Re: energy and mass

From	Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity, sci.electronics.design
Subject	Re: energy and mass
Date	2026-03-19 10:38 +0100
Message-ID	<n21u0qF4l6qU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	(15 earlier) <10p1a7r$3a2h8$1@dont-email.me> <n1klj1F1p4rU8@mid.individual.net> <10p3t9u$a44n$2@dont-email.me> <n1nanlFenm4U2@mid.individual.net> <10p5vh4$10avb$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

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 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.

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).

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 ozeans.

But that assumption is insane, because the ozeans are above plates, too, 
because if there were no plates beneath the ozeans, the water would boil 
instantly.

So, more or less the entire planet is covered with plates and many are 
thinner and are covered with water, what we call 'ozeans'.

Now the plates below the ozeans are still thick plates, even not as 
thinck 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.

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'

2) there is no place for movement, because in any dierections there are 
other plates.

Same with tectonic plates:

1) they are extremly heavy, hot and half molten on the lower side and 
stick to the upper mantle

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.

Plates are also extremly rigid, because they are made of rock.

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.

In effect the only option, that would actually allow spreading would be 
a growing planet.

TH

...

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

Thread

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