Observational evidence that the earth is undergoing an expansion

On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 13:24:08 -0500, Sam Wormley
wrote:

On 7/1/11 3:19 AM, Surfer wrote:
There is observational evidence that the earth is undergoing an
expansion, with the strongest evidence being that the continents fit
together most accurately only on a sphere half the present radius of
the earth.


Is this confirmed by earth satellite orbital tracking?


Not as far as I can tell. The following suggests that the effects of
the calculated rate of expansion are too small to distinguish, with
current satellites, from the effects of other phenomena.

Are artificial satellites orbits influenced by an expanding Earth?
Giancarlo Scalera
ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 49, N. 2/3, April/June 2006
http://www.earth-prints.org/bitstream/2122/1066/6/20 Scalera.pdf

On 7/2/11 10:26 AM, Surfer wrote:
On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 13:24:08 -0500, Sam
wrote:

On 7/1/11 3:19 AM, Surfer wrote:
There is observational evidence that the earth is undergoing an
expansion, with the strongest evidence being that the continents fit
together most accurately only on a sphere half the present radius of
the earth.


Is this confirmed by earth satellite orbital tracking?


Not as far as I can tell. The following suggests that the effects of
the calculated rate of expansion are too small to distinguish, with
current satellites, from the effects of other phenomena.

Are artificial satellites orbits influenced by an expanding Earth?
Giancarlo Scalera
ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 49, N. 2/3, April/June 2006
http://www.earth-prints.org/bitstream/2122/1066/6/20 Scalera.pdf




Then we can conclude that there is *no measurable change* in the
mass of the earth.

Surfer wrote in news:8edu07ldi4klmnki18scfmdpfoaeusc35v@
4ax.com:

On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 13:24:08 -0500, Sam Wormley
wrote:

On 7/1/11 3:19 AM, Surfer wrote:
There is observational evidence that the earth is undergoing an
expansion, with the strongest evidence being that the continents fit
together most accurately only on a sphere half the present radius of
the earth.


Is this confirmed by earth satellite orbital tracking?


Not as far as I can tell. The following suggests that the effects of
the calculated rate of expansion are too small to distinguish, with
current satellites, from the effects of other phenomena.

Are artificial satellites orbits influenced by an expanding Earth?
Giancarlo Scalera
ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 49, N. 2/3, April/June 2006
http://www.earth-prints.org/bitstream/2122/1066/6/20 Scalera.pdf





Stop reading crank litearture.

Surfer wrote in news:cqau07teiticupokldrht4mvaod997foip@
4ax.com:

In dynamical 3-space theory, space is a 3-dimensional entity that
expands and flows. In this theory, the expansion of the universe is
caused by the expansion of space

And what causes the expansion of space?


and gravity is caused by the acceleration of space into matter.

Please exlpain what is meant by "acceleration of space INTO matter."


So the theory can account for the expansion of the universe without
needing to assume the existence of dark energy.

"Dark Energy" and "Dark Matter" are not 'assumptions'. They are
inferred from observational evidence. The descriptive "Dark" simply
means that we have yet to observe the energy or matter, as opposed
to "Light" energies and matters that can currently be observed.
It is nothing more than a label for something we have yet to detect
directly.


However, the acceleration of space into planets

Again, explain how space accelerates INTO something? What do you mean
by "into"?


It is hypothezised

So it's just a mere hypothesis then? Sounds like you and others have
some work to do, namely testing your hypothesis by experiment and
collecting observational evidence.

BTW, it sounds like this hypothesis is subjecting itself to the fallacy
that, as Michael Shermer words it, "scientific words do not make a
science."

I prefer to call it "word salad."

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

On Jul 1, 12:06*pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:

BUT the earthquake in Japan shoved that plate UNDER the Atlantic one,
opposite to an expansion.

Earthquakes are a signature of the rotating fluid interior ,
differential rotation to be precise, hence earthquakes do not cause
part of the fractured crust to be shoved under another,earthquakes are
an effect of an evolving process which does shove the fractured crust
across the less than spherical Earth and there is a huge difference.

If investigators wish to continue to insult themselves by promoting a
stationary Earth mechanism based on thermal convection while ignoring
that all rotating celestial objects with exposed fluid exteriors
display differential rotation then so be it,it means they must find
clear reasons for exempting the Earth's interior from the same
rotational trait whereas they would be more productive by just
assuming a differential rotation and getting on with looking for clues
on the surface crust.

The Earth has a 26 mile spherical deviation between equatorial and
polar diameters and the ease of explaining this deviation by way of an
uneven rotational gradient between equatorial and polar latitudes
matches differential rotation as the fluid rotates in shear bands
hence rotational speeds are uneven and nothing like the smooth
reduction in speed of the surface crust from 1037.5 miles per hour at
the equator diminishing to 0 at the polar latitudes.

Plate tectonics brought evolutionary geology into close contact with
planetary dynamics,after all,the motion of the fractured surface
crust relies on encompassing planetary dynamics and especially
intrinsic rotation of the interior fluid.The mechanism which links the
common features of planetary shape and crustal evolution/motion have
been on the table for over 6 years and it is about time it received
the attention it deserves.

On Jul 2, 8:14*pm, Skywise wrote:

Brian
--http://www.skywise711.com- Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Here we have another one of these things where the effects is assigned
a wrong cause as it settles on something minor rather than the process
causing the tides to vary in daily,menstrual and annual terms -

"Earth Tides Can Trigger Shallow Thrust Fault Earthquakes - Elizabeth
S. Cochran, John E. Vidale, Sachiko Tanaka We show a correlation
between the occurrence of shallow, thrust earthquakes and the
occurrence of the strongest tides"

http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/index.html

I abandoned an approach years ago that crustal evolution is influenced
by the difference between constant daily rotation and variations in
orbital speed,not so much abandoned but rather set it aside for the
more productive differential rotation mechanism behind crustal motion.

If there is a correlation between shallow earthquakes and cyclical
events,it would arise from or originate from planetary dynamics as
the main inputs for tidal fluctuations are found in the daily and
orbital cycles with secondary inputs arising from the orbital position
of the moon.Drab empiricists would not stand a chance handling the
topic at that level even though they once had a fairly decent grip on
the correlations between terrestrial effects and astronomical causes -

http://books.google.com/books?id=RyB...page&q&f=false

That letter was written in 1666 or about two decades before Isaac
shortcircuited the genuine approach empiricists up to then were taking
but that is another story.

On 7/3/11 12:05 PM, oriel36 wrote:
Here we have another one of these things where the effects is assigned
a wrong cause as it settles on something minor rather than the process
causing the tides to vary in daily, menstrual and annual terms -

menstrual?

On Jul 3, 7:44*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 7/3/11 12:05 PM, oriel36 wrote:

Here we have another one of these things where the effects is assigned
a wrong cause as it settles on something minor rather than the process
causing the tides to vary in daily, menstrual and annual terms -

* *menstrual?

Read the page you dummy -

http://books.google.com/books?id=RyB...page&q&f=false

Ah,a bunch of empiricists who live off definitions but no real feel
for any topic.Its fine that all these doctorates live off scraps but
there was once a time when men could actually discuss effects and
their causes sensibly having a decent standard of intellect,today I
couldn't get a reader to affirm the Earth turns once in 24 hours or at
an equatorial speed of 1037.5 miles per hour.Some chance of discussing
differential rotation in the fluid interior and its effects on
planetary shape and crustal evolution when not even a basic fact of
geography and geometry survives.

Is there any way you lot can be more uninspiring ? because I can't see
it.

Your brain suffers from differential rotation of thought.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

On Jul 3, 8:09*pm, Skywise wrote:
Belba Grubb wrote :









On Jul 2, 2:14*pm, Skywise wrote:

(excellent counterpoints)

BTW, it sounds like this hypothesis is subjecting itself to the fallacy
that, as Michael Shermer words it, "scientific words do not make a
science."

I prefer to call it "word salad."

I thought that was the realm of *psychiatry and neurology, but per Dr..
Wikipedia, it's a valid description. *There's even an album!!! Sorry.

Anyway, people doing real science sometimes seem to lose the ability
to speak in English when they're excited: *meteorologists start
talking in hodographs and BRN and Craven numbers and other arcane
things sometimes,

It's not that arcane words or intangible concepts are being used. It's
that they are using the words and temrs incorrectly. In science, words
and terms have very distinct and precise meanings. Same thing with
lawyers and their 'legalese'.

Brian
--http://www.skywise711.com- Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

From the outside you look like overgrown pupils who still look for
approval from teachers, 'peer review' or whatever you call it.

Genuine men will feel the loss of the shuttle program this week,no
matter how well it is projected,the fact that they never advanced and
built on the system is a testament to the unimaginative people who
think unobservable empirical novelties existing only in the
imagination can replace genuine human adventure.