Re: Speculative concept of universal growth was: earth expansion
- From: don findlay <don@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 05:38:31 -0800 (PST)
Florian wrote:
Jonathan <write@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To me this subject of earth expansion is interesting because
on the one hand it seems impossible to prove,
It is possible to prove it. The age of the ocean floor prove it as soon
as you put the never to be proven hypothesis of recycling into the
trash.
but intuitively
it seems plausible. I say that because it's established fact
the entire universe is expanding. That is not in dispute.
"They" say only space is expanding, and that gravity would
rule locally and individual objects would not themselves expand. [...]
I don't like the term "expansion" because it sounds like the inflation
of a balloon, i. e., same amount of matter occupying more room, whereas
what's happening is a growth.
Like speculation? ok, let's go for some speculation:
The concept is that of a fluid that is condensing/crystallizing into a
new state: matter.
`
It is very much like the crystallization of water in surfusion: the
growth is propagating by seeding.
Seeds of matter catalyzes the organization of the fluid into more
matter. Thus, matter would be propagating not expanding.
As time goes by, more fluid is transformed into matter so that the
average density and pressure of the fluid decreases with time. It means
that the frequency of a wave in the fluid will decrease with time during
its travel. Yep, that corresponds to a redshift.
end of the speculation.
Did you like it ;-)
(Null points - Carey..) Me, ..I think you have to be careful though
how far you speculate otherwise you end up in the same boat as Plate
Tectonics - where the theory *IS* the geology. The theory will look
after itself if the facts can be shown to be tightly knitted into an
integrated whole. If the job is done right, with the facts laid out
in the right hierarchical order there should no need to speculate.
The theory will gradually speak for itself. The thing is to stick to
the Big Facts tagged with only very little surmise.
That's where Earth Expansion wins immediately, today over Plate
Tectonics; it remains essentially within the bounds of fact with
minimal amounts of surmise. Plate Tectonics on the other hand goes
for these big blousy drunken leaps of garish speculation which are
actually *contradicted* by the facts, ..and thinks that the
spectacular show is everything, and against such a kalaiedoscopic
dazzle who would be mousey enough to care about anything so pedestrian
as a li'l ol' fact?
I agree with you about the term 'Earth expansion' being a bad one.
'Growth' is difficult too because of the biological connotations
(gaia). "Expansion(al) Tectonics' could be better. You also have to
be cognitive of just how much of Physical theory might have to be
discarded or reconstructed if Earth Expansion gets a grip
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Plate Tectonics and Earth expansion
- From: don findlay
- Re: Plate Tectonics and Earth expansion
- From: Jonathan
- Speculative concept of universal growth was: earth expansion
- From: Florian
- Plate Tectonics and Earth expansion
- Prev by Date: Re: Plate Tectonics and Earth expansion
- Next by Date: Re: Plate Tectonics and Earth expansion
- Previous by thread: Speculative concept of universal growth was: earth expansion
- Next by thread: Re: Speculative concept of universal growth was: earth expansion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
