Are the planets growing?

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light? If you have a personal favorite theory, that is in someway related to the Electric Universe, this is where it can be posted.
allynh
Posts: 1116
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:51 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by allynh » Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:17 pm

The only flaw with the article is using the myth of the creation of the Moon from collisions with the Earth.

They are at the start of the process of creating images from earthquake data. It is too soon to start locking down consensus narratives that will prevent understanding what we are seeing.

Scientists Have Discovered Vast Unidentified Structures Deep Inside the Earth
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ep4z ... -the-earth
Scientists combed through nearly 30 years of earthquake data to probe huge and mysterious objects near the Earth's core. By Becky Ferreira Jun 11 2020, 12:00pmShareTweetSnap

Becky Ferreira

Mist on the Marquesas Islands. Image: Tom Patterson

Scientists have discovered a vast structure made of dense material occupying the boundary between Earth’s liquid outer core and the lower mantle, a zone some 3,000 kilometers (1,864 miles) beneath our feet.

The researchers used a machine learning algorithm that was originally developed to analyze distant galaxies to probe the mysterious phenomenon occurring deep within our own planet, according to a paper published on Thursday in Science.

One of these enormous anomalies, located deep under the Marquesas Islands, had never been detected before, while another structure beneath Hawaii was found to be much larger than previously estimated.

Scientists led by Doyeon Kim, a seismologist and postdoctoral fellow at the University of Maryland, fed seismograms captured from hundreds of earthquakes that occurred between 1990 to 2018 into an algorithm called Sequencer. While seismological studies tend to focus on relatively small datasets of regional earthquake activity, Sequencer allowed Kim and his colleagues to analyze 7,000 measurements of earthquakes—each with a magnitude of at least 6.5—that shook the subterranean world under the Pacific Ocean within the past three decades.

“This study is very special because, for the first time, we get to systematically look at such a large dataset that actually covers more or less the entire Pacific basin,” Kim said in a call. Though scientists have previously mapped out structures deep inside Earth, this study presents a rare opportunity to "bring everything in together and try to explain it in a global context,” he noted.

Earthquakes create seismic waves that travel through Earth’s interior where they become scattered and distorted by structures deep inside our planet. These warped patterns are captured in seismograms, which are recordings of wave activity inside Earth, enabling seismologists to capture rare glimpses of Earth’s inaccessible underworld.

The team focused on seismograms produced by shear (S) waves that travel along the boundary between Earth’s core and the lower portion of the mantle that borders it. These waves are the slower secondary waves that follow the initial tremors made by earthquakes, called primary (P) waves, and they generally produce clearer signals.

“We normally like to use S waves because they are larger in amplitude and the data is more or less clean because there is less P wave traffic,” said Kim. In particular, the team looked for the shear waves diffracting along the core-mantle boundary. “Because it diffracts along that surface, it’s a great phase to look for these tiny structures on top of the core-mantle boundary,” Kim noted.

When the shear waves hit these structures, they produce a type of echo-like signature known as a “postcursor” (there are helpful figures of this process on Kim’s website). These echoes indicate the presence of anomalies deep inside Earth called ultra low velocity zones (ULVZs), which are dense patches on the core-mantle boundary.

Nobody knows exactly how ULVZs are formed or what they are made of, but it’s clear that they have diameters of about a hundred kilometers and that they are dense enough to slow down waves that pass through them.

By running thousands of seismograms through Sequencer, Kim and his colleagues found that the strongest postcursor signals in their dataset emanate from under Hawai’i and the Marquesas Islands. This is tantalizing evidence of the existence of two “mega-ULVZs,” zones that stretch for about 1,000 kilometers, or more.

1591898015439-234269
An updated map of Earth's interior based on the new study. Image: D. Kim, V. Lekíc, B. Ménard, D. Baron and M. Taghizadeh-Popp

While the Hawaiian structure has been partially mapped out in previous studies, Kim’s team found that its dimensions are much larger than expected. Meanwhile, the mega-ULVZ detected under the Marquesas Islands represents “a previously unidentified localized wave-speed anomaly,” according to the study.

Mega-ULVZs are intriguing structures not only due to their size, but because they may be composed of exotic materials that date back to a time before Earth had a Moon. These huge anomalous chunks could be partially melted material that predate the Moon formation event, which scientists think was a gigantic collision between early Earth and a Mars-sized object more than four billion years ago.

“This is very interesting because this might indicate that mega-ULVZs are special and may host primitive geochemical signatures that have been relatively unmixed since early Earth history,” Kim said.

The new study demonstrates the applications of algorithms like Sequencer, which use a special type of process called unsupervised learning, in processing complex datasets like those found in astronomy, seismology, and countless other scientific fields. As opposed to supervised learning algorithms, which are trained to sort information based on known labels, unsupervised algorithms are designed to find insights in unlabelled datasets.

“What if we don’t really know what to look for in the dataset?” explained Kim. “This is the typical question we’d like to think about because the lower mantle, the target of our study, still has so many unknowns. It’s not really surprising to find almost anything in the lower mantle because we cannot actually go inside and take a look at it with our bare eyes.”

“When you use a sequencer, what it actually does is find additional information hidden behind this dataset,” he continued. “So, what we did here is find an optimal arrangement in the dataset itself. We’re not actually altering the dataset; we’re not doing anything but just rearranging and finding this optimal arrangement. That’s what Sequencer does.”

The team plans to continue developing this novel way of peering into Earth by examining higher-frequency waves that might yield finer details about the enigmatic structures on the core-mantle boundary. The researchers also hope to expand their dataset to seismograms produced under the Atlantic Ocean.

“We’re hoping that Sequencer will be able to basically let us use all of these diverse datasets and bring them together to look for these lower mantle structures systematically,” Kim concluded. “That is our vision going forward, to answer more questions about the lower mantle in general.”
This is the website mentioned that has more diagrams and goes into detail.

Sequencing Seismograms: A Panoptic View of Scattering in the Core-Mantle Boundary Region
http://doyeonkim.us/sequencing_seismograms

This is the paper as pdf:

Sequencing Seismograms
http://doyeonkim.us/pdfs/Kim_et_al_2020_Science.pdf

The images they have are scary.

As mentioned in Forum 2.0, the core is probably hollow, so the slow areas they show around the "core" probably represent the original inner shell, like the crystals inside a geode.

Watch the video Neal Adams did showing the crust shift as it grows.

Expanding Earth Theory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqF-vvi5uUA

- I suspect that those inner bodies would come together in a sphere along with the surface shell.

If we could image that in cgi, I suspect that we would see the original size of the Earth's inner hollow core, when it was first formed after it was ejected from the Sun.

User avatar
spark
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:36 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by spark » Sun Jul 12, 2020 4:45 am

New Earth Expansion Book: Live Interview with author Stephen Hurrell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-Mp2WbhcL8

Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth by Stephen Hurrell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1ls_MjxkfA

Global Expansion Tectonics: A Significant Challenge for Physics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P38eReiw7LU

Plate Tectonics vs Expanding Earth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiCMFzpMnZM

Stephen Hurrell and James Maxlow's books:
https://www.amazon.com/Stephen-Hurrell/ ... t_ebooks_1
https://www.amazon.com/Kindle-Store-Jam ... mes+Maxlow

Open Mind
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:47 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Open Mind » Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:47 pm

One of the interesting discoveries of the Safire Project is the observed transmutation of elements on the surface of the anode as a result of the plasma process. Does this address the biggest debunking point about the mystery of where the new mass comes from? I'm curious if through they're scanning electron microscopy identifying new elements forming on the surface, if they are able to estimate the mass of those new formations and generate a relationship between the input power and a rate of transmutation. Would love to find out if it would be possible to crunch the numbers and see if anyone could make an estimate of mass increase on earth and compare that to the estimates of the proposed rate of expansion.

User avatar
spark
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:36 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by spark » Sun Jul 19, 2020 5:04 am

Peleogravity - Calculating Ancient Gravity using Dinosaur Fossils in Expanding Earth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpFFzyMvdZM

BipedalJoe
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2018 1:17 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by BipedalJoe » Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:39 pm

I think continental drift proves that Earth has grown, yes. To fit oceanic basins covering 60% of Earth surface with young oceanic crust, interspersed between the continents and their continental crust, sqrt(1/(1-60%)) radial increase is required, 1.6x. This means a volume increase of 1.6^3 = 4.

Open Mind
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:47 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Open Mind » Tue Aug 04, 2020 12:16 am

BipedalJoe wrote: Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:39 pm I think continental drift proves that Earth has grown, yes. To fit oceanic basins covering 60% of Earth surface with young oceanic crust, interspersed between the continents and their continental crust, sqrt(1/(1-60%)) radial increase is required, 1.6x. This means a volume increase of 1.6^3 = 4.
I agree. So the challenge is focused on disproving subduction. I haven't really looked deeply into subduction beyond grade 8 geography and a few geo docs, but it seems in comparison to the expanding earth theory, there has to be considerable substantive evidence for subduction, and yet it appears from some early digging, that there is alot of disagreement on that subject. If earth is sliding into itself under continents, it 'seems' the junction of that intersection would be obvious and prevalent all around the land masses. Is it?

BipedalJoe
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2018 1:17 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by BipedalJoe » Wed Aug 05, 2020 7:22 pm

Open Mind wrote: Tue Aug 04, 2020 12:16 am I agree. So the challenge is focused on disproving subduction. I haven't really looked deeply into subduction beyond grade 8 geography and a few geo docs, but it seems in comparison to the expanding earth theory, there has to be considerable substantive evidence for subduction, and yet it appears from some early digging, that there is alot of disagreement on that subject. If earth is sliding into itself under continents, it 'seems' the junction of that intersection would be obvious and prevalent all around the land masses. Is it?
I think "falsification" is a form of newspeak or double-speak. A theory does not prove itself by falsifying other theories, but by proving itself. To force people into re-sentiment, to constantly have to fight and falsify some nonsense, is just a form of dominance strategy that causes slave mentality and kills all passion, it only favours the status quo nonsense theory. The continents have obviously drifted apart, that people cannot agree on that, people aren't primarily looking to agree on scientific theory, but on more primitive things since we are primates. Nation-states are compartmentalized cult-like farms, of course some local focus is selected for that prevents people from seeing the whole.

Open Mind
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:47 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Open Mind » Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:19 am

BipedalJoe wrote: Wed Aug 05, 2020 7:22 pm
I think "falsification" is a form of newspeak or double-speak. A theory does not prove itself by falsifying other theories, but by proving itself. To force people into re-sentiment, to constantly have to fight and falsify some nonsense, is just a form of dominance strategy that causes slave mentality and kills all passion, it only favours the status quo nonsense theory. The continents have obviously drifted apart, that people cannot agree on that, people aren't primarily looking to agree on scientific theory, but on more primitive things since we are primates. Nation-states are compartmentalized cult-like farms, of course some local focus is selected for that prevents people from seeing the whole.
Fundamentally your correct about falsification, but it's moot. What if you stepped into a time machine and went back to the time when people thought the world was flat. And you knew the world was round. If what you're saying is correct, then proving the world was round would be all that is necessary, but in actual fact, you'd be burned at the stake as a witch. If you pull the rug out from under humanities sense of confidence in its comprehension of the world around it, and leave it to face a vacuum of understanding, everyone goes nuts. So yes, you do need a fundamental provable alternative theory in your back pocket. But in this world, where people cling to old idea's by their fingernails for fear of losing that intoxicating illusion of confident comprehension in all things, you can't win anyone over simply just on the merits of the quality of your alternative proof. You have to pull people away from their old way of thinking like pulling a toy out of the hand of your 2 year old. And that toy is subduction.

BipedalJoe
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2018 1:17 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by BipedalJoe » Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:39 am

Open Mind wrote: Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:19 am Fundamentally your correct about falsification, but it's moot. What if you stepped into a time machine and went back to the time when people thought the world was flat. And you knew the world was round. If what you're saying is correct, then proving the world was round would be all that is necessary, but in actual fact, you'd be burned at the stake as a witch. If you pull the rug out from under humanities sense of confidence in its comprehension of the world around it, and leave it to face a vacuum of understanding, everyone goes nuts. So yes, you do need a fundamental provable alternative theory in your back pocket. But in this world, where people cling to old idea's by their fingernails for fear of losing that intoxicating illusion of confident comprehension in all things, you can't win anyone over simply just on the merits of the quality of your alternative proof. You have to pull people away from their old way of thinking like pulling a toy out of the hand of your 2 year old. And that toy is subduction.
That's why I put most of my effort into changing the social coordination rules. To raise everyone a bit to see a little more. I finished a complete implementation of a new global population registry yesterday (source code). Probably the same type of things that ended the middle ages.

On a side note, based on the radial expansion, and volume increase of 4x just to fit oceanic basins, I'm open to that the Earth is hollow because that means new mass would not have had to be created..

Open Mind
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:47 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Open Mind » Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:49 pm

BipedalJoe wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:39 am
On a side note, based on the radial expansion, and volume increase of 4x just to fit oceanic basins, I'm open to that the Earth is hollow because that means new mass would not have had to be created..
Hollow earth is a necessary conclusion without any explanation for where the mass comes from. But the Safire Project is currently breaking news about transmutation of elements on the surface of their electric sun model experiment Anode. It is real and repeatable and has huge implications on this issue, but as with all things science and paradigm shifting, its literally just happened in the past couple years, and for this result and its effect on this discussion to take a foothold will take more time.

That two year old has quite a firm grip..


BipedalJoe
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2018 1:17 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by BipedalJoe » Sat Aug 08, 2020 8:40 pm

spark wrote: Sat Aug 08, 2020 6:58 am Hollow Planet Seismology Vs Solid Earth Seismology
That seismology model is still based on prejudice of solid Earth and refraction. Look at my model, a reverberation model, it perfectly explains shadow zones from energy loss with distance. https://i.imgur.com/RDupfFD.png
Open Mind wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:49 pm Hollow earth is a necessary conclusion without any explanation for where the mass comes from.
I'm open to the hollow model since it seems like it could just as well be hollow as solid. The radial expansion is beyond doubt though.

User avatar
spark
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:36 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by spark » Mon Aug 10, 2020 5:40 am

Hollow Planets: A Feasibility Study of Possible Hollow Worlds - Could the Planets Mercury, Venus and Earth Possibly be Hollow?
https://www.amazon.com/Hollow-Planets-F ... B071ZP68YS

Is Earth Really a Solid?: The Evidence Reexamined
https://www.amazon.com/Earth-Really-Sol ... 691060720/

Have the Poles Really Been Discovered
https://www.auricmedia.net/wp-content/u ... ardner.pdf

The Hidden History of Earth Expansion: Told by researchers creating a Modern Theory of the Earth
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/09522 ... bl_vppi_i1

Aardwolf
Posts: 1457
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Aardwolf » Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:10 am

Don't need a hollow Earth or creation of mass. We receive more than enough mass from the Sun for the required expansion. Sometimes in bursts;

https://astronomy.com/news/2020/07/powe ... arthquakes

Poppa Tom
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 10:05 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Poppa Tom » Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:03 am

:lol:
allynh wrote: Thu Feb 06, 2020 10:42 pm I was telling my friend about Growing Earth Theory again. He refuses to watch any of the videos I send him, and when I repeat what the video says he keeps saying, "What do you mean?"

I sent him the links again and found a video using an orange peel to demonstrate. This is similar to my example on the old forum with grapefruit/orange/tangerine continents with deep cantaloupe oceans.

Growing Earth Topology (Expanding Earth Theory)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZZVoPL3acw

I like his example, but mine is more fruitful. GET it, because I use more than just an orange peel. HA!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest