Re: earth/moon relationship
Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:41:46 -0500 (EST)

In a message dated 97-10-26 22:04:13 EST, you write:

<< Danny, Danny, Danny, think first. The earth is cooler now than it was
billions of years ago, right? Its no longer molten all the way through?
So due to contraction of cooling it should be smaller, right? NOT
bigger. >>

Well, the crust is only a few miles thick, and the propogation of matter from
the core to mantle is part of the cooling process.

>I also thought I had explained to you that the fact that the
>existing contintents being only so much area means absolutely nothing
>with regards to the size of the earth

actually its how the continents fit, so its not about area, but about how
they are shaped, and by seeing how they fit, the only way they can fit
perfectly is if the earth was smaller than it is now, 80% smaller. So no the
land doesnt affect the expansion of the earth necessarily, but it shows that
it exists.

>as well as that there is no way
>the earth could expand due to material from the core moving out.
>Material flows in and out all the time, and the density is merely due to
>the gravitationally induced pressure of the weight of all the mass in
>the outer layers pushing in. By your logic, the earth should be smaller
>since the outer layers have been pushing against the core for billions
>of years, so they must have compacted it down more. (Y'know, like why
>your cereal settles down in the box over time)

This is your opinion, you dont know how the inner core/mantle relationship
works. Havent you ever heard of an expanding sun? Things expand when they
cool. Anyway, this is just a theory to back up the fact that the earth was
smaller a long time ago. So, doesnt it seem obvious that the core is
expanding into the mantle? The core is 3 times denser than the mantle. You
say that the mantle flows in and out of the core, which of course you dont
know for sure, but if this is true, at the same time couldnt less and less
mantle be flowing back into the core? Think yourself!