Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- From: "J. Taylor" <nchiwana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 12:14:59 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 8, 1:35 am, "George" <Geo...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"J. Taylor" <nchiw...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:c57b822e-b7b4-437e-9a8a-9dc782051796@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, "George" <Geo...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"J. Taylor" <nchiw...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:cc27842f-4f24-4b85-b6c1-e2452d38093d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jan 7, 2:14 am, mike3 <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 22 2008, 7:47 pm,
auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(Florian) wrote:
brad <lbjohnson1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 19, 5:54 pm, auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Florian) wrote:
Your constant failure to identify evidences incompatible with
plate
tectonics and supporting planetary growth theory is quite amazing.
Let's all rewrite Physics .And Chemistry , too , just for good
measure . And
all Mathematics is suspect....
Only idiot would think that one must rewrite Physics or whatever your
fantasm tells you. George is one of them. Are you?
<snip>
I'd agree with George. It does require a rewriting of physics. If not,
then
tell me where the matter comes from, and how atomic xeroxing works,
all using known physics. If you claim known physical theory is
_wrong_,
then you have contradicted yourself, as you are saying above that we
do
_not_ need to rewrite physics.
You need a subscription to read
ithttp://www.nature.com/news/2008/081120/full/news.2008.1246.html
You need a subscription to read it
Here is someone blogging on
ithttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/11/21/confirmed-scient....
"Particle physics explains that the bulk of atoms is made up of
protons and neutrons, which are themselves composed of smaller
particles known as quarks, which in turn are bound by gluons. The odd
thing is this: the mass of gluons is zero and the mass of quarks
[accounts for] only five percent. Where, therefore, is the missing 95
percent? "
So let's see, 96% of the Universe is made up of Dark matter/energy
And the 4% we can see is made up of 95% "....from the way they
interact"
Which, if my math is correct, is only .2% we know much about
I don't think we will be closing the book any time soon because we
know it all.
JT
=========
This explains where the extra mass comes from, how? How does this extra
mass magically appearing inside the Earth prevent the moon's orbit from
going haywire? Basically, answer all the questions I've already asked,
Taylor, instead of avoiding them. You're clutching at straws again.
95% of mass is nothing more than energy
=============
Like I said, clutching at straws. E=mc^2. Energy and mass are directly
proportional. If there is more mass, there is also going to be more
gravity. How does the moon stay in it's orbit if you add enough mass to the
Earth to make it up to 50% larger?
My error, energy and mass are directly proportional, but they are not
equal
To answer your question, mass of Earth changes and so does the moon's
JT
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- From: mike3
- Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- From: J. Taylor
- Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- From: George
- Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- From: J. Taylor
- Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- From: George
- Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- Prev by Date: Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- Next by Date: Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- Previous by thread: Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- Next by thread: Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
