where in the world would we be ?

[iseason]

hi Guys
i want to discuss the pro's and cons of veiwing earth in an expansive model.

to kick off...

i have long been opposed to the notion that the continents are "drifting " apart.Not that i dissagree with the facts that
A; at some time they were closer together, and probably joined.
B: that they are moving further apart.

what i have trouble with is the notion that they are simply floating on a layer of magma... this gem of science means that there was a pocket of land on one part of the earth only.
to leave it at that seems to stretch things a bit..

my viewpoint gives the motor behind the changes in terrestial landscape as being caused by the expansion of the inner core and therefore the outer.
the heat that is generated in the centre is similar to the breakdown science allows for most atoms over time where they emit a photon or similar energy down the scale .
the result would act like a mathamatical breakdown for fractions . land/minerals/metals loosing energy would necessarily reduce to less complex atoms , the most common (upon the surface of the earth ) being those that make up water.
water therefore would be a supturation of the breakdown occuring deeper within the earth .
the net result is that all these changes require more space , and therefore the earth expands , causing the continents to move farther apart.

comments

Iseason

[Iron Sun 254]

Tha's not right at all. The Earth isn't expanding. When continents separate the plates that make up the ocean on get pulled back into the core.

[Europa[alive]]

this gem of science means that there was a pocket of land on one part of the earth only.


excuse me, what?


other than that, an interesting theory, but plate tectonics is a very well supported theory, confirmed by many independant lines of investigation, and furthermore, thanks to GPS sattelites and LIDAR, laser altimeters on orbiting spacecraft and the like, we would have quite quickly discovered if the earth was expanding at anyhting like the neccessary rate to have split Gondwanaland and Pangea in the ammount of time available.


besides, sea-floor spreading and subduction zones provide very compelling evidence for the theory of plate techtonics.

Care to take another swing?

[iseason]

Not really arguing with the science of techtonic plates . when I posted this I was looking at a different way to explain , not just the mechanics of earth , but behaviours in general.
The problem with the simplified techtonic plate explaination is that all the earth was connected at some time "see we can fit this into here".
the condition of those same continents today suggests that either a continuous expansion or a period where the earth expanded in order for the continents to separate evenly.
Other Why techtonic plates> the best reason is to relive pressure. What pressure? either heat pressure or expansion of the core.it doesn't matter if the expansion now uses the techtonic plates to leak matter onto the surface of the earth.
But i still means the earth was or is in an expansion state.I'm quite happy not to see seas and surface water in the original picture . heat and changes caused by a molten core can account for this appearing some time later.

cheers
Iseason