0 members (),
181
guests, and
2
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
Enough levity! Let's have another go at serious discussion.
I propose starting with the idea that the Earth's core rotates faster than the mantle and crust.
There has been debate about this possibility for around ten years, but it seems to be settled now thanks to modern technology and the analysis of seismic waves over a long period. The verdict is that the inner core rotates faster than the mantle and crust. The latest study has even put a value to this. The inner core rotates at 0.3 to 0.5 degrees per year faster than the mantle and crust. However, it seems that this relative difference must not be taken as a steady rate as it varies over time.
We should now ask the question: “Why this difference?”. There would appear to be at least three candidates for the cause.
1) Mansfield’s idea that when the old moon collided with pre-earth it would have slowed (pre-) Earth’s rotation, and that this slowing would have had more effect on the crust and mantle than on the core.
2) Current geological thinking goes something like this: The heat of Earth's solid inner core churns the molten liquid outer core. The churning generates electric currents and, as a result, creates the planet's magnetic field. Interaction between the electric current and magnetic field is thought to spin the inner core at the same rate that the liquid core just above it is turning, which tends to be slightly faster than the mantle.
3) The moon is not only the major tidal influence on the Earth; it also has a breaking influence on the Earth’s rotation. This influence would be greater on the crust and mantle than it would on the core.
Anyone, any thoughts on a choice of candidate? (With reasons, please.)
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
Have a care, there, Orac! Just because you don't inhabit geology forums...... Yes, I know that should be "fora", but I'm trying to make a pretence of modernity. Come on Bill S they are rocks ... not much excitement there ... come to the light and study alive stuff :-) BTW: Pre has sort of re-ignited my interest in geology after almost 40 years, give him credit for that.
ZOMG something positive out of an interaction with Preearth I am astounded. BTW good luck to you .. preeath answer a question hahahaha
Last edited by Orac; 08/26/12 03:12 AM.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
come to the light and study alive stuff :-) Alive? Like your quons???
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
There's a thread dealing with " the flatness problem", but there seems also to be a problem of flatness in matters tectonic, in particular, and geological in general.
Surely there's someone out there with some thoughts.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370 |
Seriously; I'm disappointed that you guys cannot find a friendly geologist to help you out.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
Pre, perhaps, if you answered some questions we might need to find a friendly geologist or two, but acording to your own standard, those who don't answer questions can be assumed to have no answers.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370 |
Pre, perhaps, if you answered some questions we might need to find a friendly geologist or two, but according to your own standard, those who don't answer questions can be assumed to have no answers. You might find a friendly geologist or two,... simply for the enlightenment of the masses. A worthy cause in it self.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
You might find a friendly geologist or two,... simply for the enlightenment of the masses. A worthy cause in it self. You keep on about consulting friendly geologists. Are you saying that only geologists have the answers? Could this be why you don't answer questions?
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370 |
You keep on about consulting friendly geologists. Are you saying that only geologists have the answers? No, I am saying that you folk know nothing; and you know no people who know anything, so why are you even here?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
Scientifically speaking we could already have convinced ourselves that we have falsified your theory and thus no further conversation is neccessary. We are comfortable that our current theory is correct and yours has been falsified what is there to discuss, that is how science works something a mathematician may not understand If you were actually interested in how science works you could always follow the story of how the standard model just got installed as the gold standard theory of physics and see whats actually involved but thats probably too hard for your type.
Last edited by Orac; 01/05/13 10:32 AM.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136 |
but by saying scientifically speaking you are not saying much as no one in the entire galaxy believe's what science says anymore.
so when science speaks , people hear it , but there is no impact anymore because the speaker is lying and the people know it.
so if science convinces itself yet again by patting themselves on the back and agreeing that they know everything , the people just roll their eyes and wonder what crap are they trying to feed us now.
orac suggest that you read about science installing the standard model as the gold model , but what has that got to do with a bunch of people standing around patting each other on the back saying we are better than everyone else because we have convinced ourselves of that fact because we are really good liar's.
and if they have falsified your theory what does that really mean?
and do you care?
what impact will it eventually have on society?
no thing that scientist claim's can actually be trusted.
because their religion is based on lies.
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
No, I am saying that you folk know nothing; and you know no people who know anything, so why are you even here? So that's what it is! Pre wants to be the only one on SAGG. I guess that's one way of ensuring that no one questions your opinions.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136 |
No, I am saying that you folk know nothing; and you know no people who know anything, so why are you even here? I believe that they are here to try somehow to reassure themselves to each other that their religion or cult is properly announced to the public. its like the bush administration tried to follow in the footsteps of hittler , with the fear tactics that they utilized. only , I believe that science is in the process of limit testing. they want to find out just how much they can get away with. just how gullible people are , and how strong people can feel about the lies that science portrays as the truth. thankfully , I can see through the lies using logic. but even logic leaves when a so called modern scientist enters the room , logic just throws up its arms and says Im outta here this mutation has arrived in my presence and it makes me sick. therefore a scientist does not have logic as a tool to use to render a conclusion. which is why we see the idiotic replies that we see on a science forum.
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
I feel you pain my friend and I think science and I are strong enough to stand your rantings caused by the pain .... Peace be with you.
ROMANS: 15.1 We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves.
Last edited by Orac; 01/06/13 02:40 AM.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136 |
We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. LOL we who are strong !!! patting each other on the back ( pleasing yourselves )and fantasizing that you are strong because science and you agree on the fantasy that science has allied itself with does not a strong group of people make. if you and science are strong then why cant you and science lift yourselves up out of the mire you are stuck in.
Last edited by paul; 01/06/13 10:37 PM.
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
I couldn't get this link to work, other than by copy/paste, but I thought it was worth the effort. http://carnegiescience.edu/news/studying_ancient_earth%E2%80%99s_geochemistry I bet someone can tell me what I should have done.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 370 |
Yeah, Andrew Alden is a bit of a dick.
|
|
|
|
|