Lloyd wrote: * I forgot about an earlier thread I posted about some granite mountains in Scotland that the ancients saw get struck by megalightning apparently: http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&~. * Since the surrounding mountains are gabbro, about the same as basalt, it seems that the lightning transmuted the gabbro into granite in a way like I described above.
Firstly, assuming that the earth was formed in a Z pinch, and is a concretion or geode, but is not possibly hollow seems a problem. Interestingly the moon rang for 3 weeks (I might have that time wrong) after the lander took off from the surface. Indicating that it might be hollow. Perhaps significantly hollow.
The earth seems much different, definitely thicker, but obviously, with a magnetic field is needs something to generate it. It requires power input, and perhaps a plasma vortex in the center.
This concretion seems to be similar to how I envision the earth:
You can see the expansion cracks and the way the inner material pushed away the outer 'crust', but it is still divided into multiple cells which expanded over time. This gives you the "Ring of Fire" and the hot spot problems, but subduction is not really as factor. Mountains would be akin to crust buckling and gaseous outpourings in the area due to its weakened state. Baha California is being pulled, much like Vancouver Island, away from the coast as the expansion is occurring significantly in the area all along the coast from Alaska to Peru. You can tell by the age of the ocean floor in that area.(20 mya or less. Very young, Accurately how young is debatable (especially on this forum where we all agree that decay rates can vary significantly due to electrical environment))
It's also possible to consider that the attraction of megalightning to these areas would occur because of the positively charged magma would be closer to the surface. So mountain formation would be (in this theory) areas where the crust is weakened or thinner, not just higher up. This is far from conclusive, but something to ponder.
This does not exclude plasma discharge machining or of course island creation. Although the Aleutian Islands do follow along a sliding expansion ridge.
Systems
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
What an impressive concretion!!
This concretion seems to be similar to how I envision the earth:
The similarities between that concretion and earth's crust are paradigm-cracking: The center ridge seems to correspond to the mid-atlantic ridge with striations perpendicular to the ridge. The shapes of the individual plates appear to fit together, just like earth's continents.
Perhaps if we can figure out how to make similar concretions, we can figure out how the earths plates were formed.
Lloyd
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
* What's wrong with my theory of how the tectonic plates formed? * And, by the way, I agree that it seems to be possible for planetoids, like concretions, geodes etc, to be hollow at the very center, but I don't think it's necessarily so, since it seems that such objects are often not hollow. Is iron or nickel etc ever found in the centers of such objects? I don't know if the theory of Earth's iron core is a certainty. Is it based on anything besides the need to explain Earth's magnetic field? Seismic waves are said not to penetrate the Earth's core, supposedly because it's solid iron, but it could also be, I think, because of being hollow. Or it could be solid quartz or maybe solid diamond, as I heard someone speculate.
webolife
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
The primary (P) waves do penetrate the core... but the secondary seismic waves do not penetrate. This is used as evidence the outer core of the earth is liquid, and seems to obviate against a hollow core... Lloyd, I still do not understand how you can explain the continental separation in terms of an expanding earth, given the massive widespread fossil evidence for marine life prior to the continental split? If the "usual" expanding earth scenario is invoked, where is all the water for that life prior to the split?
Lloyd
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
* Webolife, how sure are you that P waves do transmit through the solid core? I thought I had read otherwise, but I could easily be wrong about that. Can you refer to any authoritative source to back that up? * Lately I have not advocated planetary expansion, because shock dynamics seems more plausible. However, I modify it, saying there was much less water on Earth previously. There were shallow seas, but no great or deep oceans. * Have you heard of fossils being found in rock layers on the ocean floors? I don't think there's much sedimentary rock there, so I doubt if fossils will be found there. Maybe in 20 or 30 years someone will look for fossils there. I mean on the deep ocean floors, about 2 to 3 miles or more deep.
allynh
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
Lloyd, Web, check out the following website for the best discussion I've seen about seismic data and the core.:
On the issue of fossils and the ocean floor. The oceans are less the 70m years old. All of the fossils have been found on continents where the ancient shallow seas were.
webolife
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
Allynh, thank you for the excellent link to Jan Lamprecht's feasibility article. Very well thought out, nice graphical representations, understandable.
Lloyd, Lamprecht's article should answer your question about seismic evidences for the core, as he compares the standard model with his novel hollow earth sandwich model. I agree with your shallow ocean view of earth [pre]history, and I probably agree with at least several aspects of your conversion to shock dynamics, which augments my catastrophic view that I've held and taught for nearly 35 years now. I don't look for fossils on the deep ocean floor, just near continental boundaries, and mostly, as allynh also indicated, on the continents themselves which were [once] deluged and their inhabitants buried. One of the things that is usually lacking from continental drift illustrations is the fact that the continents were largely submerged during much of the period of drift.
Reaction is normally initiated from the sample surface with a heat flux (heated wire, electric spark, laser beam, etc.). After initiation, reaction proceeds in the mode of self-propagation. The duration of heating is markedly shorter than the time of reaction (combustion).
thinking about the formation of rocks and rock strata in time frame that does not require millions of years
some really cool implications involving high temps electricity and rock/planetary formation
webolife wrote: One of the things that is usually lacking from continental drift illustrations is the fact that the continents were largely submerged during much of the period of drift.
Yes, at ten and at six thousand years ago the Sahara was twice turned into an inland shallow sea, then dried out as the land warped and changed.
What's really fun, is the latest news on PBS Newshour and National Geographic about the Green Sahara. The finding shows that GET is valid and the Earth grew between ten thousand and six thousand years ago, exactly when the Thunderbolts event occurred.
The fact that the first group ten thousand years ago was a foot taller than the six thousand year old people shows that the Earth grew, that the gravity increased by anywhere from ten to fifteen percent in time when the Thunderbolts event occurred.
webolife
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
Great article, Allynh. I mentioned the green Sahara in a catastrophic earth history class I taught last summer. However, skeletal height is not proof by any means, even slim evidence, of a change in gravity... I have members of my own family of origin who varied greatly in height, from 4'11", my father's mother, to 6'6", my mother's brother... no big gravity anomaly occurred in the past century... and my 5 grown children range in height from 5'9" to 6"5". Me, I'm just an average gravity guy of 6'0". In addition, the carbon dating method used to date those burials is prone to assumptions about how rapidly the climate changed, or how slowly as in the assumptions of the given dates. During the great catastrophe, the actual % of C-14 in the atmosphere need only change by a few parts per 10,000,000 to yield very different decay curves for the dating process. The old dates, and the difference between them, is based on the uniformitarian assumption of a constant rate of C-14 turn-around in the atmosphere. The equilibrium standard for C-14/C-12 is about 1/1,000,000 So, for example, if there had been an increase of just 5 parts per 10 million over say a period of a year between the burials, the ages might have been calculated as virtually identical. Other factors regarding the relative depths of burial, etc. are also open to wide speculation.
allynh
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
I'm sure that you are right, but my interpretation is far more fun.
When I see that the average height of the population dropped that much, my GET alarm rings.
I bought the BBC series Walking with Dinosaurs/Monsters, etc..., and had great fun inserting GET commentary as I watched the DVDs. The Earth smaller than the Moon, with millipedes the length of busses, dragonflies with four foot wingspans; it doesn't "GET" better than that. When they got near the present day with the Mammoths and they mentioned them dying off 10k years ago, I got to yell, "Saturn Event!"
Fun stuff.
redeye
Re: LK EU Geology Theory
Great link Allynh, I always felt like a bit of a flat Earther for believing that planets could be hollow (it is a bit Jules Verney). It's nice to read a paper that takes this proposition seriously.
I find it interesting that the layers which make up the structure of the Earth seem to be reflected in the layers which make up the atmosphere.
Neither of the images I've used are to scale, but the proportions are roughly similar.
Cheers!
Jaythree
Establishment physicists recognize plasma effects
At an IEEE conference back in 2002 some Israeli engineers presented a paper on an experiment (yes, an experiment!!) in which microwave heating of basalt stone produced "flying" plasmoid disks that traveled from the basalt to the magnetron antenna. See http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_ ... er=1030655 for an abstract. This seems to be significant insofar as recent historical reports of "ball lightning" might be scientifically verified, while more ancient transcripts involving the effects of intensified aurora are provided a proven basis. The authors seem to be likely candidates for Thunderbolts Outreach. Has anyone seen anything else on plasmoids from basalt or igneous rock?
JJ78
Could the earth be warming up from the inside?
Hello everyone!
I was just wondering about the following: when I was reading in Dwardu Cardona's book "Primordial Star" about how Coal Seams would come about, I started thinking that perhaps the earth heated up the flora without the actual surface materials (like stones, rocks, ...) would melt. Because of the imense heat the flora would carbonize. This heat could come from the inside... well... since the earth is hot inside. It could increase in temperature for the same reasons as the sun's intensity could flare up. Perhaps something similar is happening now with the Global Warming. Of course the heat is (luckily) not increasing as much as it would if flora were to carbonize, but still the global warming effect could come from the inside. This would mean that it is not the sun that is responsible for the global warming (due to the Milankovic cycles), but it is an out side effect on the solar system that makes the planets and the sun become hotter from the inside... Does this somehow make sense?
