Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

felltoearth · **#11941** by **felltoearth** » Jul 14, 2020 7:22 pm

JustStarDust wrote:

I never said we're losing anything from things being eaten etc. I'm saying that the things that do ultimately end up in the ground over time, would effect the mass. Or does energy from the sun, change the mass? That don't work, nor does it change the density.

I’m not suggest anything, I’m trying to figure out just what the fuck you are getting at. You seem to be suggesting that biological functions add mass to the earth, and that the energy used to do so converts to mass. If you could be clearer in your language and produce a sentence that can be properly parsed, you might get the response you deserve.

JustStarDust wrote:

But yes, sorry, I haven't read through nearly 600 pages yet. Maybe you could simply, post the link to the post that describes this stuff?

There’s a search function at the top of this page. I suggest you familiarize yourself with it.

JustStarDust wrote:

Campemon said we're losing atmosphere, just a tiny bit each year, which is believable considering we're not in a dome / closed system? (or are we, because the atmosphere alone weighs a few ton per square inch, as Thunderf00t once said in a video.. & Google "The total mass of Earth's atmosphere is about 5.5 quadrillion tons, or roughly one millionth of Earth's mass." .. So how does it escape gravity in the 1st place? Nvm?) But what does that have to do with the actual density (yeh yeh correct, mass vs desity, well done here's a medal ), or continents or Earth 'growing' - not 'inflating' like some balloon, but bits over time being added... - & yes sure, a simulation animation, is not 100% correct because - obviously?

Nothing. You’re the one speculating on additional mass from somewhere not me.

______________________________________
Sent to somewhere using a shitty app. Sorry for the tags and/or dupe posts.

Thommo · **#11942** by **Thommo** » Jul 14, 2020 8:43 pm

JustStarDust wrote:Even if it's .000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%. All of that, over billion of years, adds up?

You certainly can add up those made-up numbers.

If the Earth gained .000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of its mass every second, then over a year it would gain .0000000000000000000000000000000000316% of its mass. .0000000000000000000000000000000000316% a year for a billion years is .0000000000000000000000000316% gained mass.

The Earth is actually about 4.5 billion years old, so if this had persisted throughout its entire history it would amount to about .000000000000000000000000142% of the Earth's mass, or just under a kilogram.

Sendraks · **#11943** by **Sendraks** » Jul 14, 2020 9:56 pm

Well obviously its going to be a way more convenient figure than that!

Just work out the difference between the current mass of the earth, then how much one imagines the earth weighed when the continents formed a perfect sphere. Divide difference by 4.5bn years, then say the earth gained that much mass each year, up to whatever point anyone can indicate the earth hasn't gained that much mass in recent years, at which point claim its stopped for whatever reason you like.

That's doing the science that is!

JustStarDust · **#11944** by **JustStarDust** » Jul 15, 2020 7:29 am

I’m not suggest anything, I’m trying to figure out just what the fuck you are getting at. You seem to be suggesting that biological functions add mass to the earth, and that the energy used to do so converts to mass. If you could be clearer in your language and produce a sentence that can be properly parsed, you might get the response you deserve.

I never said, a biological function, adds mass. All I'm saying, is that matter adds to the mass. Life starts off as tiny things and grows up to a large then which dies & gets put back into the ground. It may not be much, but it's probably more then some 'space dust' which somehow leaves Earths gravity? Idk for sure, you're right. I'm no professional geologist.

There’s a search function at the top of this page. I suggest you familiarize yourself with it.

Yep, true. I should. I really should. But, I don't have that much time on my hands, even if it does seem like I do have enough time. You seems to have already read the part which has the answers, and maybe you could post the link to the page. But I'm not demanding that you do. I'll find it myself, all good.

That's doing the science that is!

Did you miss the previous posts? If you are interested, see from here on:
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/pseud ... 11880.html

A pdf says in the title:

"As Earth’s atmosphere slowly trickles away into space, will our planet come to look like Venus?" - which doesn't have anything to do with Earth growing in the 1st place.

Either way, does this prove that "the continents wind back to a sphere"? Not really. I have to read about 600 posts to find the truth apparently. All that I see is that Earth grew, and continues to grow. Earths 'convection' plays a role in it too, imo. But I mist admit that I don't know much, I'm just another dork on the internet

JustStarDust · **#11945** by **JustStarDust** » Jul 15, 2020 7:47 am

Wow, 104 years old! Did you get a letter from the Queen? :think:

Cito di Pense · **#11946** by **Cito di Pense** » Jul 15, 2020 8:48 am

JustStarDust wrote:Wow, 104 years old! Did you get a letter from the Queen?

You must admit, he's pretty sharp for someone in that age bracket. You're keeping your age a secret, aren't you, but you're probably "old enough to know better".

JustStarDust wrote:Life starts off as tiny things and grows up to a large then which dies & gets put back into the ground. It may not be much

Did you know your body contains a lot of water? When a corpse dries out and decays, where do you think that water goes? Eventually back into the ocean. You're old enough to understand that.

theropod_V_2.0 · **#11947** by **theropod_V_2.0** » Jul 15, 2020 11:01 am

Apparently it is unicorn piss.

You don’t see where the earth grew.

RS

felltoearth · **#11948** by **felltoearth** » Jul 15, 2020 1:01 pm

JustStarDust wrote:
I never said, a biological function, adds mass. All I'm saying, is that matter adds to the mass. Life starts off as tiny things and grows up to a large then which dies & gets put back into the ground.

The second sentence directly contradicts the first. Life is a biological function.

As I said. Sit down, have a think about what you are actually trying to say, and then write it down.

Or write it down and very carefully read it back to yourself and think about it before posting.

What you have been write here is so convoluted and irrational you shouldn’t even be posting it.

JustStarDust · **#11949** by **JustStarDust** » Jul 15, 2020 1:34 pm

felltoearth wrote:
JustStarDust wrote:
I never said, a biological function, adds mass. All I'm saying, is that matter adds to the mass. Life starts off as tiny things and grows up to a large then which dies & gets put back into the ground.

The second sentence directly contradicts the first. Life is a biological function.

JustStarDust · **#11950** by **JustStarDust** » Jul 15, 2020 1:48 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
JustStarDust wrote:Wow, 104 years old! Did you get a letter from the Queen?

You must admit, he's pretty sharp for someone in that age bracket. You're keeping your age a secret, aren't you, but you're probably "old enough to know better".

JustStarDust wrote:Life starts off as tiny things and grows up to a large then which dies & gets put back into the ground. It may not be much

Did you know your body contains a lot of water? When a corpse dries out and decays, where do you think that water goes? Eventually back into the ocean. You're old enough to understand that.

Water is it's own can of worms. And if this is true:

Some water and methane molecules reach the stratosphere and decompose, releasing hydrogen, which slowly diffuses up-ward until it reaches the exobase. A small amount clearly makes it out because ultraviolet images reveal a halo of hydrogen atoms surrounding our planet

http://faculty.washington.edu/dcatling/ ... _SciAm.pdf

Then some water leaves, and doesn't go back into the ocean.

Cito di Pense · **#11951** by **Cito di Pense** » Jul 15, 2020 3:05 pm

JustStarDust wrote:Then some water leaves, and doesn't go back into the ocean.

And other water arrives, as a component in meteorites. Do you have some special hotline to the mass balance? You could look it up and make your case, but you won't. That's where the quibble is, down at decimal 0 0 0 0 ... 1. Is it in you to think before you write? It may very well be, but if you're operating at low power, the results will never be very impressive.

SafeAsMilk · **#11952** by **SafeAsMilk** » Jul 15, 2020 3:22 pm

JustStarDust wrote:Adult behavior > or = or < childish behavior?

It doesn't matter if I was under 50 or over 50, tbh, imo.

It's true, what you post is garbage whether you're a teenager or not. But if you were a teenager, it would help explain why you're posting garbage and some folks might not treat you like an adult who should've figured this out by now.

JustStarDust · **#11953** by **JustStarDust** » Jul 15, 2020 3:25 pm

Thank you.

Yes, I will keep looking up stuff about Earths mass > gain VS loss. But I have to keep in mind, that most of this stuff is just theoretical. Even if I do find a whole bunch of graphs, and maths. And who knows what surprises Earth has, beneath the mantle? It's all unknown?

SafeAsMilk · **#11954** by **SafeAsMilk** » Jul 15, 2020 3:42 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_outer_core

Thommo · **#11955** by **Thommo** » Jul 15, 2020 3:43 pm

JustStarDust wrote:And who knows what surprises Earth has, beneath the mantle? It's all unknown?

It's not "all" unknown though. We know the laws of physics that operate above the surface and below it are the same.

We know a lot of other things too, but that one is probably the most salient.

Cito di Pense · **#11956** by **Cito di Pense** » Jul 15, 2020 4:40 pm

JustStarDust wrote:But I have to keep in mind, that most of this stuff is just theoretical

Bullshit, my friend. Meteorites are not theoretical. Gaseous ablation is not theoretical. What you mean is that the data present large relative uncertainties. But the magnitudes of the quantities involved are not large, and large relative uncertainties don't turn milligrams into megatons.

It's dumbass CYA to call what you honestly don't know "theoretical" in order to protect the delusion you might be right about something. Stop acting like an idiot teenager bullshitting outside the Sip 'n' Bite and you'll be treated as if you're making any kind of inquiry.

What you appear to be after is what all pseudoscience bullshitters are after: Speculating about forces unknown.

campermon · **#11957** by **campermon** » Jul 15, 2020 4:41 pm

JustStarDust wrote:Thank you.

Yes, I will keep looking up stuff about Earths mass > gain VS loss. But I have to keep in mind, that most of this stuff is just theoretical. Even if I do find a whole bunch of graphs, and maths. And who knows what surprises Earth has, beneath the mantle? It's all unknown?

Yes, 'as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know.'

hths

In other news, it's great to see the number of bars opening at the moment. It's great stuff for the economy.

:cheers:

ginckgo · **#11958** by **ginckgo** » Nov 27, 2020 4:15 am

Nature has an open access collection of recent Plate Tectonics papers, some are relevant to some of the discussions here (like the Scotia Arc)

https://www.nature.com/collections/cbjbfjhdbg

Tremilberg · **#11959** by **Tremilberg** » Nov 28, 2020 11:01 pm

As has been shows by others here, no net seafloor is being destroyed at the Scotia Arc.
Similar to the situation in the Caribbean.
https://youtu.be/Pw5vtM-1IRE

Challenger007 · **#11960** by **Challenger007** » Dec 01, 2020 10:09 am

Well, as I read, the Earth is a fairly stable planet. Moving continents and changing their coastlines takes children of thousands of years, if not millions. Although we do not know how the situation can change due to climate change. Fires overheat the surface of the earth, and this heat goes into the deep layers. Who knows, maybe this will activate some thermal processes, provoke some kind of volcanic eruptions or the formation of crevices. Of course, this is not a matter of one week or one month, but in the aggregate, all these phenomena can increase the number of cataclysms. I may be wrong, then such thoughts come to mind.

Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere. Yes or No ?

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Ads by Google

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Ads by Google

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Ads by Google

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Suspicious0bservers

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Re: Expanding earth. Do the continents wind back to a sphere

Who is online