Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #670258

Re: energy and mass

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

On Sat, 21 Mar 2026 10:06:03 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
wrote:

>Am Freitag000020, 20.03.2026 um 14:06 schrieb Bill Sloman:
>> On 20/03/2026 8:36 pm, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am Donnerstag000019, 19.03.2026 um 13:18 schrieb Bill Sloman:
>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> 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 inconceiveable, but it means that you 
>>>> need very convincing evidence to support the idea, and that doesn't 
>>>> seem to exist.
>>>
>>> Well, it would violate a certain principle which is commonly called 
>>> 'materialism'.
>>>
>>> This 'great materialistic metaparadigm' is encoded into what is called 
>>> 'standard model of QM' and belongs to the also fraudulent 'big-bang 
>>> theory'.
>> 
>> Neither is fraudulent - both were advanced as hypotheses and seem to fit 
>> the data. It's perfectly clear that neither is perfect, but until you 
>> can come up models that work at least as well, nobody is going to take 
>> your alternatives seriously.
>
>I assume intention and some kind of 'bad physics', which is carefully 
>crafted and force-feed to the defenceless general public.

Speaking of bad science, this is a cool book:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1250372275




John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

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