Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #386580
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Time and Gravity |
| Date | 2016-06-24 07:49 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <nkja87$ii7$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (15 earlier) <dsp80jFi1shU1@mid.individual.net> <nk9kk0$97i$1@gioia.aioe.org> <dt2vopFh63rU1@mid.individual.net> <nkhivm$af$1@gioia.aioe.org> <dt3tksFmdbvU1@mid.individual.net> |
On 6/24/2016 12:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 23.06.2016 23:06, schrieb Odd Bodkin: >> On 6/23/2016 3:39 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: >>> Am 20.06.2016 22:45, schrieb Odd Bodkin: >>> >>>>>>> Landmasses do not rise. >>>>>> >>>>>> Deny all you want, that does not change the FACT that many >>>>>> landmasses do >>>>>> indeed rise, and are MEASURED to do so. >>>>>> >>>>>> The Himalayas are rising by 5-6 cm/year. >>>>> >>>>> 'Rising' is 'relative', since the reference surface is the mean >>>>> sea-level. >>>> >>>> No, it really doesn't. In modern measurements, it's the distance from >>>> the center of the earth, as measured by orbiting GPS satellites. As you >>>> know, GPS can tell you the elevation of the responder. >>> >>> You cannot measure anything from the centre of the Earth, since the >>> centre is deep inside the planet and cannot be seen. >> >> Sir, please start thinking. >> If I am a satellite system that has orbits on a sphere in space, then I >> know the location of the center of that sphere. (If you walked in a >> large circle, measuring your distance of travel, you would know the >> circumference of the circle you walked in. Knowing the circumference and >> dividing by 2*pi, you now know the radius of the circle from your >> measured distance of travel. Now that you know the radius, you know the >> exact location of the center of the circle you traveled in, even though >> it may be in the middle of a mountain.) The center of that sphere >> coincides with the center of the earth, even though I cannot see the >> center of the earth. The radius of this sphere is therefore a measured >> value R. > > > This too funny, since what you cannot do in orbit, that is measure the > distance travelled by kind of odometer. (You DON'T walk in space!) I did not mean to suggest that satellites measure the circumference of their travel. They know the dimensions of the sphere they are on by different means (radar ranging, effectively). The point of my illustration of walking in a circle is to point out that you do not need to be able to see the center of a circle to know where it is, even when walking around a mountain. > > You can only measure movement in respect to certain reference points and > those are on the surface of the Earth, because the orbit does not > provide such points. Not so. The GPS satellites have each other to provide that reference, and likewise knowledge of the sphere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GPS_satellites You have this mistaken illusion that all location services are with respect to ground level, and this is simply untrue. It's a false claim you have to let go of. > > ... > >>>>> >>>>> If this sea-level changes, the mountain would also 'rise'. >>>>> >>>>> But rising mountains are actually no problem for 'Growing Earth', >>>>> since >>>>> 'growth' actually means' rise of the surface'. >>>>> >>>>> Plate tectonics, in contrast, needs some kind of mechanism, by which >>>>> the >>>>> mountains would rise. >>>> >>>> Collision of plates. You don't believe plates can move, but they've >>>> been >>>> MEASURED to move despite your doubts. >>> >>> >>> I don't have doubts about plate movement. Spreading is similar in Plate >>> tectonics and Growing Earth. >> >> Well, that's funny, because with your watermelon example, you claimed >> that the friction is too much for plates to move at all. > > > No! > I wrote, that movement of plates is caused by growth. > > What cannot possibly work is the mechanism, which Plate tectonic assumes. > > PT has a constant size of the planet as axiom. Under this condition > plates cannot move at all. > > PT uses, in violation of facts, a plane model of plates. I don't think so, no. I don't know where you got the impression that it does. > Those plates > move like a conveyor belt about a surface. They rise at the spreading > zone, move along the surface and dive into Earth at the subduction zone. > > But in reality the Earth has a spherical surface and plates are not flat > and not roughly rectangular. > > On a constant sized Earth plates cannot move at all, because they would > instantly hit the neighbouring plates along on almost half of their > circumference (not only at the assumed subduction zones). > > And much less they could slide along these neighbours, since the form > would hinder the movement. They are also not rounded on the side > opposite side of the Euler pole of that movement. > > The gluey connection to the mantle would also be a significant > stumbling block for floating of plates Again with this "significant" term. I ask you again whether Jello "significantly" distorts when you tip the bowl, as it is a semi-solid and not a liquid. Yes or no? > > And, last, but not least, subduction does not work. > >> This is why I suggested you try the same experiment with an avocado, >> cutting all the way through the skin. Now you will certainly see the >> plates on that avocado move when you push them, spreading and subduction >> alike. >> > > Avocados are not spherical. Nor is a watermelon. Objection irrelevant. > They also have no rigid crust. They are just as rigid as the Earth's crust! I suggest you look up the thickness of an avocado skin compared to the fruit radius, and compare it to the earth's crust thickness compared to the earth's radius! > So I don't > see them as good example. > >>> The difference is subduction. >>> >>> Growing Earth assumes, the spreading is caused by Growing Earth. >>> >>> Plate tectonics assumes, that the plates are pushed sideways, because of >>> 'convection currents'. >>> >>> This cannot be true, since the Earth mantle is not liquid, but >>> semi-solid. So these currents cannot be too significant. >> >> What do you mean "too significant"? Is the flow of Jello out of a bowl >> when you tip that semi-solid "too significant"? >> > > The Earth mantle is more than 80% of the Earth' material. It is more or > less 'one piece', since very high pressure pushes it together. On the > upper layers the mantle is solid. It's like Jello -- a semi-solid. > > So how would you like to construct 'convection currents' within the mantle? Differential heat flow! Just like the sun! > > Btw: what puzzles me is the ignorance of this particular question among > physicists. > > Reason: if Earth does in fact grow, physicist can be certain to have > made some mayor mistakes. So the question, whether or not Earth would > grow, is of tremendous importance in theoretical physics. > > TH > > > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Time and Gravity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 11:09 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-03 15:38 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 09:35 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:20 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-04 06:34 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-04 09:36 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-05 05:03 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 15:35 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-07 15:52 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:26 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-08 10:42 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-08 01:55 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-08 22:24 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-08 23:24 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-10 01:24 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-12 10:19 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:17 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-08 22:39 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 15:52 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-09 05:13 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:39 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-10 07:23 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-10 13:14 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-11 06:35 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-17 11:09 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-18 06:46 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-19 12:02 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-19 14:17 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-20 05:59 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 15:45 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-23 22:39 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 16:06 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-24 07:09 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 07:49 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-24 09:52 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-24 17:31 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 13:17 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity A Nony Mouse <abc@cef.ghi> - 2016-06-24 12:57 -0600
Re: Time and Gravity alsor@interia.pl - 2016-06-24 12:08 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-25 04:35 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-24 20:12 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-24 20:31 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-24 23:48 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-25 08:13 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-25 09:04 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 13:33 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-26 03:34 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-27 15:33 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-27 23:58 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 08:26 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-11 06:30 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-13 09:50 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-13 07:40 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-14 07:14 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 05:54 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 06:04 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 07:03 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-25 14:00 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "Dr. Bob John" <drbobjohn@hotmail.org> - 2016-06-25 18:31 +0000
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-25 05:02 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 13:32 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-12 06:30 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-12 08:27 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 09:07 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-24 07:23 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 14:14 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-26 03:24 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-26 15:59 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-27 04:25 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-27 14:27 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-28 00:43 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 08:43 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-28 22:10 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 16:22 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 08:06 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 05:47 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 19:18 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 10:28 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-08 09:36 +0200
Silliness about "growing earth" Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-07-08 10:45 -0500
Re: Silliness about "growing earth" Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-09 07:10 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Alejandro Bellucci <alejb@yahoo.info> - 2016-07-08 17:49 +0000
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 08:08 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 18:46 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 12:17 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 19:45 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 13:02 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-30 07:41 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 08:14 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-01 05:12 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 07:46 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-01 22:16 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 15:54 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-02 07:25 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-06 04:18 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 23:28 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-06 23:10 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-09 10:23 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-09 10:36 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-09 13:18 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:25 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-10 07:05 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:41 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 08:54 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-06 09:17 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-06 09:37 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-06 11:11 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 10:13 -0700
csiph-web