Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #741894
| From | Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity, sci.electronics.design |
| Subject | Re: energy and mass |
| Date | 2026-03-19 23:18 +1100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10pgpiv$mp47$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <n1klj1F1p4rU8@mid.individual.net> <10p3t9u$a44n$2@dont-email.me> <n1nanlFenm4U2@mid.individual.net> <10p5vh4$10avb$1@dont-email.me> <n21u0qF4l6qU1@mid.individual.net> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On 19/03/2026 8:38 pm, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am Sonntag000015, 15.03.2026 um 10:52 schrieb Bill Sloman: >> On 15/03/2026 8:08 pm, Thomas Heger wrote: >>> Am Samstag000014, 14.03.2026 um 16:02 schrieb Bill Sloman: >>> ... >>>>>> Society does have an interest in seeing it published - the patent >>>>>> system was set up to encourage people to publish their inventions >>>>>> and collect royalties from people who can exploit them. >>>>> >>>>> Well, publishing is usually the final step. >>>>> >>>>> But before you could publish something, you need to have something >>>>> worth publishing. >>>>> >>>>> And that is difficult, if you do it all alone. >>>> >>>> Very few people do. >>> >>> I did. >>> >>>>>> I'm sure there a fat cats who are doing well, and don't want new >>>>>> inventions to cut into their markets. The fossil carbon extraction >>>>>> industry is precisely that sort of fat cat, and they'd be much >>>>>> happier if science wasn't documenting the relentless progression >>>>>> of anthropogenic global warming. They do spend a lot on climate >>>>>> change denial propaganda, but they don't seem to have been all >>>>>> that effective in shutting down research on the topic. >>>>> >>>>> E.g. I'm a proponent of 'Growing Earth' and 'abiogenic oil' and >>>>> have spent a lot of time on these topics. >>>>> >>>>> And I'm pretty certain, that Earth does in fact grow and also know >>>>> why. >>>> >>>> And I'm pretty certain that you are deceiving yourself. >>>> >>>>> But you can't even talk about these topics, because that would >>>>> cause very harsh reactions. >>>> >>>> The continental drift theory took a long time to get accepted. You >>>> do seem to be unaware of it. >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Wegener >>> >>> No, because I knew who Wegener was and how his theory worked. >>> >>> But I'm a proponent of the German geologist Ott-Christoph Hilgenberg, >>> who invented 'Growing Earth' as addition to Wegner's continental >>> drift theory. >>> >>> Both theories are quite similar, but have one main difference: >>> >>> plate tectonics(PT) assumes a constant size of the Earth and growing >>> Earth (called GE here) assumes growth. >>> >>> So, PT needs something balancing the obvious spreading. PT calls this >>> 'subduction'. >>> >>> But 'subduction is blatant nonsense for an large number of reasons. >> >> It happens at oceanic trenches, and is well documented. > Subduction is a hypothesis. But a pretty well tested one. > > But it also blatant nonsense. It is actually the lie that plate > tectonics depends on, hence cannot be questioned at all. > > But it is nonsense, however. > > Subduction would assume thing, which violate simple logic. > > For instance plate tectonics is based on the assumption, that Earth > would NOT grow. That's why the obvious spreading needs something to > balance that spreading and that is the alleged subduction. A growing earth violates the principle of the conservation of mass/energy. That doesn't make it inconcieveable, but it means that you need very convincing evidence to support the idea, and that doesn't seem to exist. > > But spreading zones are large and obvious and subduction zones far less > and in most cases at the 'wrong' locations (not opposite to spreading > zones). Subduction involves oceanic plate getting sucked into the mantle. It's not going to be anything like as obvious as new oceanic plate being extruded at mid-ocean ridges, but siesmologists are sure that they have have mapped subduction zones. Letting off explosive charges on the surface does launch acoustic waves into the underlying rocks, which you can detect with an array of microphones, and you can use this technique to map large areas. The whole of the Arabian plate has been mapped that way. https://eos.org/articles/a-new-underground-atlas-of-subduction-zones > To make that nonsense somehow plausible additional blunder is need and > actually introduced into 'science'. > > In effect pt assumes, that continents kind of 'swim' through the oceans. They don't. They ride on top of convection currents in the molten rock of the outer core. > But that assumption is insane, because the oceans are above plates, too, > because if there were no plates beneath the oceans, the water would boil > instantly. Rock is a pretty good insulator. There is a continuous flux of heat (generated by radioactive decay) from the core of the earth out to the surface, where it gets radiated away, and there's a thermal gradiant from the inner cores (which is at 5700K) out to the surface which drives the flow of heat. > So, more or less the entire planet is covered with plates and many are > thinner and are covered with water, what we call 'oceans'. > > Now the plates below the oceans are still thick plates, though not as > think as the continental plates. > > Now the question: how would you move any plate at all, if the entire > planet is covered with thick plates? > > As a relatively good 'model' you could use a water melon. You really can't. It's a perfectly terrible model > The 'crust' of the watermelon is relatively stiff and has equivalent > thickness (a little too thick, but that doesn't matter). > > Now we take a sharp knife and cut the 'crust' into 'plates' and name > them like the plates on our planet. > > Now we have a 'planet', covered with 'plates' and could try to move the > 'plates' around. > > But there are two things, which would hinder the movement: > > 1) these 'plates' stick to the interior of the 'planet' Except that the outer core is molten rock - a fluid, not a solid - and it convects. > 2) there is no place for movement, because in any directions there are > other plates. Except that the oceanic plates are in continuous movement as they move from the mid-ocean ridges to the subduction zones, getting thicker all the way as the liquid outer core freezes onto their undersides. > > Same with tectonic plates: > > 1) they are extremly heavy, hot and half molten on the lower side and > stick to the upper mantle But the upper mantle is entirely molten and convecting, and drags the continental plates plates along in the direction of the convection current. > 2) they cannot move, because any border line has actually a vertical > depth of several ten kilometers, which would push against other plates, > once you try to move them. But they clearly can move past them. The San Andreas fault is a well known example of two plates moving past one another. > > Plates are also extremely rigid, because they are made of rock. But geological forces can obviously bend them. Chunks that were once deeply buried get pushed up to the surface and eroded, and you can see the bent bits if you know where to look. > So, any movement would cause a collision and that not only in the middle > of the moving direction, but also sideways, where also collisions could > occur. The San Andreas fault is an obvious counter example. > > In effect the only option, that would actually allow spreading would be > a growing planet. It might look that way to somebody who doesn't know much about geology. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-11 07:54 -0700
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-11 18:45 +0100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-11 20:19 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-12 17:37 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-12 07:59 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-13 16:41 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-13 08:10 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-14 16:53 +1100
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-12 11:51 +0100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-12 10:18 -0700
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-12 21:58 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-13 16:48 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-13 08:18 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-14 17:03 +1100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-12 17:34 +1100
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-12 11:51 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-13 02:29 +1100
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-12 21:58 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-13 16:55 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-13 07:56 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-14 01:47 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-13 20:01 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-14 17:13 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-14 07:50 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 01:18 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-14 20:40 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 15:40 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-15 08:13 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 20:19 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-15 10:33 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 23:36 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-15 14:50 +0100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-13 09:46 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-14 02:24 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-14 09:55 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 02:02 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-15 10:08 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 20:52 +1100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-16 20:50 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-19 10:38 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 23:18 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-20 10:36 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 00:06 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-21 10:06 +0100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 07:31 -0700
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-21 09:35 -0700
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 10:17 -0700
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-21 11:13 -0700
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 14:15 -0700
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-22 09:37 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 20:37 +1100
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-22 11:34 +0100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-22 07:45 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-23 02:18 +1100
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-22 19:13 +0100
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-22 11:44 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 04:32 +1100
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-21 11:22 -0700
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-21 22:32 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 04:27 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 10:44 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 15:54 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-23 10:15 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-24 22:45 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-26 13:58 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 01:50 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-26 08:08 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 17:16 +1100
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-19 06:16 -0700
csiph-web