Talk:Expanding Earth

2018 Self-published volume

I stumbled into another EE-er on Twitter recently who seems to be trying to talk up a self-published book. He's been writing "papers" (no evidence of any peer review, but well presented - spell-checked even!!) on Researchgate, and no doubt is citing them wherever possible. Standard techniques that I remember from EE-ers on USENET back in the 1990s.

The pile I've just been wading though is a re-hash (with, thankfully, references) of the "sauropod size" argument given above. The slightly useful content is that there is a compendium of size models for Giraffatitan (Brachisaurus, the 1909-1912 specimen from Tanzania / Tanganyika Colony at the time), with some degree of referencing. He uses these to get various volume estimates for the specimen. Without giving a methodology, he then picks a number from the air for the volume, completely discarding the acknowledged fact that there is a large variation in those volume estimates. That number divided by a weight estimate taken from limb-bone circumference estimates (no consideration for the bone shape, or proportion of cortical vs marrow bone), then gives the number which was desired. Including the variation in volume estimates produces a range which includes modern gravity, demolishing the author's contention.

Typical fare from an EE-er.

I suppose I'd better give a link to the Researchgate "paper", and post these criticisms there.

Paper https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329586654_A_palaeogravity_calculation_based_on_weight_and_mass_estimates_of_Giraffatitan_Brachiosaurus_brancai/stats

AKarley (talk) 14:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

New Study

Atmospheric acceleration and Earth-expansion deceleration of the Earth rotation Sciencia58 (talk) 19:25, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

[1] Sciencia58 (talk) 19:39, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

[2] Sciencia58 (talk) 20:01, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

As with most brand new studies, it's best to wait and see whether this becomes accepted and/or backed up by other studies before mentioning it in this article. Mikenorton (talk) 22:15, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Historical

[3] Sciencia58 (talk) 21:54, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Missing Historical Advancements in the Growth and Expansion of Planets

The History is missing advancements and needed additions by several people working after Carey. People that have worked on various aspects are: Neal Adams,( Videos ), James Maxlow,( books, and videos ), Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth, ( Stephen Hurrell ), Nuriet (spelling), Nut Trees, and the Expanding Earth, and unfortunately all of the lost information when Yahoo shut down their Yahoo groups. Several hundred conversations were lost.

As for myself, I have been working over 21 Years on Growth and Expansion of the Earth, and have recently added growth and expansion of planets. As a result, the Earth is in the beginnings of a transition phase between slower growing smaller rocky planets, and the faster growing, and out-gassing larger gas giants. This transition occurred this side of 252.17 million year ago extinction event. About 200 million years ago, the rate of global growth and expansion resulted in pronounced rifting of the planets crust, and the beginning of the formation of our current ocean basins. Around 90 million years ago, the rate of new water added to the surface was exceeded by the increase in the rate of formation of the new ocean surface area. This side of 90 Ma, the Oceans have generally gotten shallower, and the water has poured off the continents to fill the enlarging ocean basins. At the same time growth has increased the mass of the Earth, the density, and the surface gravity. As a result, maximum allowable insect, and animals sizes have decreased, and the Atmosphere has become thinner, but gravity has compresses the atmosphere keeping Earth in a habitable range of temperatures while the surface pressure has remained similar over vast time periods. However, a thinner atmosphere means it now freezes at the poles, and at high altitudes, which did not happen back past 42 million years ago, when the south pole first formed ice. This side of 37 million years, the south pole has always had ice. After Siberia added 2 to 4 miles of lava flows to its surface, the top still had a temperate climate where trees and plants grew all year long. This was due to the taller atmosphere where the pressure was half at more the 36,000 feet, not at 18,000 feet as it is today. 98.245.216.62 (talk) 23:59, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia article content is based on published reliable sources, and not on the fringe opinions of Yahoo groups and YouTubers. And this talk page is not a forum. If you want to propose any changes to the article, you will need to be specific, and cite sources meeting WP:RS requirements. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:30, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

@AndyTheGrump: Because Name and shame, i think that it would be usefull to name other (than Samuel Carey) proponents of Expanding Earth, such

• contributors of the 1981 conference https://eprints.utas.edu.au/11559/
• contributors of this 1994 book https://books.google.com/books?id=0DgbAQAAIAAJ
• contributors of the 2011 conference https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/10268805

By the way, have you read the 2014 article, 2018 poster, 2019 article, by Paolo Sudiro about Expanding Earth? Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 12:10, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

'Name and shame' is a poor rationale for including anything in an article. Particularly when based around primary sources. Wikipedia isn't a platform for 'shaming' obscure individuals for their pseudoscientific beliefs. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:22, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, you are welcome. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 12:40, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

2023-01

• Samuel Carey, 1976: «Two corner-cube reflectors have been placed on the moon. Three optical observatories at Canberra, Honululu, and Tokyo have telescopes capable of receiving reflected laser light from a lunar corner-cube [...] According to the "plate tectonics" hypotheses these three observatories are approaching each other at a rate of several centimetres per year. According to the expanding earth model they are separating at a few centimetres per year. Remeasurement after a few years would establish the truth.»
• Samuel Carey, 1994: «No new crust has been inserted between Hawaii and Japan since the Jurassic, so this arc would appear to be shrinking at 6 cm per year, which is about what NASA finds. But they interpret it as subduction of crust, whereas I interpret it as caused by insertion of new crust between Hawaii and Peru and elsewhere within the Hawaii-Japan great circle.»

The Expanding Earth thesis is garbage and always has been. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 22:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

This is flawed as even rulers would have to expand for this idea to work. So it is not testable. 50.35.113.183 (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 10:06, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Two methods of estimating the Surface Gravity of the Earth in The Past Using Elephants, Dinosaurs, and Giraffes

Method One is Archived, it uses the Volume Ratios of Sauropods compared to the Volumes Male African Elephants. Gravity of Sauropods is approximately N Male African Elephant Volumes raised to the ( 2/3 Power ) divided by N Male African Elephant Volumes. This example uses 14.7 Male African Elephant Volumes. So 14.7 ^ (2/3 ) Power is = 6.000 833 218, and dividing it by 14.7 = 0.408 219 946 of the current surface gravity. This calculation is only true is the Sauropod skeleton you collected it very near the largest possible animal volume for the time period being considered. If you find a bigger sauropod at a specific time period, then the bigger sauropod will give a better estimate of the surface gravity at that time period. What you are really comparing is the Surface areas of sauropods divided by the Volumes of Sauropods. The most important surface areas are related to the cross-section areas of the support posts ( feet, legs, knees, bones, muscles, hips vertebra, etc., and the surface area of the bottom of the feet ). To compare, you need a large elephant, but not the very largest elephant ever made which is around 6.0 cubic meters. I use 5.85 cubic meter, big, but not too big to be the very largest. So 14.7 X 5.85 = about 86 cubic meters, and for weight use 0.408 22 X 86 X 0.97 X 2200 lbs / m^3 = about 74, 920 lbs, round to 75,000 lbs. Not the heaviest which is around 80,000 lbs, but around 93.75 % of the heaviest which occurred at an earlier geologic time period. The 0.97 comes from the videos of swimming elephants. the 2200 comes from 2204.6 lbs per cubic meter. This gives you one of the methods.

The second method uses Neck length ratios between Sauropods and Giraffes . This same sauropod has a neck length of around 15.0 meters, while a Giraffe has a neck length of around 2.5 meters . Taking the ratio of the shorter divided by the longer gives 2.5 . 15.0 = 0.166 666 666. Then you take the square root of the linear ratio to get SQRT ( 0.166 666 666 ) = 0.408 248 29 gravity. Notice that gravity is proportional to the square root of the neck length ratio which gives a gravity similar to the Male African Elephant Volume Ratio.

That is 0.408 219 946 is similar to 0.408 248 290 gravity. Both examples relate features of really big sauropods to feature in current animals that are near their structural limitations base on gravity ( past, OR present ).

The average is around 0.408 234 118, or rounded to around 0.408 2 Gravity = 4.003 m/ sec ^ 2 back past 150 million years ago. ( more or less ).

Now here is the bonus round. The Ultimate Bearing capacity of the soft soils is around 5,040 lbs per square foot of one of the sauropods feet. Largest one, front or rear. To Support 75,000 lbs on soil that fails at 5,040 lbs per square foot of foot bottom surface area, you need around 75,000 / 5,040 = 14.881 square foot of foot bottom surface area. So Pi / 4 X d^2 = 14.881 , and so d > = 4.3528 feet across = 52.234 inches across on a diagonal. The largest ever found are around 54 inches across. Check: 80,000 / 5,040 = 15.873 square feet , and Pi / 4 X d^2 = 15.873 , so d = 4.49557 feet across = 53.947 inches. Checking ( 52.234 / 53.947 ) ^ 2 = 0.9375

That is the weight of the animal is confirmed at 93.75 % of the maximum by different methods.

Michael W. Clark, Golden Colorado, USA 98.245.219.152 (talk) 00:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)