes.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

The Earth might have kept on expandng if not for ...

~

[00.03:07]

~

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
khol
12 hours ago, Polar said:

Hello,

I wanted to bring the hypothesis of an expanding earth to the discussion. It seems odd that if one decrease the earth's radium, continents seem to magically fit perfectly, why?

 

EarthGrowth.jpg

Fig. Continents around the Atlantic and Pacific oceans (left and right respectively) as they might have appeared at several points,

going back in history, under the expanding Earth hypothesis.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth

 

Hey Polar....Hello by the way and welcome to UM. I just realized this was your first post !   Dont give up..we're all curious here about pretty much everything :) and everyone has an opinion in which they are entitled to....cheers

third eye may have a point in that it possibly could have been the Supremes that halted the expansion ..

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

Surely the earth is getting smaller what with billions of people trampling it down every day. 

 

:rofl:

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
10 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Stupidest idea ever (I know that it's not yours.)

It "works" if you don't stop to think about layers of rock and why they're different, about why some mountains are growing and some aren't, about why there are salt domes in the middle of all sorts of areas, and if you don't stop and look at where fossils are found and what kind of fossils are found and at what depth they are found.

The minute you learn something about what types of rocks are in your area and how the beds tilt and what fossils are there, the more idiotic the idea becomes.

No need to go there.

Just mention the law of conservation of mass.

Harte

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh
21 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Surely the earth is getting smaller what with billions of people trampling it down every day. 

 

:rofl:

 

No, because the Earth is flat, all those people trampling on it are spreading it out more. That's a good thing because we don't want population explosions to cause people to be falling off the edges.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte

We must strive for even distribution of the population so that the Earth doesn't tip over.

Harte

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh
12 minutes ago, Harte said:

We must strive for even distribution of the population so that the Earth doesn't tip over.

Harte

That must be why we're sinking a bit more on the Chinese end.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Polar

I wanted to discuss a quick earth expansion possibility, not the proposed slow and gradual expanding earth per se.

One way or the other, there is a much better continental fit when earth's radius is considerably smaller (around 40%) than the modern radius. I found this article among others that deal with various forms of earth expansions:

Quote

Rapid Earth Expansion : An Eclectic View

Abstract

Paleobiogeography, plate evolution, and minor amounts of subduction require a rapidly expanding earth during post-Triassic time, not plate tectonics. An asteroid impact at the P/Tr boundary in the Congo Basin ruptured the lithosphere and, together with another impact in the Carnian of Arizona, caused Earth's volume to subsequently expand. The increase in volume was likely due to inner core and lower mantle transformation growth at the expense of the fluid outer core. A modified Pacific reconstruction is proposed that closes up the Pacific Basin in the Triassic and allows continents to cover a 55% radius Earth. Some serious weaknesses in the plate tectonics theory are noted, and tectonics by high-energy impacts is discussed.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1342937X05700071

 

For the sake of comparison i am also posting a model developed by Hilgenberg in 1933:

%5B36%5D%20Vom_wachsenden_Erdball.jpg

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ott_Christoph_Hilgenberg

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Polar

 

On 5/24/2018 at 9:18 PM, Kenemet said:

Actually, it was popularized long after that.  Artist Neal Adams decided that it was a brilliant idea (and possibly his own idea, he thought) and made an animated movie of it, explaining his brilliance.  Amost everyone who saw it (except for rockhounds land anyone who took geology) loved it and felt he was right.

 

The Earth Expansion Science Videos by Neal Adams

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaden
4 minutes ago, Polar said:

I wanted to discuss a quick earth expansion possibility, not the proposed slow and gradual expanding earth per se.

One way or the other, there is a much better continental fit when earth's radius is considerably smaller (around 40%) than the modern radius. I found this article among others that deal with various forms of earth expansions:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1342937X05700071

 

For the sake of comparison i am also posting a model developed by Hilgenberg in 1933:

%5B36%5D%20Vom_wachsenden_Erdball.jpg

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ott_Christoph_Hilgenberg

 

 

 

  Why are you more willing to accept an outlandish idea that no modern scientist worthy of his\her Phd gives any credence to, rather than the one that all of the evidence points to and very close to 100% of people accept?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Polar
Quote
The Earth expansion theory and its transition from
scientific hypothesis to pseudoscientific belief
P. Sudiro
Baker Hughes, SS 602, C.da Calcasacco – Villanova, 65012, Cepagatti, PE, Italy
Correspondence to:
P. Sudiro (paolo.sudiro@bakerhughes.com)
Received: 13 January 2014 – Revised: 4 May 2014 – Accepted: 22 May 2014 – Published: 20 June 2014
Abstract.
During the first half of 20th century, the dominant global tectonics model based on Earth contraction
had increasing problems accommodating new geological evidence, with the result that alternative geodynamic
theories were investigated. Due to the level of scientific knowledge and the limited amount of data available in
many scientific disciplines at the time, not only was contractionism considered a valid scientific theory but the
debate also included expansionism, mobilism on a fixed-dimension planet, or various combinations of these geo-
dynamic hypotheses. Geologists and physicists generally accepted that planets could change their dimensions,
although the change of volume was generally believed to happen because of a contraction, not an expansion.
Constant generation of new matter in the universe was a possibility accepted by science, as it was the variation
in the cosmological constants. Continental drift, instead, was a more heterodox theory, requiring a larger effort
from the geoscientists to be accepted.
The new geological data collected in the following decades, an improved knowledge of the physical processes,
the increased resolution and penetration of geophysical tools, and the sensitivity of measurements in physics
decreased the uncertainty level in many fields of science. Theorists now had less freedom for speculation because
their theories had to accommodate more data, and more limiting conditions to respect. This explains the rapid
replacement of contracting Earth, expanding Earth, and continental drift theories by plate tectonics once the
symmetrical oceanic magnetic striping was discovered, because none of the previous models could explain and
incorporate the new oceanographic and geophysical data.
Expansionism could survive after the introduction of plate tectonics because its proponents have increasingly
detached their theory from reality by systematically rejecting or overlooking any contrary evidence, and selec-
tively picking only the data that support expansion. Moreover, the proponents continue to suggest imaginative
physical mechanisms to explain expansion, claiming that scientific knowledge is partial, and the many incon-
sistencies of their theory are just minor problems in the face of the plain evidence of expansion. According to
the expansionists, scientists should just wait for some revolutionary discovery in fundamental physics that will
explain all the unsolved mysteries of Earth expansion.
The history of the expanding-Earth theory is an example of how falsified scientific hypotheses can survive
their own failure, gradually shifting towards and beyond the limits of scientific investigation until they become
merely pseudoscientific beliefs.

https://www.hist-geo-space-sci.net/5/135/2014/hgss-5-135-2014.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.