Is onze aarde hol? #4: Wat veroorzaakt de aurora's van Saturnus?

quote:

Op vrijdag 27 januari 2012 16:22 schreef Hoppahoppa het volgende:

[..]

Nee, maar een hint in een bepaalde richting zou fijn zijn. Tot nu toe heb ik niets anders gezien als dan ongefundeerde onzin die wordt voortgebracht uit domheid. Owja, wacht, even vergeten dat ik op BNW meelees.

[..]

Waarom zou ik die willen zoeken?

PS, lachen (als in het werkwoord) is met ch, niet met een g.

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 12:02 schreef ATuin-hek het volgende:
En het punt dat je probeert te maken is?

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 12:28 schreef Killaht het volgende:

[..]

Dat is CGI, niet een echt plaatje..

Dus omdat het een keer heter is aan de polen, is de planeet hol.., duidelijk. Maar hoe kan het dan dat op onze planeet een noord en zuidpool is waar een ijslaag van 3km ligt, je zou zeggen met zo'n gutsend lavagat van 2600km, dat dat er niet is.

quote:

In March 1960, the very much in depht and popular French science magazine "science et vie," published a very interesting article of the South Pole area nearby the Ross sea. It says that Russian scientists explored the "BENGUER " oasis, an area of 500KM2 free of ice (displaying an average temperature of more than 25°Celsius??...) with lakes, springs, vegetation and several bird species...For such an incredible phenomenon, the magazine says that the scientists found out the reason of that sudden rise of temperature, which is due to the fact that in the South, mountains are breaking down the wind and holding a huge amount of ice and snow and in the North the ocean has a softening effect? How could these scientists let us believe that a mountain range and the softening effect of the ocean can explain a difference of more than 100°Celsius! (that`s boiling water!) since the article says that the lower temperature surrounding the area has reached a phenomenal record of minus 86.7° Celsius and displays an average of minus 50° Celsius.

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 13:23 schreef Killaht het volgende:

[..]

Op ijsland heb je ook dergelijke plekken, maar geen gat van 2600 km in diameter met 2000graden celsius lava dat eruit komt wel? Dat zegt dus helemaal niks over de holle aarde, dan wel de discussie die ik met Ticker aanging omtrent Venus.

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 13:48 schreef Killaht het volgende:

[..]

Ja, jij komt met halfbakken plaatjes en tekst en een quote en verwacht dan dat mensen begrijpen wat je bedoelt. En dan vragen mensen ernaar en dan ga je er nog geeneens op in, en je dan afvragen, waar mensen het vandaan halen, terwijl het je eigenschuld is.

Wanneer komt je volgende reeks tot een kansloze poging met verklaren waarom de aarde hol is, zo kunnen we het hele heelal afgaan, misschien dat er een holle tussen zit..

De aarde is hol want storm op saturnus..

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 14:07 schreef Ticker het volgende:

[..]

Het is natuurlijk niet heel toevallig, dat jij, die net zo weinig weet over dit onderwerp als ik, exact begrijpt hoe en wat.. Maar bij mensen die er niets van willen weten, ze ook totaal geen hersen cel meer over hebben die mee kan doen met nadenken.
Troll is obvious... en zoveel meer.

quote:

The Thule Society, which was well known by Adolf Hitler,reported much about Tibetan myths of openings into the Earth. There is even a theory that Hitler ordered a research journey for such an opening in Antarctica, based on a speech of Admiral Donitz in front of a German submarine in 1944, when he claimed "The German submarine fleet is proud of having built an invisible fortification for the Fuhrer, anywhere in the world." During the Nuremberg Trials, Donitz spoke of "an invisible fortification, in midst of the eternal ice."

As the story goes ... Hitler and his followers wanted to create a race of super soldiers an Ayran race (like the Atlanteans) to rule the world. They came to this conclusion through the acceptance of many occult beliefs and practices, including the Hollow Earth Theory. There is a legend which says that Hitler and his chief advisers escaped the last days of the Third Reich by going through the opening at the South Pole (Antarctica) where they discovered an entrance to the Earth's interior.

According to the Hollow Earth Research Society in Ontario, Canada, they are still there. After the war, the organization claims, the Allies discovered that more than 2,000 scientists from Germany and Italy had vanished, along with almost a million people, to the land beyond the South Pole. This story gets more complicated with Nazi-designed UFOs, Nazi collaboration with the people who live in the center of the Earth, and the possible explanation for "Aryan-looking" UFO pilots.

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 14:40 schreef Ticker het volgende:

[..]

Nu ga je zelf ook al de fout in.. het interesseert me geen ruk of je er in geloofd of niet.. maar je begreep toch wat ik schreef.. dat is heel wat anders dan wat er geprobeerd wordt, zoals

[..]

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 15:28 schreef Killaht het volgende:

[..]

Dat vind ik nogal kort door de bocht en snel een conclusie trekken op basis van een lichtshow. Hetzelfde als, ja noorderlicht is een fenomeen, dus de aarde is hol.

En waar kader je het hele verhaal, aarde of alle planeten erbij betrekken.

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 14:57 schreef Bankfurt het volgende:

[..]

@J0kkebr0k,

ik ben ben het wel eens met Ticker.

quote:

J0kkebr0k, jij doet een heleboel werk hier in BNW om goede informatie op te duiken, maar het lijkt alsof je bij "onverwachte zaken" die jij (nog) niet begrijpt je je dan terugtrekt en je probeert in te dekken met dooddoeners.

Kortom - je wil wel meedenken, maar niet verder dan wat jij als vaststaand WEET of DENKT te weten.

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 18:54 schreef Hoppahoppa het volgende:

[..]

Allemaal best. Maar hoe verklaar je dan een fenomeen als zwaartekracht? Of het electromagnetische veld van de aarde? Zo'n beetje alle essentiële natuur- en scheikunde toont aan dat de aarde niet hol kan zijn, omdat er een bepaalde massa verondersteld wordt. Of is het babyzonnetje gewoon heel erg zwaar met een enorme soortelijke dichtheid?

En vanaf welk punt zou de aarde dan hol moeten zijn? Hoe dik is de korst? Waar is de aarde van gemaakt?

quote:

I have just finished reading a very detailed book that has half convinced me that the earth (and other planetary bodies) are hollow. I know this sounds ridiculous, and if someone here gives a good answer why not, I’ll change my mind, (and get very annoyed that I read a 500 page page book that can be disproved!) but I can’t think of a good reason to disprove it.
I read the previous topic on this site on the hollow earth theory, but no-one raised the points that were in this book so I’ll have a go.

You can see the book at: http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0620...15#reader-link , its written by Jan Lamprecht who says the book is a Lateral Thinking exercise along the lines advocated by Kurt Godel.

When I started reading I had three problems I could see with the hollow earth concept;
1. Gravity
2. Seismology
3. The origin of volcanoes

I found his rebuttals to these points hard to flaw, which he answered in the very first section:

1. Newton's Law of Gravity; one of the most useful mathematical formulae ever devised. This little formula has made space travel and the exploration of the Solar System possible. It made satellites possible. . . . Scientists use this little formula to gain an understanding of galaxies far away, and indeed the behaviour of the universe as a whole. It is now more than 300 years since Newton devised this little formula; and we still do now know what causes gravity.
Newtonian gravity is accurately measured and proven with the bounds of the solar system. However, Newtonian gravity remains untested in other areas. All we have is a formula. This formula has been used to determine the mass of the Earth. This is based on the concept that for each mass of M inside the Earth, it exerts and attractive force of F. We do not know the valid range for Newtonian gravity. Inside Newton's formula is G. G is the "universal gravitational constant". It is assumed, and assumed is the correct word here, that each mass of M exerts the same force of F regardless of where in the universe it may be placed. It is also assumed that each mass of M exerts the same force F whether it lies on the surface of the Earth or whether it be deep inside the Earth. When using the Cavendish balance to determine the mass of the Earth, it is assumed that each particle exerts a fixed force upon all others. This assumption rules out the very real possibility that particles near the surface of a planet might exert a force greater than those deep down. The key to all of our gravity is the mass of the Earth. If the mass of the Earth is wrong, then so are our estimates for those of other bodies. If the mass of the Earth has been overstated, then it follows that the masses of all other bodies in the solar system have also been overstated. If the Earth is hollow, then so too is every other planet in the solar system.
How can we be sure that the Earth really has the mass accorded it by Newtonian gravity? As gravity is so unbelievably weak, is an experiment using two lead balls really representative of the entire Earth? No, of course not. There is electrical charge to account for, and also magnetic forces and electromagnetic forces, that are a lot stonger than gravity, that the current theory does not take into account.
[He then proceeds to go into detail about Newton’s shell theorem, which is too mathematically complex for me to understand, but I think proves that gravity is always 0 at the centre of any spherical body]

..then seismology

2. The only "reliable" method we have of knowing what goes on in the Earth beneath our feet comes from the science of Seismology. However, there are many examples of actual findings being different from what was predicted. The science of seismology contains two very broad assumptions which no one has ever been able to verify: 1. The speed of seismic waves beneath the Earth is ultimately inferred from our understanding of the structure of the Earth based on Newtonian Gravity. We have no way of being certain that these waves really are reaching these depths or travelling at these speeds. 2. We cannot be sure that speed changes are due to the changing constitution of the Earth. Our view of the inner Earth might be very skewed. Much of the predicted structure changes have never turned out to be real. If we find such errors at depths of just a few kilometres, how much less can we trust our ideas when dealing with rock which is hundreds and perhaps thousands of miles beneath the surface?
The fact that the deepest man has ever gone into the earths crust is 25 miles, theres still hundreds of miles to go until we can have any sort of proof.

..then geology

3. What do we really know about the Earth's interior? And how trustworthy is our knowledge of it? Many people (mistakenly) think that the lava which pours out of volcanoes comes from a large reservoir of molten material which makes up the greater part of the Earth. Scientists have discovered that lava comes from within the Earth's crust. The lava comes from approximately 20 miles down. The existence of lava does not affect the passage of earthquake (seismic) waves. This indicates to scientists that the crust is largely solid. So where does the heat come from which melts the rock locally? Scientists have advanced two theories. Some say that the melting is due to high concentrations of radioactive elements in a particular area. These decaying radioactive elements generate enough heat to melt rock. Much lava is slightly radioactive and that lends support to this theory. Other geologists have argued that shearing and faulting are adequate heat generating mechanisms via friction. The evidence supports both theories. Lava cannot possibly be rising from the centre of the Earth as some may be tempted to think. It would cool down and become solid on its long, slow journey upwards. Lava is therefore a surface phenomenon and does not in any way reflect what the Earth is like 50 or 100 or more miles down.

The author then gives some reasons to believe the earth may be hollow. He mentioned what seismologists call the 'shadow zone' which is the large area in the centre of the earth that no P or S waves ever penetrate, and he has concluded that it is more likely that they cannot penetrate that because there is nothing there to penetrate (seismology does not work in gas). He also explains the earth’s magnetic field with a counter rotating dynamo effect which involves a burning hydrogen core. He postulates that as Hydrogen is the lightest element, due to Newton’s shell theorem making g = 0 at the centre, it would naturally diffuse to the centre and would burn in a reaction similar to the suns.

I was surprised to read a review of the book from Dr Tom Van Flandern (astronomer, formerly U.S. Naval Observatory) who said: “For merely showing us all that the inferred density profile of Earth's interior is not a unique solution of seismic data -- an important constraint for all theoreticians working in that area -- the book had already made itself worthwhile.”
And also a review from Richard Baum (Director Mercury & Venus Sections, British Astronomical Association) which said: “I must say you have stored your book with an enormous amount of information; much quite surprising, all stimulating. Essentially you are not only obliging us to take a fresh look at things but to observe from an unsuspected different position - the presumed impossible.”

quote:

Ik vind trouwens het proces wat jij doormaakt wel erg grappig. Van heel lacherig in het begin ga je al langzaam naar een punt toe dat je het niet meer ongeloofwaardig vindt. Ik voorspel dat je binnen 2 topics helemaal om bent en volledig gelooft dat onze aarde hol is. Gewoon omdat je het bewijs van het tegendeel niet begrijpt. Goh, waar hebben we dat eerder gezien.

quote:

Op maandag 30 januari 2012 19:06 schreef SoddimoKolehmainen het volgende:
Jammer dat Ticker weg is. Er zou ook nog gereageerd worden op de namen met betrekking tot poolexpedities die naar de geografische pool leidden. Mits dat niet in scene is gezet betekent het dat de gaten door tig mensen niet zijn waargenomen en door een enkeling (zwever) zoals Byrd wel.