I know that Planetary Expansion was covered previously in this topic, and it was brought up as something which falsifies Stellar Metamorphosis - I don't see it this way. In fact, I think Stellar Metamorphosis is the best theory to explain Planetary Expansion. I believe that Planetary Expansion is a temporary dissipative process, resulting from the adoption of a planet into a new thermodynamic environment.
First, I'm thinking that that the center of gravity of an astron is not
the point at the center of the iron core, but is further out in the photosphere/atmosphere/hydrosphere/lithosphere. Angular momentum keeps the densest matter, and therefore the center of gravity outward to some extent (except for the magnetized iron). This experiment is a nice demonstration.
Essentially, what I'm thinking is that hollow stars become hollow planets.
Once the lithosphere has formed, pressure can build within. If the planet gets captured while the interior is still hot and under pressure, the heating by the adoptive star will raise the pressure to levels which the crust cannot contain, causing tectonic splits and expansion as the molten inner solids and superheated gases spill outward until the pressure is relieved.
Although cartoonish and not to scale, my illustration here
shows the rough idea. It's certainly not perfect and I'm unsure about a lot of things.
The observations which lead me to believe this are as follows:
-Tectonic plate geometry fits together perfectly on a smaller size sphere - not just on Earth but on other planets/moons. Neal Adams' visualizations demonstrate this very well (though I don't agree with his proposed mechanism.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6 ... C3PT1DkEb7
Jupiter's moon Ganymede
note the wedge shaped splits in the darker crust indicating that it could only have fit together on a smaller radius sphere. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fsg1XJTbKA
-Age and composition of Earth's upper tectonic plates (continents) match. Seafloor age is consistent with spreading hypothesis.
https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/image/ima ... talAge.jpg
-Fossils of flora and fauna match at the shores of continents.
Basically all the evidence for Pangaea supports Planetary Expansion, but Pangaea as currently accepted is physically impossible as Neal Adams demonstrates in this visualization.
-Ancient corals reveal that days were shorter in the past (conservation of angular momentum)
http://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch ... ay/471180/
-Hollow planet explains more simply the seismic shadow zone anomaly.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierr ... ueca_9.htm
I think this is why planets which are impact remains (undifferentiated) are so round - the outer lithosphere takes the brunt of the impact and shatters, leaving the inner core relatively unscathed.
Anyways, I've been mulling these ideas over the past few months and figured I'd post now since my thinking on this has not progressed much lately, and perhaps others may share their insights or benefit from this.