Prev: cleaning copper from steel
Next: A Convenient Falsehood: Global Warming Is a Hoax*
From: Tom McDonald on 24 May 2010 08:52
On May 24, 6:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 23, 4:10 pm, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 23 May 2010 11:01:36 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >On May 23, 3:06 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 15:58:01 -0700 (PDT), hafeez
>
> > >> <hafeezb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >On May 23, 3:17 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > >> >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 07:13:02 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >On May 22, 4:23 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > >> >> >> On Fri, 21 May 2010 21:29:15 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > >> >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >On May 20, 4:00 am, Jean-Paul Turcaud <montj...(a)sfr.fr> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> AT THIS POINT IN PRESSURE,  ANY CRYSTAL IS OF COURSE REDUCED TO A
> > >> >> >> >> SOLUTION !
>
> > >> >> >> >> Elementary Dr Watson.
>
> > >> >> >> >> jpturcaud
> > >> >> >> >> Australia Mining Pioneer
> > >> >> >> >> Founder of the True Geology
>
> > >> >> >> >Zero gravity, so what pressure are you talking about?
>
> > >> >> >> > Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
> > >> >> >> >http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
>
> > >> >> >> But not a spherical solid.
>
> > >> >> >> > Why not a crystal lined geode core?
>
> > >> >> >> > ~ BG
>
> > >> >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > >> >> >Could be other than solid.
> > >> >> >Could be a gaseous inner core.
> > >> >> >At center could conceivably be a vacuum.
>
> > >> >> >The mantel of perhaps extensively thorium and heavier elements might
> > >> >> >be relatively solid, forming a thick and hot shell.  Within that inner
> > >> >> >shell could be a solid carbonado core, although higher temperatures
> > >> >> >should make whatever liquid or even gaseous.
>
> > >> >> >For example, our physically dark moon should be at least 0.1% hollow,
> > >> >> >although conceivably it's 1%<10% hollow below that extremely thick and
> > >> >> >fused basalt crust that's so heavy element saturated.
>
> > >> >> >Bottom line, we do not have sufficient objective information about the
> > >> >> >interior of Earth to subjectively guess at whatever's inside of other
> > >> >> >planets or moons.  It seems drilling deep holes into the lithosphere
> > >> >> >of our planet is at best problematic.
>
> > >> >> There is one thing we do know about the core: it conducts sound.
>
> > >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > >> >When sound is conducted by the core of the earth, then the Seismic
> > >> >waves penetrating in the core indicates that a solid Iron Nickel core
> > >> >is there from 5121-6371 Kms , surrounded by a liquid Iron Nickel
> > >> >core.. This si what Seismology tells us.
>
> > >> Precisely, which is why it cannot be hollow.
>
> > >> Eric Stevens
>
> > >At zero gravity, or perhaps even reverse gravity to us surface
> > >dwellers;  where's the pressure coming from?
>
> > You can only get zero gravity if the earth is a hollow thin shell. Two
> > of us (just now) have explained to the evidence that the earth is
> > solid. At this point your theory falls down (or maybe up, if you can
> > make your reverse gravity work).
>
> > >Are you suggesting that Earth is shrinking? (because that's what I've
> > >been saying all along)
>
> > >An iron shelled sphere, of say having a meter thick shell and 100
> > >meters radii, plus otherwise filled/displaced with a volume of 90%
> > >water and 10% helium, as situated within the zero delta-V of our Earth-
> > >moon L1(Selene L1), is going to have how much added pressure at it's
> > >core?
>
> > >Where is that helium eventually going to end up?
>
> > >Do the same thing except replacing that water with something that's
> > >much heavier than water and semi-solid (always pliable).
>
> > Why waste your time trying to analyse and argue about that kind of
> > model when the evidence is that it does not apply to the earth?
>
> > Eric Stevens
>
> The shell can be several thousand miles thick, and layers of it can be
> liquid or even compressed gas.  Inside of this thick shell is still
> zero or negative gravity.

1. What is negative gravity?
2. None of this applies to the Earth

> About my hollow sphere of iron example;  Why didn't you just say that
> you don't know?

Do you know how much helium can be dissolved in water?
Do you think your iron shell has thing one to do with the Earth?
If so, what?

From: infowolf1 on 24 May 2010 09:07
On May 22, 10:04 am, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use...(a)cox.net> wrote:
> On 5/22/2010 9:17 AM, infowolf1 wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 21, 9:29 pm, Brad Guth<bradg...(a)gmail.com>  wrote:
> >> On May 20, 4:00 am, Jean-Paul Turcaud<montj...(a)sfr.fr>  wrote:
>
> >>> AT THIS POINT IN PRESSURE,  ANY CRYSTAL IS OF COURSE REDUCED TO A
> >>> SOLUTION !
>
> >>> Elementary Dr Watson.
>
> >>> jpturcaud
> >>> Australia Mining Pioneer
> >>> Founder of the True Geology
>
> >> Zero gravity, so what pressure are you talking about?
>
> >>   Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
> >>  http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
>
> >>   Why not a crystal lined geode core?
>
> >>   ~ BG
>
> > Regardless of the validity or lack thereof of this application of
> > hyperphysics which is
> > at least partly pseudo science anyway,
>
> You really need to either check out the site or learn some physics,
> because what they showed was the classical analysis of the gravitational
> field inside a hollow spherical shell, familiar to sophomore or junior
> physics students the world over.
>
> > IT WOULD ONLY APPLY NEAR THE CORE, and the crystals etc. being
> > discussed are from almost at the surface. the rock pressures etc.
> > would
> > still be valid in the first few hundred miles down from the surface.
>
> It would apply inside any hollow symmetric shell, anywhere inside that
> shell.  However the Earth is not a hollow symmetric shell.

Is that junior and sophomore college or high school? math wasn't my
strong
point and I never finished 12th grade.

My point was, that if there is reduction to zero of gravity as you
approach
the core, it is still irrelevant to this true physics daydreamer's
position,
because we are talking about crystals and pressures near the surface.

If a dysfunctional mess like me, who clings to objectivity as a
stabilizer,
can see through this flaw in logic, why can't this "think for yourself
-
meaning think as I say" hollow earth nut case see through this enough
to stop posting before he starts?

Probably a prior commitment to the hollow earth. (I think an early
exercize in this nonsense was editorpha, something that seemed
to be from some psychic source, and hollow earth was part of nazi
mysticism. Mysticism in general is of doubtful value, with the
exception of the efforts to attain more precise consciousness of
Eastern Orthodox Christianity, not blurred out confusing self with
the universe type stuff from the New Age and so forth writers.
One thing I figured out long ago, is that there is a certain overlap
between what the eastern metaphysic and magick and so forth
considers to be illumination, and schizophrenia. My later
religious research tended to confirm it.)

Justina
From: Brad Guth on 24 May 2010 10:01
On May 24, 5:52 am, Tom McDonald <kilt...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 24, 6:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 23, 4:10 pm, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Sun, 23 May 2010 11:01:36 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >On May 23, 3:06 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 15:58:01 -0700 (PDT), hafeez
>
> > > >> <hafeezb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >On May 23, 3:17 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > >> >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 07:13:02 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >On May 22, 4:23 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> On Fri, 21 May 2010 21:29:15 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > >> >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >On May 20, 4:00 am, Jean-Paul Turcaud <montj...(a)sfr.fr> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> AT THIS POINT IN PRESSURE,  ANY CRYSTAL IS OF COURSE REDUCED TO A
> > > >> >> >> >> SOLUTION !
>
> > > >> >> >> >> Elementary Dr Watson.
>
> > > >> >> >> >> jpturcaud
> > > >> >> >> >> Australia Mining Pioneer
> > > >> >> >> >> Founder of the True Geology
>
> > > >> >> >> >Zero gravity, so what pressure are you talking about?
>
> > > >> >> >> > Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
> > > >> >> >> >http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
>
> > > >> >> >> But not a spherical solid.
>
> > > >> >> >> > Why not a crystal lined geode core?
>
> > > >> >> >> > ~ BG
>
> > > >> >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > >> >> >Could be other than solid.
> > > >> >> >Could be a gaseous inner core.
> > > >> >> >At center could conceivably be a vacuum.
>
> > > >> >> >The mantel of perhaps extensively thorium and heavier elements might
> > > >> >> >be relatively solid, forming a thick and hot shell.  Within that inner
> > > >> >> >shell could be a solid carbonado core, although higher temperatures
> > > >> >> >should make whatever liquid or even gaseous.
>
> > > >> >> >For example, our physically dark moon should be at least 0.1% hollow,
> > > >> >> >although conceivably it's 1%<10% hollow below that extremely thick and
> > > >> >> >fused basalt crust that's so heavy element saturated.
>
> > > >> >> >Bottom line, we do not have sufficient objective information about the
> > > >> >> >interior of Earth to subjectively guess at whatever's inside of other
> > > >> >> >planets or moons.  It seems drilling deep holes into the lithosphere
> > > >> >> >of our planet is at best problematic.
>
> > > >> >> There is one thing we do know about the core: it conducts sound..
>
> > > >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > >> >When sound is conducted by the core of the earth, then the Seismic
> > > >> >waves penetrating in the core indicates that a solid Iron Nickel core
> > > >> >is there from 5121-6371 Kms , surrounded by a liquid Iron Nickel
> > > >> >core.. This si what Seismology tells us.
>
> > > >> Precisely, which is why it cannot be hollow.
>
> > > >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > >At zero gravity, or perhaps even reverse gravity to us surface
> > > >dwellers;  where's the pressure coming from?
>
> > > You can only get zero gravity if the earth is a hollow thin shell. Two
> > > of us (just now) have explained to the evidence that the earth is
> > > solid. At this point your theory falls down (or maybe up, if you can
> > > make your reverse gravity work).
>
> > > >Are you suggesting that Earth is shrinking? (because that's what I've
> > > >been saying all along)
>
> > > >An iron shelled sphere, of say having a meter thick shell and 100
> > > >meters radii, plus otherwise filled/displaced with a volume of 90%
> > > >water and 10% helium, as situated within the zero delta-V of our Earth-
> > > >moon L1(Selene L1), is going to have how much added pressure at it's
> > > >core?
>
> > > >Where is that helium eventually going to end up?
>
> > > >Do the same thing except replacing that water with something that's
> > > >much heavier than water and semi-solid (always pliable).
>
> > > Why waste your time trying to analyse and argue about that kind of
> > > model when the evidence is that it does not apply to the earth?
>
> > > Eric Stevens
>
> > The shell can be several thousand miles thick, and layers of it can be
> > liquid or even compressed gas.  Inside of this thick shell is still
> > zero or negative gravity.
>
> 1. What is negative gravity?
> 2. None of this applies to the Earth
>
> > About my hollow sphere of iron example;  Why didn't you just say that
> > you don't know?
>
> Do you know how much helium can be dissolved in water?
> Do you think your iron shell has thing one to do with the Earth?
> If so, what?

Just because you don't get it, is no reason to perceive that others
are as equally dysfunctional.

Why are you speaking for Eric Stevens or others in this topic?

btw; helium doesn't bind with anything.

~ BG
From: Tom McDonald on 24 May 2010 10:33
On May 24, 9:01 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 24, 5:52 am, Tom McDonald <kilt...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 24, 6:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 23, 4:10 pm, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sun, 23 May 2010 11:01:36 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > > <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >On May 23, 3:06 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > > >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 15:58:01 -0700 (PDT), hafeez
>
> > > > >> <hafeezb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >On May 23, 3:17 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > > >> >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 07:13:02 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > > >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >On May 22, 4:23 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> On Fri, 21 May 2010 21:29:15 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > > >> >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >On May 20, 4:00 am, Jean-Paul Turcaud <montj...(a)sfr.fr> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> >> AT THIS POINT IN PRESSURE,  ANY CRYSTAL IS OF COURSE REDUCED TO A
> > > > >> >> >> >> SOLUTION !
>
> > > > >> >> >> >> Elementary Dr Watson.
>
> > > > >> >> >> >> jpturcaud
> > > > >> >> >> >> Australia Mining Pioneer
> > > > >> >> >> >> Founder of the True Geology
>
> > > > >> >> >> >Zero gravity, so what pressure are you talking about?
>
> > > > >> >> >> > Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
> > > > >> >> >> >http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
>
> > > > >> >> >> But not a spherical solid.
>
> > > > >> >> >> > Why not a crystal lined geode core?
>
> > > > >> >> >> > ~ BG
>
> > > > >> >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > > >> >> >Could be other than solid.
> > > > >> >> >Could be a gaseous inner core.
> > > > >> >> >At center could conceivably be a vacuum.
>
> > > > >> >> >The mantel of perhaps extensively thorium and heavier elements might
> > > > >> >> >be relatively solid, forming a thick and hot shell.  Within that inner
> > > > >> >> >shell could be a solid carbonado core, although higher temperatures
> > > > >> >> >should make whatever liquid or even gaseous.
>
> > > > >> >> >For example, our physically dark moon should be at least 0.1% hollow,
> > > > >> >> >although conceivably it's 1%<10% hollow below that extremely thick and
> > > > >> >> >fused basalt crust that's so heavy element saturated.
>
> > > > >> >> >Bottom line, we do not have sufficient objective information about the
> > > > >> >> >interior of Earth to subjectively guess at whatever's inside of other
> > > > >> >> >planets or moons.  It seems drilling deep holes into the lithosphere
> > > > >> >> >of our planet is at best problematic.
>
> > > > >> >> There is one thing we do know about the core: it conducts sound.
>
> > > > >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > > >> >When sound is conducted by the core of the earth, then the Seismic
> > > > >> >waves penetrating in the core indicates that a solid Iron Nickel core
> > > > >> >is there from 5121-6371 Kms , surrounded by a liquid Iron Nickel
> > > > >> >core.. This si what Seismology tells us.
>
> > > > >> Precisely, which is why it cannot be hollow.
>
> > > > >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > > >At zero gravity, or perhaps even reverse gravity to us surface
> > > > >dwellers;  where's the pressure coming from?
>
> > > > You can only get zero gravity if the earth is a hollow thin shell. Two
> > > > of us (just now) have explained to the evidence that the earth is
> > > > solid. At this point your theory falls down (or maybe up, if you can
> > > > make your reverse gravity work).
>
> > > > >Are you suggesting that Earth is shrinking? (because that's what I've
> > > > >been saying all along)
>
> > > > >An iron shelled sphere, of say having a meter thick shell and 100
> > > > >meters radii, plus otherwise filled/displaced with a volume of 90%
> > > > >water and 10% helium, as situated within the zero delta-V of our Earth-
> > > > >moon L1(Selene L1), is going to have how much added pressure at it's
> > > > >core?
>
> > > > >Where is that helium eventually going to end up?
>
> > > > >Do the same thing except replacing that water with something that's
> > > > >much heavier than water and semi-solid (always pliable).
>
> > > > Why waste your time trying to analyse and argue about that kind of
> > > > model when the evidence is that it does not apply to the earth?
>
> > > > Eric Stevens
>
> > > The shell can be several thousand miles thick, and layers of it can be
> > > liquid or even compressed gas.  Inside of this thick shell is still
> > > zero or negative gravity.
>
> > 1. What is negative gravity?
> > 2. None of this applies to the Earth
>
> > > About my hollow sphere of iron example;  Why didn't you just say that
> > > you don't know?
>
> > Do you know how much helium can be dissolved in water?
> > Do you think your iron shell has thing one to do with the Earth?
> > If so, what?
>
> Just because you don't get it, is no reason to perceive that others
> are as equally dysfunctional.

Well, for one thing, you only answered one of my questions. And that
was a silly hypothetical having nothing to do with the thread subject.

> Why are you speaking for Eric Stevens or others in this topic?

It's a public group. If you followed your own advice here, you'd
almost never post.

> btw;  helium doesn't bind with anything.

Good! Now explain why any of this has to do with the topic of this
thread?
From: Brad Guth on 24 May 2010 13:39
On May 24, 7:33 am, Tom McDonald <kilt...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 24, 9:01 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 24, 5:52 am, Tom McDonald <kilt...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 24, 6:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On May 23, 4:10 pm, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Sun, 23 May 2010 11:01:36 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > > > <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >On May 23, 3:06 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > > > >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 15:58:01 -0700 (PDT), hafeez
>
> > > > > >> <hafeezb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >On May 23, 3:17 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 07:13:02 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > > > >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> >On May 22, 4:23 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> >> On Fri, 21 May 2010 21:29:15 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
>
> > > > > >> >> >> <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> >> >On May 20, 4:00 am, Jean-Paul Turcaud <montj...(a)sfr.fr> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> >> >> AT THIS POINT IN PRESSURE,  ANY CRYSTAL IS OF COURSE REDUCED TO A
> > > > > >> >> >> >> SOLUTION !
>
> > > > > >> >> >> >> Elementary Dr Watson.
>
> > > > > >> >> >> >> jpturcaud
> > > > > >> >> >> >> Australia Mining Pioneer
> > > > > >> >> >> >> Founder of the True Geology
>
> > > > > >> >> >> >Zero gravity, so what pressure are you talking about?
>
> > > > > >> >> >> > Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
> > > > > >> >> >> >http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
>
> > > > > >> >> >> But not a spherical solid.
>
> > > > > >> >> >> > Why not a crystal lined geode core?
>
> > > > > >> >> >> > ~ BG
>
> > > > > >> >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > > > >> >> >Could be other than solid.
> > > > > >> >> >Could be a gaseous inner core.
> > > > > >> >> >At center could conceivably be a vacuum.
>
> > > > > >> >> >The mantel of perhaps extensively thorium and heavier elements might
> > > > > >> >> >be relatively solid, forming a thick and hot shell.  Within that inner
> > > > > >> >> >shell could be a solid carbonado core, although higher temperatures
> > > > > >> >> >should make whatever liquid or even gaseous.
>
> > > > > >> >> >For example, our physically dark moon should be at least 0..1% hollow,
> > > > > >> >> >although conceivably it's 1%<10% hollow below that extremely thick and
> > > > > >> >> >fused basalt crust that's so heavy element saturated.
>
> > > > > >> >> >Bottom line, we do not have sufficient objective information about the
> > > > > >> >> >interior of Earth to subjectively guess at whatever's inside of other
> > > > > >> >> >planets or moons.  It seems drilling deep holes into the lithosphere
> > > > > >> >> >of our planet is at best problematic.
>
> > > > > >> >> There is one thing we do know about the core: it conducts sound.
>
> > > > > >> >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > > > >> >When sound is conducted by the core of the earth, then the Seismic
> > > > > >> >waves penetrating in the core indicates that a solid Iron Nickel core
> > > > > >> >is there from 5121-6371 Kms , surrounded by a liquid Iron Nickel
> > > > > >> >core.. This si what Seismology tells us.
>
> > > > > >> Precisely, which is why it cannot be hollow.
>
> > > > > >> Eric Stevens
>
> > > > > >At zero gravity, or perhaps even reverse gravity to us surface
> > > > > >dwellers;  where's the pressure coming from?
>
> > > > > You can only get zero gravity if the earth is a hollow thin shell.. Two
> > > > > of us (just now) have explained to the evidence that the earth is
> > > > > solid. At this point your theory falls down (or maybe up, if you can
> > > > > make your reverse gravity work).
>
> > > > > >Are you suggesting that Earth is shrinking? (because that's what I've
> > > > > >been saying all along)
>
> > > > > >An iron shelled sphere, of say having a meter thick shell and 100
> > > > > >meters radii, plus otherwise filled/displaced with a volume of 90%
> > > > > >water and 10% helium, as situated within the zero delta-V of our Earth-
> > > > > >moon L1(Selene L1), is going to have how much added pressure at it's
> > > > > >core?
>
> > > > > >Where is that helium eventually going to end up?
>
> > > > > >Do the same thing except replacing that water with something that's
> > > > > >much heavier than water and semi-solid (always pliable).
>
> > > > > Why waste your time trying to analyse and argue about that kind of
> > > > > model when the evidence is that it does not apply to the earth?
>
> > > > > Eric Stevens
>
> > > > The shell can be several thousand miles thick, and layers of it can be
> > > > liquid or even compressed gas.  Inside of this thick shell is still
> > > > zero or negative gravity.
>
> > > 1. What is negative gravity?
> > > 2. None of this applies to the Earth
>
> > > > About my hollow sphere of iron example;  Why didn't you just say that
> > > > you don't know?
>
> > > Do you know how much helium can be dissolved in water?
> > > Do you think your iron shell has thing one to do with the Earth?
> > > If so, what?
>
> > Just because you don't get it, is no reason to perceive that others
> > are as equally dysfunctional.
>
> Well, for one thing, you only answered one of my questions. And that
> was a silly hypothetical having nothing to do with the thread subject.
>
> > Why are you speaking for Eric Stevens or others in this topic?
>
> It's a public group. If you followed your own advice here, you'd
> almost never post.
>
> > btw;  helium doesn't bind with anything.
>
> Good! Now explain why any of this has to do with the topic of this
> thread?

First of all, it's not your topic, and Jean-Paul Turcaud hasn't said
anything derogatory or otherwise purely negative as you've done.

Secondly, any planet or moon could host a geode like hollow that's
crystal lined, and it could even be a little offset from dead center
(such as within our moon(Selene). For topic argument sake, let us
consider that the crystal lined void within Earth is 0.1% the volume
of Earth, and that it's filled or displaced with mostly helium, plus
He3 and otherwise H2 (all gasses, no liquids).

Try to remember that within this void it's offering a near zero
gravity environment, and otherwise pressure protected by a seriously
robust outer shell or hull that's extremely thick and usually
perceived as extremely hot due to compression and those radioactive
elements such as thorium, although the robust basalt lithosphere of
our moon/Selene at something less than 100 km thick is relatively
cool, at something less than 20 mw/m3 (could be closer to 10 mw/m3) at
the surface, whereas Earth offers <128 mw/m3 at the surface and
progressively hotter as we penetrate inward.

However, try to appreciate that any fixed amount of compression by
itself simply does not generate heat unless there's something moving
and thus involving friction or vibrations that'll generate heat. I
happen to favor that Earth is shrinking, and thus accounting for at
least some of that heat, and otherwise the outer lithosphere rotation
is slightly different than the inner mantel rotation, and possibly the
core rotates retrograde.

btw; Our unique and likely semi-hollow (0.1<10%) moon/Selene involves
a continuous transfer of 2e20 Newtons/Joules worth of tidal and
subsequent whole-Earth modulating or morphing form of energy, that's
always going somewhere.

How's that for being on-topic?

~ BG
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: cleaning copper from steel
Next: A Convenient Falsehood: Global Warming Is a Hoax*