# Re: Conspiracy Theory- Earth's Expansion

"Which is of course wrong, because the Earth hasn't heated up. If
anything,
it has cooled down (though probably not steadily)." -- DM

Well, there's "cold accretion", and then the "mystery" of how radio-active heat
is dissipated.

But never that because --

"No such change in bone microstructures or bone proportions or muscle
attachment site proportions through time is observed. QED." -- DM

Expanding Earth (w/ radii differential of more than oh, say 1%, give or take?)

Are we famous yet?

Don

----- Original Message ----
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
To: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 1:48:44 PM
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theory- Earth's Expansion

> Not if the mass remains the same but is packed in a smaller volume.

Too if the mass remains the same but is packed in a smaller volume.

Again: the strength of a field of gravity at any point is Gm/(r^2),
where G
is the universal constant, r is the distance from the center of
gravity, and
m is the mass that generates the field in question. If you pack the
same
mass into a smaller volume, that means m stays constant while r
shrinks, and
this means that Gm is divided by a smaller number.

> ONE
> of the expansionists theories is that the Earth's mass has remained
the
> same through time but the Earth has expanded like a balloon from the
> internal heat generated.

Which is of course wrong, because the Earth hasn't heated up. If
anything,
it has cooled down (though probably not steadily).

> The rule of thumb is half the diameter = 4x the surface gravity ...
more
> than enough to affect bone structure in similarly-massed NLR's.
Anyone
> wants to kill (er, I mean test) "expanding Earth", here's is your
chance.

No such change in bone microstructures or bone proportions or muscle
attachment site proportions through time is observed. QED.

Also, if G had ever changed within the last few billion years, the
solar
system would no longer exist, and probably the galaxy wouldn't either.