Is the earth expanding?

http://www.classzone.com/books/earth_science/terc/content/visualizations/es2501/es2501page01.cfm

ES2501 Observe images illustrating the impact theory of the moon's formation.

From the animation, and the way debris is scattered all around the Earth with the Earth the main gravitational body in close proximity, the chances of the material regrouping to form the Moon seems rather improbable. For the gravitational attraction between the objects, Object to Object will be less than Object to Earth. My bet is on each object just falling back to Earth

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

How long would the regrouping take? for the migration of the Moon to a higher orbit can only take place once it has otherwise the tidal effects would separate the cloud of particulates.
For certain there would be some rocks found that was the result of this collision. I haven't heard of them so far.
I see there must have been an incorrect calculation somewhere for an annual migration of 80 MM per year for 4.5 billion years will get you out to 350,000 Km.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'm wondering if I will be able to link the Moon Capture with the Study findings.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I can't comment Trippy as I'm quite confused by the whole complexity of the situation. It going to take a little while to sink in.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What evidence is there that the Earth had a a five hour day to begin with?

 

So my choice concerning the formation of the moon is:

1. A tested and generally accepted theory based on celestial mechanics worked out by astrophysicist.

2. Your visual assesment of a video simulation.

I will have to go with number 1.

 

But what is your gut feeling? If the Moon was created that way there would be still rocks in space returning to the Earth, left over from the collision and not gathered by the moon formation. Are there any of these being found? Actual Earth sourced meteorites? I have not specifically looked for them on a Google search but I'm sure if there had been one we'd be hearing about it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well based only on my everyday experience, the speed of light should not be constant, sub atomic particles should not tunnel, electrons have no wave aspect and no sane person could actually watch Jersey Shore.

Gut feelings do not work very good on the very small and the very large (they are outside of our normal experience) as well entertainment tastes. So I advise you to take some science courses and then you will start to rely more on mathematics and experiementation and less on gut feeling.;

 

It keeps you keen to solve the mysteries when it goes against your gut feelings.

I would say plenty stop reading my posts for the very same reason. I don't know the program Jersey Shore.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

With my hypothesis having the Earth surrounded with an enormous ocean of volatiles, even though the tides would have been enormous when the Moon was closer, there is a suggestion this situation would not result in tidal acceleration. (Or put it like this at this stage I think that is what it means???)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration#cite_note-10

So an ocean world would have no where to slow down and drag the wave. The wave would advance practically the same rate as the Earth rotates and the wave would be in line with the moon earth centres. Hence limited gravitational attraction would be limited. Ok there must still be some friction in the liquids so it definitely is not going to be absolute zero.
But once dry land appeared the tidalites mentioned could quite possible be correct. That means for the last 600 millions years the mechanism was different that for the previous 3.8 billion years.

 

I think I read somewhere once that atoms are closer together (or that atoms have less volume) closer to the centre of our galaxy?

If the position within the galaxy has some relevance, then if the solar sytem is slowly moving outwards this could be having an effect?

 

Yep. We had a long discussion about it but Trippy still believe that orbit parameters from tidalites data are supporting modeling of the tidal effect.

 

This figure illustrates how convergence is possible on a growing Earth. The mantle upwelling runs over the lithosphere on its path, dragging the arc so that b (on the arc) and a converge. But a and c do not converge because b and c diverge by the same amount (back-arc extension).
This explains why there is no net reduction of surface along active margins despite the convergence.

The following figures illustrate the anatolian flow running over the immobile mediterranean seafloor.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

There is convergence of the hellenic arc and North Africa, but not net decrease in surface between macedonia and North Africa as illustrated in the scheme.

Be realist, you can't understand why convergence does not imply a net reduction of surface despite exhaustive explanations and illustrations (as those above).
The conclusion is that all of this is way over your understanding abilities.

Does anyone else has an understanding issue with this?

(à force de jouer au simplet, tu risques de vraiment passer pour un simplet).

 

Perhaps the conclusion should be that your drawings show nothing.

You've stated that expansion has been observed and measured. This is not the case. Instead, you've supplied drawings and an explanation of what those drawings are supposed to show.

No measurements. No observations. Just speculation.

 

False. It has been measured from ocean and continental growth.
And apparently, this scheme is necessary for you to understand that the "no, because there is subduction" argument does not hold one second.

 

Have you considered decompression yet?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

False. You've been asked for the measurements and sources, and you only reply with drawings. The only numbers you supply are for sea floor spreading, from which you extrapolate to get the answer you want.

There are no measurements of earth expanding.

Something you keep saying, but that's all you do, make the assertion and think that's sufficient.

You haven't managed to back up a single thing you've claimed.

 

@AlexG What was the rotational period of the Earth when it was young, like at the time the Moon "formed".

If it has gone from a 5 hour day to a 24 hour day do you think that some of that rotational momentum could not be easily accounted for in expansion of the terrestrial Earth?

 

Sounds like "there are no evidence for life evolution", and false: Quantification of an Archaean to Recent Earth Expansion Process Using Global Geological and Geophysical Data Sets

 

Yes, I examine this theory. There is no evidence of compression 200 My ago.