 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Geology Forum » The 1~10% hollow moon / Brad Guth... |
|
Page 5 of 5 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| BradGuth... |
 Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
<australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
[/quote]
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Where's all the Usenet/newsgroup expertise hiding these days? (afraid
of what sort of kosher approved punishment you'll get?)
~ BG
On Aug 28, 11:00 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 28, 5:16 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Here’s yet another edited food for thought topic, about our local
planetoid Selene/moon that has a little something hollow to say about
itself;
Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
This zero gravity environment of course wouldn't fully apply to our
naked Selene/moon interior unless that hollow was a substantial sphere
at nearly dead center, but none the less it's still worth our
considering the possible implications, and it’s especially what-if
topic worthy when the bulk of lunar mass is clearly being held within
its thick and highly paramagnetic basalt crust, with no obvious
indications of an iron or otherwise dense core.
Natural/geothermal and isotope generated gas bubbles could easily have
created such a geode hollow(s) or even pockets of trapped mineral
brines and perhaps a few as having become crystal lined volumes of
weird geological anomalies representing livable voids deep within the
moon, as well as for the continual tidal pull of Earth’s gravity may
have significantly offset the original soft/molten interior core,
leaving a substantial hollow/caverness void rising towards the
extremely thick backside crust, as well as for the Earth/Selene
lithobraking encounter should have caused something to shift within
this unusual planetoid we call our moon.
First of all, I have never once suggested anything lower mass than
7.35e22 kg (if anything I’ve proposed an extra mass of <262 km worth
of ice for a grand total of 8.5e22 kg), nor have I ever suggested that
our Selene/moon was 90% hollow, nor otherwise have I ever insisted the
interior density below the thick basalt crust being as low as 1 kg/m3
(although the element sodium is kinda minimal density at .97 g/cm3,
not to mention lithium). So don’t get yourselves all defensively
crazy and huffy about any of this.
If the thick and paramagnetic basalt plus mineral saturated crust with
many of those heavier lunar elements (including thorium, uranium,
plutonium and of course radium as supposedly derived from the core of
Earth plus via whatever else as having impacted Earth) are situated or
somehow having been coagulated/solidified near the surface, not to
mention a bazillion naked meteor deposits of carbonado/lonsdaleite and
of course always those much heavier metallic elements including
thorium, iron, nickel, platinum and loads of titanium, plus a little
of whatever else was part of Earth. So, for the purely what-if of
this semi-hollow moon topic, how about our considering a 10% hollow
moon (2.2 billion cubic kilometers worth)?
How many personally safe interior habitats is 2.2e18 m3 actually
worth?
At 1000 m3 per habitat is offering 2.2e12 units. Given a wide
percentage (more than half) for a perfectly rational (meaning
intelligent) infrastructure is still going to offer 1e12 units of 1e3
m3 each.
However, even if we’re talking of a 1% hollow Selene is still offering
an off-world viable habitat that’s worthy of safely hosting 100
billion units, along with 55% as still going for infrastructure.
Seems more than adequate if such a semi-hollow moon were to be
utilized as an off-world shelter or that of an interstellar survival
craft (red supergiant and helium flashover lifeboat), and of course it
gets all the better yet if it should became heavily iced over along
the way.
Along with my LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator and Counter Mass with
the terrific amount of ISS habitat interior) is what makes the to/from
aspects of utilizing our semi-hollow Selene/moon rather simple and
energy efficient, though most likely as owned and operated by China
and India (so expect to pay a hefty toll).
Father Haskell:
How will you feed all 100 billion of those units?
Chinese and India takeout from their LSE-CM/ISS (Selene L1) outpost/
gateway, and otherwise direct fly-by-rocket shipments of fish and rice
via North Korea, and perhaps fresh fruit from Cuba (via Guantanamo
Space Port).
As I'd said, roughly 55% as the lunar community infrastructure should
provide enough volume as industrial greenhouse and accommodating
whatever assortments of chickens, turkeys and pigs. You know, Earth
isn't ever going to be very far away, and even I can think of all
kinds of ways for a continuous supply of just about anything, in
exchange for He3 and any number of other precious elements that would
be mostly robotic mined, processed and efficiently exported to Earth,
or effectively stored for future needs.
Obviously we'd need to accommodate at most fewer than 10 billion such
units as our lunar interior habitats, thereby leaving 95% available as
infrastructure for working within this 1% hollow moon.
Remember, if most everyone is living inside the moon, Eden/Earth
stands a darn good chance of once again becoming a thriving plant and
animal sanctuary that's nearly devoid of humans and their industrial
scale polluting. (perhaps at most 1% stays with Earth in order to
repair/salvage the frail environment and help feed the other 99% of
folks living within the moon, and the subsequent visiting of Earth by
these others would become a highly restricted privilege).
However, if our continuing recession turns into WWIII, that gets all-
out and downright nuclear dirty, plus otherwise chemical and
biologically lethal, there may be few if any safe places on Earth
worth risking further genetic mutations to your frail DNA.
Trust me, I have a reasonably failsafe plan. It's rather complex and
certainly not perfect, but at least it's offering a whole lot better
constructive option than most any other plan of salvaging humanity
that’s designed mostly to benefit only the rich and powerful surviving
off-world, while the rest of us village idiots get to tough it out and
otherwise end up paying for everything that primarily benefits these
rich and powerful individuals (including fighting their wars).
Btw; If a black hole were merely that of an event horizon shell of
whatever horrific mass and density (say a thick swarm of tightly
packed electrons orbiting this hollow void or perhaps sustaining a
small core of positron antimatter) as surrounded by whatever makes you
a happy camper:
Once again, a little physics food for thought: The gravity force
inside a spherical shell is always zero, that is unless it has some
kind of an extremely massive core that’s magnetically centered or
somehow electrostatic isolated within this otherwise hollow sphere.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
Geothermal/geodynamic derived gasses plus atomic produced hydrogen and
helium (under great pressure) = fast p-waves > 8 km/sec (obviously
stellar compressed gasses far exceed p-waves of 100 km/sec), but then
Earth and most everything else is after all made of star stuff.
Supposedly at 65 GPa, hydrogen offers a p-wave velocity of <20 km/sec
(depending on temperature, whereas the higher the temperature you’d
think the faster those p-waves), although the low density metallic
element of sodium by rights should also offer a relatively fast
seismic p-wave, from which the average interior density of our Selene/
moon can be interpreted. However, the potential hollowness of our
moon needs 3D seismic mapping that should have been accomplished as of
decades ago.
Mysteries of the Inner Earth (including our hollow moon)
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/inner_earth/inner.htm#....
The Solid Earth Hypothesis
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/inner_earth/inner1.htm
“Since the density of the Earth increases with depth you would expect
the waves to slow down with increasing depth. Why, then, do both P-
and S-waves speed up as they go deeper? This can only happen because
the incompressibility and rigidity of the Earth increase faster with
depth than density increases. [2]”
“Thus geophysicists simply adjust the values for rigidity and
incompressibility to fit in with their preconceptions regarding
density and velocity distribution within the earth! In other words,
their arguments are circular.”
“*P-wave velocity = square root of [(incompressibility + 4/3rigidity)
divided by density]. S-wave velocity = square root of [rigidity
divided by density]. In a fluid, rigidity vanishes and S waves cannot
propagate at all.”
“On 8 June 1994, one of the largest deep earthquakes of the 20th
century, with a magnitude of 8.3 on the Richter scale, exploded 640 km
beneath Bolivia. It caused the whole earth to ring like a bell for
months on end; every 20 minutes or so, the entire planet expanded and
contracted by a minute amount. A significant feature of the Bolivian
earthquake was that it extended horizontally across a 30- by 50-km
plane within the 'subducting slab'. This undermines the hypothesis
that such quakes are caused by olivine within the 'cold' centre of a
slab suddenly being transformed into spinel in a runaway reaction when
the temperature rises above 600°C. It also undermines the theory that
gravity increases with depth; if this were true, the motion of
earthquakes at such depths should be nearly vertical [4]. There
appears to be something very wrong with scientific theories about what
exists and what is happening deep within the earth.”
“Rock density is generally expected to increase with depth, as
pressures rise. Results from the Kola hole indicated that densities
did increase with depth initially, but at 4.5 km the drill encountered
a sudden decrease in density, presumably due to increased porosity.
The results also showed that increases in seismic velocity do not have
to be caused by an increase in rock basicity. The Soviet Minister of
Geology reported that 'with increasing depth in the Kola hole, the
expected increase in rock densities was therefore not recorded.
Neither was any increase in the speed of seismic waves nor any other
changes in the physical properties of the rocks detected. Thus the
traditional idea that geological data obtained from the surface can be
directly correlated with geological materials in the deep crust must
be reexamined“
It seems below 4.5 km is where the density of Earth starts decreasing,
as though the basalt reinforced shell/crust above is taking most of
the gravity compression load, and of what’s below is simply less than
understood by way of any interior model or geophysical computer
simulations.
Geomagnetism:
“An alternative theory has been proposed by J.M. Herndon, who
suggests that the earth's magnetic field is largely produced by
electric currents generated by a self-sustaining nuclear fission
reaction in a uranium (and thorium) subcore at the centre of the
earth, having a density as high as 26 g/cm³ [5]. However, the
existence of such a subcore is entirely hypothetical.”
Apparently the geomagnetic/electromagnetic cause and affect that
sustains our vast and protective magnetosphere at a trillion+ fold
greater worth than anything humanly devised or even proposed is yet
another highly subjective piece of physics and science work that we’re
supposed to accept as mainstream objective matter of fact, even though
there are few actual facts, because any thoughts of revising our
interpretations are forbidden.
Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
This only applies to the ideal hollow sphere, which of course does
not represent Earth or that of our Selene/moon. However, perhaps
somewhat in between the realm of absolute compressed solids and
whatever highly compressed metallic fluids could be a little give and
take, whereas compress gasses at less gravity would coexist without
causing problems or imposing weirdness upon the robust outer shell and
of it’s fluid liner.
There is obviously much we do not objectively know, and it seems there
are many here in Usenet/newsgroups that never want us to discover or
better understand whatever makes Earth and our moon tick (so to
speak), much less to ever utilize the zero delta-V of our moon/Selene
L1, Venus L2 or consider how applied technology makes the planet Venus
perfectly viable for an intelligent species (such as us humans). In
order to fend off the general media and other public interest, there’s
a gauntlet of topic/author stalking applied for everything that puts
their mainstream mindset and policy at risk, and otherwise there’s
always topic/author banishment, and apparently of their faith-based
sins no matters how egregious are to be forgiven, even though the past
and ongoing benefits from such faith perpetrated and unpoliced
debauchery are in charge of most everything that counts.
No wonder we have so much social/economic disparity, wars and global
inflation that primarily benefits the mostly faith-based rich and
powerful that seemingly can’t be avoided, perhaps because being a
mainstream bully requires hardly any real intelligence outside of brut
force or false flagged efforts.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:17 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 20, 6:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
[/quote]
There actually is a natural or preexisting hole or vertical cave like
entrance into that thick crust of our moon, plus odds are looking good
there will be others discovered. There's still no objective or
deductively subjective reasons to believe that moon isn't at least
semi-hollow within and under that robust and heavy mineral saturated
crust.
http://www.tonic.com/article/newly-found-moon-hole-may-lead-to-cave/
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18030-found-first-skylight-on-t...
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:45 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
[/quote]
Do I sense the fear of those that should know better?
Why does our Selene/moon have to be solid, clean through and through?
If it's supposedly solid (compacted to its iron core), then why
doesn't it have greater mass?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 25, 12:45 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
Do I sense the fear of those that really should know better?
Why does our Selene/moon have to be solid, clean through and through?
If it's supposedly a solid moon (compacted to its iron core), then why
doesn't it have greater mass?
[/quote]
Where is it objectively nailed shut that our moon is a solid orb?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
[/quote]
Why does the geology of our moon (from its physically dark surface to
its marginally hot core and apparent lack of any geothermal events
taking place) have to match that of what the mostly fluid sphere of
Earth represents?
That’s really odd, for all the best educated parrots of mainstream to
think that Earth’s interior can only increase in density and pressure
per added depth, because otherwise in deep underground caves or mine
shafts, other than the expected dynamics of atmospheric pressure
increase that’s obvious and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km
depth unless you plan on artificially cooling that vertical column of
air in order to get a 100% increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any
other significant geology pressures for our physiology to contend
with, including while swimming or scuba diving in those deep
underground lakes or aquifers, and there’s certainly not any big
increase in gravity (if anything it only measurably increases ever so
slightly), and there’s certainly no objective way of telling if the
inner core is merely that of a dense shell that’s hollow inside, or
not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2064-67.pdf
Perhaps the geometric arch and/or robust geode like shell of whatever
sphere isn’t really as structurally compression worthy or even it’s
density all that buoyant as we’d thought. However, we certainly know
that it can hold back a great deal of pressure.
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth and subsequent temperature there’s
only a relatively slight atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its external surroundings, at least until it’s broken
into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less density
substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or displaced
by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An interior cavity
of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply fragmented and
removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or farside of our Selene/
moon, under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon populated and otherwise
very paramagnetic, as such could be offering quite a large volume of a
hollow interior to work with. Being situated 100 km underground might
seem downright testy, but on the moon it’s actually kind of nifty to
ponder.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:12 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Is our physically dark moon really just a weird monochrome kind of
inert gray that's conditionally retro-reflective?
Are we still being intentionally fed selective science?
~ BG
On Oct 30, 12:33 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]Why does the geology of our moon (from its physically dark surface to
its marginally hot core and apparent lack of any geothermal events
taking place) have to match that of what the mostly fluid sphere of
Earth represents?
That’s really odd, for all the best educated parrots of mainstream to
think that Earth’s interior can only increase in density and pressure
per added depth, because otherwise in deep underground caves or mine
shafts, other than the expected dynamics of atmospheric pressure
increase that’s obvious and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km
depth unless you plan on artificially cooling that vertical column of
air in order to get a 100% increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any
other significant geology pressures for our physiology to contend
with, including while swimming or scuba diving in those deep
underground lakes or aquifers, and there’s certainly not any big
increase in gravity (if anything it only measurably increases ever so
slightly), and there’s certainly no objective way of telling if the
inner core is merely that of a dense shell that’s hollow inside, or
not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2....
Perhaps the geometric arch and/or robust geode like shell of whatever
sphere isn’t really as structurally compression worthy or even it’s
density all that buoyant as we’d thought. However, we certainly know
that it can hold back a great deal of pressure.
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth and subsequent temperature there’s
only a relatively slight atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its external surroundings, at least until it’s broken
into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less density
substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or displaced
by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An interior cavity
of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply fragmented and
removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or farside of our Selene/
moon, under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon populated and otherwise
very paramagnetic, as such could be offering quite a large volume of a
hollow interior to work with. Being situated 100 km underground might
seem downright testy, but on the moon it’s actually kind of nifty to
ponder.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:46 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:33 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
Why does the geology of our moon (from its physically dark surface to
its marginally hot core and apparent lack of any geothermal events
taking place) have to match that of what the mostly fluid sphere of
Earth represents?
That’s really odd, for all the best educated parrots of mainstream to
think that Earth’s interior can only increase in density and pressure
per added depth, because otherwise in deep underground caves or mine
shafts, other than the expected dynamics of atmospheric pressure
increase that’s obvious and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km
depth unless you plan on artificially cooling that vertical column of
air in order to get a 100% increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any
other significant geology pressures for our physiology to contend
with, including while swimming or scuba diving in those deep
underground lakes or aquifers, and there’s certainly not any big
increase in gravity (if anything it only measurably increases ever so
slightly), and there’s certainly no objective way of telling if the
inner core is merely that of a dense shell that’s hollow inside, or
not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2....
Perhaps the geometric arch and/or robust geode like shell of whatever
sphere isn’t really as structurally compression worthy or even it’s
density all that buoyant as we’d thought. However, we certainly know
that it can hold back a great deal of pressure.
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth and subsequent temperature there’s
only a relatively slight atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its external surroundings, at least until it’s broken
into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less density
substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or displaced
by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An interior cavity
of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply fragmented and
removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or farside of our Selene/
moon, under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon populated and otherwise
very paramagnetic, as such could be offering quite a large volume of a
hollow interior to work with. Being situated 100 km underground might
seem downright testy, but on the moon it’s actually kind of nifty to
ponder.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
[/quote]
With near zero gravity within the offset core of our extremely unusual
moon, and perfectly good odds that the substance outside of that core
being of a relatively low density and/or semi-hollow substance that's
sandwiched between that offset core and the otherwise extremely dense,
thick and mineral saturated basalt crust, as such is what drives my
continuing interpretation that our Selene/moon is in fact usability
hollow.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:31 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:33 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
Why does the geology of our moon (from its physically dark surface to
its marginally hot core and apparent lack of any geothermal events
taking place) have to match that of what the mostly fluid sphere of
Earth represents?
That’s really odd, for all the best educated parrots of mainstream to
think that Earth’s interior can only increase in density and pressure
per added depth, because otherwise in deep underground caves or mine
shafts, other than the expected dynamics of atmospheric pressure
increase that’s obvious and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km
depth unless you plan on artificially cooling that vertical column of
air in order to get a 100% increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any
other significant geology pressures for our physiology to contend
with, including while swimming or scuba diving in those deep
underground lakes or aquifers, and there’s certainly not any big
increase in gravity (if anything it only measurably increases ever so
slightly), and there’s certainly no objective way of telling if the
inner core is merely that of a dense shell that’s hollow inside, or
not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2....
Perhaps the geometric arch and/or robust geode like shell of whatever
sphere isn’t really as structurally compression worthy or even it’s
density all that buoyant as we’d thought. However, we certainly know
that it can hold back a great deal of pressure.
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth and subsequent temperature there’s
only a relatively slight atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its external surroundings, at least until it’s broken
into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less density
substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or displaced
by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An interior cavity
of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply fragmented and
removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or farside of our Selene/
moon, under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon populated and otherwise
very paramagnetic, as such could be offering quite a large volume of a
hollow interior to work with. Being situated 100 km underground might
seem downright testy, but on the moon it’s actually kind of nifty to
ponder.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
[/quote]
With near zero gravity within the offset core of our extremely unusual
moon, and perfectly good odds that the substance outside of that solid
core being of a relatively low density and/or semi-hollow (poorly
compacted) substance that's sandwiched between that offset core and
the otherwise extremely dense, thick and mineral saturated basalt
crust, as such is what drives my continuing interpretation that our
Selene/moon is in fact usability hollow.
Even if this hollow or easily excavated under-crust potential were
limited as to 0.1%, as such this kind of volume would represent a
terrific off-world outpost and otherwise failsafe kind of habitat
that’s existing as is. (2.2e16 m3 is hardly insignificant)
The unusually mineral saturated and otherwise mascon populated basalt
crust itself could also have existing passages and/or geode like
pockets, as deep enough and volumetric enough to utilize as is. In
fact, it might be extremely odd if such didn’t exist.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:40 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:33 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
Why does the geology of our moon (from its physically dark surface to
its marginally hot core and apparent lack of any geothermal events
taking place) have to match that of what the mostly fluid sphere of
Earth represents?
That’s really odd, for all the best educated parrots of mainstream to
think that Earth’s interior can only increase in density and pressure
per added depth, because otherwise in deep underground caves or mine
shafts, other than the expected dynamics of atmospheric pressure
increase that’s obvious and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km
depth unless you plan on artificially cooling that vertical column of
air in order to get a 100% increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any
other significant geology pressures for our physiology to contend
with, including while swimming or scuba diving in those deep
underground lakes or aquifers, and there’s certainly not any big
increase in gravity (if anything it only measurably increases ever so
slightly), and there’s certainly no objective way of telling if the
inner core is merely that of a dense shell that’s hollow inside, or
not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2....
Perhaps the geometric arch and/or robust geode like shell of whatever
sphere isn’t really as structurally compression worthy or even it’s
density all that buoyant as we’d thought. However, we certainly know
that it can hold back a great deal of pressure.
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth and subsequent temperature there’s
only a relatively slight atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its external surroundings, at least until it’s broken
into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less density
substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or displaced
by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An interior cavity
of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply fragmented and
removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or farside of our Selene/
moon, under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon populated and otherwise
very paramagnetic, as such could be offering quite a large volume of a
hollow interior to work with. Being situated 100 km underground might
seem downright testy, but on the moon it’s actually kind of nifty to
ponder.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
[/quote]
Water at the environment of 3e-21 bar (the vacuum as found at Selene
L1) pretty much instantly demoleculizes itself into something less
than atoms of hydrogen and oxygen, and that’s pretty much regardless
of its volume and original mass. Therefore, the extremely weak
Newtonian force of gravity or molecular binding force isn’t
necessarily worth all that much when the water or whatever fluid
element itself represents a zero delta-V and especially when situated
within such an extreme vacuum. If there’s anything holding a given
molecule of h2o together, it’s those strong electrostatic, diamagnetic
plus the usual atomic and subatomic binding forces and whatever
subsequent worth of good old pressure that doesn’t necessarily involve
or require gravity (although naked pressure can’t coexist w/o gravity
or vise versa, whereas artificial pressure or vacuum can coexist if
there’s a shell or artificial energy field of some kind)..
The extremely thick (50<150 km) and robust basalt crust that’s so
mineral saturated about our Selene/moon offers a terrific shell.
Within or especially under that shell is where life as we know it
could with some technology manage to survive, as well as manage to
contribute to terrestrial matters of exotic minerals and lots more.
At 0.1% hollow (within geode pockets, cavernous layers or easily
excavated to suit), there’s certainly no shortage of habitat volume,
and the maintaining of pressure simply can’t be an insurmountable
problem.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:33 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
Why does the geology of our moon (from its physically dark surface to
its marginally hot core and apparent lack of any geothermal events
taking place) have to match that of what the mostly fluid sphere of
Earth represents?
That’s really odd, for all the best educated parrots of mainstream to
think that Earth’s interior can only increase in density and pressure
per added depth, because otherwise in deep underground caves or mine
shafts, other than the expected dynamics of atmospheric pressure
increase that’s obvious and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km
depth unless you plan on artificially cooling that vertical column of
air in order to get a 100% increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any
other significant geology pressures for our physiology to contend
with, including while swimming or scuba diving in those deep
underground lakes or aquifers, and there’s certainly not any big
increase in gravity (if anything it only measurably increases ever so
slightly), and there’s certainly no objective way of telling if the
inner core is merely that of a dense shell that’s hollow inside, or
not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2....
Perhaps the geometric arch and/or robust geode like shell of whatever
sphere isn’t really as structurally compression worthy or even it’s
density all that buoyant as we’d thought. However, we certainly know
that it can hold back a great deal of pressure.
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth and subsequent temperature there’s
only a relatively slight atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its external surroundings, at least until it’s broken
into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less density
substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or displaced
by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An interior cavity
of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply fragmented and
removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or farside of our Selene/
moon, under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon populated and otherwise
very paramagnetic, as such could be offering quite a large volume of a
hollow interior to work with. Being situated 100 km underground might
seem downright testy, but on the moon it’s actually kind of nifty to
ponder.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
[/quote]
Since I’ve gotten nothing but grief and avoidance about our hollow
moon, I’ve revised the topic from “The 1~10% hollow moon” to “The
0.1~1% hollow moon”. Not that it matters, because the mainstream
still isn’t buying any of it.
Water exposed at the environment of 3e-21 bar (the vacuum as found at
Selene L1) pretty much instantly demoleculizes itself into something
less than atoms of hydrogen and oxygen, and that’s pretty much
regardless of its volume and original mass. Therefore, the extremely
weak Newtonian force of gravity or molecular binding force isn’t
necessarily worth all that much when the water or whatever fluid
element itself represents a zero delta-V and especially lost to that
solar wind when situated within such an extreme vacuum. If there’s
anything holding a given molecule of h2o together, it’s those strong
electrostatic, diamagnetic plus the usual atomic and subatomic binding
forces and whatever subsequent worth of good old pressure that doesn’t
necessarily involve or require gravity (although naked pressure can’t
coexist w/o gravity or vise versa, whereas artificial pressure or
vacuum can only coexist if there’s a shell or artificial energy field
of some kind)..
The extremely thick (50<150 km) and robust basalt crust that’s so
mineral saturated about our Selene/moon offers a terrific shell.
Within or especially under that shell is where life as we know it
could with some technology manage to survive, as well as manage to
contribute to terrestrial matters of exotic minerals and lots more.
At 0.1% hollow (within geode pockets, cavernous layers or easily
excavated to suit), there’s certainly no shortage of habitat volume,
and the maintaining of pressure simply can’t be an insurmountable
problem.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:49 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 4, 10:38 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 12:33 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 5:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 22, 8:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear Mr Brad Guth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
Or perhaps having multiple near misses of an icy Selene before the
final lithobraking encounter.
For some unexplained reasons, the modern world as of the last ice age
has to believe that we've always had that moon of ours. I believe
it's mostly a faith-based kind of spooky thing, because otherwise
science can seem to place or nail down anything objective as to
exactly when Earth got the bulk of her seasonal tilt or the Arctic
ocean basin. It's also as though 11,711 years ago was somehow just
another normal terrestrial thing that we have to accept without
anything objective as a global and/or solar cause to go by.
The "Cosmological Ice Ages" seems to fit rather nicely within the
elliptical trek we have had with the Sirius star system, and yet even
though there's nothing else out there that comes even close to what
Sirius has to offer, it seems the most mainstream opposition to any of
this is that of the kosher interpretation, that's as faith-based
closed mindset as you can possibly get, including their recent
obfuscation/exclusion of those Newtonian laws of physics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
http://www.alaskapublishing.com
http://www.guarddogbooks.com
Why does the geology of our moon (from its physically dark surface to
its marginally hot core and apparent lack of any geothermal events
taking place) have to match that of what the mostly fluid sphere of
Earth represents?
That’s really odd, for all the best educated parrots of mainstream to
think that Earth’s interior can only increase in density and pressure
per added depth, because otherwise in deep underground caves or mine
shafts, other than the expected dynamics of atmospheric pressure
increase that’s obvious and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km
depth unless you plan on artificially cooling that vertical column of
air in order to get a 100% increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any
other significant geology pressures for our physiology to contend
with, including while swimming or scuba diving in those deep
underground lakes or aquifers, and there’s certainly not any big
increase in gravity (if anything it only measurably increases ever so
slightly), and there’s certainly no objective way of telling if the
inner core is merely that of a dense shell that’s hollow inside, or
not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2...
Perhaps the geometric arch and/or robust geode like shell of whatever
sphere isn’t really as structurally compression worthy or even it’s
density all that buoyant as we’d thought. However, we certainly know
that it can hold back a great deal of pressure.
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth and subsequent temperature there’s
only a relatively slight atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its external surroundings, at least until it’s broken
into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less density
substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or displaced
by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An interior cavity
of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply fragmented and
removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or farside of our Selene/
moon, under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon populated and otherwise
very paramagnetic, as such could be offering quite a large volume of a
hollow interior to work with. Being situated 100 km underground might
seem downright testy, but on the moon it’s actually kind of nifty to
ponder.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
Since I’ve gotten nothing but grief and avoidance about our hollow
moon, I’ve revised the topic from “The 1~10% hollow moon” to “The
0.1~1% hollow moon”. Not that it matters, because the mainstream
still isn’t buying any of it.
Water exposed at the environment of 3e-21 bar (the vacuum as found at
Selene L1) pretty much instantly demoleculizes itself into something
less than atoms of hydrogen and oxygen, and that’s pretty much
regardless of its volume and original mass. Therefore, the extremely
weak Newtonian force of gravity or molecular binding force isn’t
necessarily worth all that much when the water or whatever fluid
element itself represents a zero delta-V and especially lost to that
solar wind when situated within such an extreme vacuum. If there’s
anything holding a given molecule of h2o together, it’s those strong
electrostatic, diamagnetic plus the usual atomic and subatomic binding
forces and whatever subsequent worth of good old pressure that doesn’t
necessarily involve or require gravity (although naked pressure can’t
coexist w/o gravity or vise versa, whereas artificial pressure or
vacuum can only coexist if there’s a shell or artificial energy field
of some kind)..
The extremely thick (50<150 km) and robust basalt crust that’s so
mineral saturated about our Selene/moon offers a terrific shell.
Within or especially under that shell is where life as we know it
could with some technology manage to survive, as well as manage to
contribute to terrestrial matters of exotic minerals and lots more.
At 0.1% hollow (within geode pockets, cavernous layers or easily
excavated to suit), there’s certainly no shortage of habitat volume,
and the maintaining of pressure simply can’t be an insurmountable
problem.
~ BG
[/quote]
With a near zero gravity within the offset core of our extremely
unusual moon, and perfectly good odds that the substance outside of
that solid core being of a relatively low density and/or semi-hollow
(poorly compacted) substance that's sandwiched between that offset
core and the otherwise extremely dense, thick and mineral saturated
basalt crust, as such is what drives my continuing interpretation that
our Selene/moon is in fact usability hollow.
Even if this hollow or easily excavated under-crust potential were
limited as to a volume of 0.1%, as such this kind of crust protected
volume would represent a terrific off-world outpost and otherwise
failsafe kind of habitat that’s existing as is. (2.2e16 m3 is hardly
insignificant)
The unusually mineral saturated and otherwise mascon populated basalt
crust itself could also offer existing passages and/or geode like
pockets, as deep enough and volumetric enough to utilize as is. In
fact, it might be extremely odd if such voids didn’t exist.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 22, 7:40 am, Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
<australia.mining-pion... at (no spam) neuf.fr> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 21, 6:57 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
*> Very interesting feedback. I'll have to get back with you on much
of
*> this.
*
*> I'm thinking 12,300~12,900 some odd years ago is when much of this
*> planet was affected by the near miss and then the impact of an icy
*> Selene, and it took nearly a thousand years for the sky to open up
and
*> let the sunlight in as of 11,711 years ago.
*
*> ~ BG
Dear MrBradGuth
Correct Brad, impact of the Moon normal to the center of present
Pacific Ring of Fire, and producing by hydraulic counter reaction the
immediate surrection of the whole Alpine type mountainous ranges. In
fact the moon impact was inevitable & resulted first from the forced
displacement of the Earth-Moon complex through the near miss with a
comet
...hence the Dilluvium of Fire as well reported in ancient texts &
the pushing away of the pair on the ecliptic.
The Earth mass made recovering quicker from the impulse but the Moon
less inertia made continue till impact.
... hence the Dilluvium of Water as well reported in ancient legends
and used by the JIC sects to fit in the fraudulent tales .. stolen
from Summer : Nipissin & so on . The Dilluvium of water was indeed in
phase with the Alpine folding & released the Zillions of material
which were churned & crashed & rounded & granulometricly discriminated
in Cyclonic Fashion ( Cyclonic Granulometric Pattern of the Quaternary
Deposits ref True Geology). Now interpreted by millions of
Universities brainwashed Cretins to justify some tales a) of Ice Ages
b) Glaciations c) evolution since all animals & life especially
dinosaurs were completely wiped out
A SIMPLE APPLICATION FURTHER OF FLUID ENGINEERING by careful
examination of the masses of Quaternary Deposits slapped on the
Buttress of the Alp, the Himalayas, the Andes etc demonstrate waves
of 2000 m with an energy of 400 km /h. No Glaciations ever in fact
ever as the poor Universities Zombies assert blindly ....
BUT A NEAR IMMEDIATE SHIFT ON THE ECLIPTIC OF OVER 1 MILLION MILES
AWAY FROM MOTHER STAR i.e OUR SUN
Hence, basing such finding & estimate on the UPL or Universal
Pressure Law ( founding rock of the True Geology) Dinosaurs although
were in great part wiped out by the commotion, such large animals
would not be able to survive on Earth present orbit since the Cosmic
Pressure or say the Local Gradient of Energy or still say again as in
the True Geology approach : the Cosmic Density Atmosphere would not
be consistent with their bones structures & would immediately lead to
the death by choking in a floundering inappropriate skeleton !
I am afraid that there is NO GANGPLANK AT ALL between the Fraudulent
Geology under-scored by the JIC Sects, (equally fraudulent indeed
since its alleged prophets were, since unable to known the very near
past, of course unable to anticipate the Future indeed) and the True
Geology. We are playing here on really different playground indeed :
The Fraudulent Universities Official Geology with his childish
theories in the kindergarten of devotees to the Dark Ages
Superstition, & the True Geology reserved to the Highest Minds able to
achieve synthesis between all disciplines known blasting its way alone
as a Pioneering Science lighting the way for beleaguered Humanity
grasping in Sectarian Ignorance to follow !
I praise here your noted independence of mind allowing you, to not
only listen to unconventional discourses droned in the background of
the continuous bleating of the Oxford Dean 's mind slaves, bleating
endlessly to their Hutton, Lyell, Haggard-ziz, Dar Ween, etc Saints
for guidance, but as well to see the merits of a True Geology not
based on dogmas, learnt by heart theories, endless circular
referencing, mob consensus approval BUT ON THE MOST EASILY VERIFIABLE
LAWS OF PHYSICS & ENGINEERING ! Indeed the most advertised tool
towards reaching the Truth of not only the History of Mankind but the
one of our Earth in True Geology is a the well known approach of Back
Engineering, TO WHICH THE EVIDENT TRADELESS BOUGREDANES & GOGOLOGIST
MASQUERADING AS GEOLOGISTS THE WORLD OVER HAVE NOT THE SLIGHTEST CLUE.
Yours faithfully
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Founder of the True Geology )
[/quote]
Since I’ve gotten nothing but the usual grief and avoidance about our
hollow moon, I’ve revised this topic from “The 1~10% hollow moon” to
“The 0.1~1% hollow moon”. Not that it matters, because the mainstream
still isn’t buying any of it, nor allowing media to pick up on any
notions of such.
Water exposed at the environment of 3e-21 bar (the vacuum as found at
Selene L1) pretty much instantly demoleculizes itself into something
less than atoms of hydrogen and oxygen, and that’s pretty much
regardless of its volume and original mass. Therefore, the extremely
weak Newtonian force of gravity or molecular binding force isn’t
necessarily worth all that much when the water or whatever fluid
element itself represents a zero delta-V and especially being lost to
that solar wind when situated within such an extreme vacuum. If
there’s anything holding a given molecule of h2o together, it’s those
strong electrostatic, diamagnetic plus the usual atomic and subatomic
binding forces and whatever subsequent worth of good old pressure that
doesn’t necessarily involve or require gravity (although naked
pressure simply can’t coexist w/o gravity or vise versa, whereas
artificial pressure or vacuum can only coexist if there’s a shell or
artificial energy field of some kind).
The extremely thick (50<150 km) and robust basalt crust that’s so
mineral saturated about our Selene/moon offers an absolutely terrific
shell. Within or especially under that shell is where life as we know
it could with some technology manage to survive, as well as manage to
contribute to terrestrial matters of exotic minerals and lots more.
At 0.1% hollow (within geode pockets, cavernous layers or easily
excavated to suit), there’s certainly no shortage of worthy habitat
volume, and thereby maintaining of atmospheric pressure simply can’t
be an insurmountable problem.
With near zero gravity within the offset core of our extremely unusual
moon, and perfectly good odds that the substance outside of that solid
core being of a relatively low density and/or semi-hollow (poorly
compacted) substance that's sandwiched between that offset core and
the otherwise extremely dense, thick and mineral saturated basalt
crust, as such is what drives my continuing interpretation that our
Selene/moon is in fact usability hollow.
Even if this hollow or easily excavated under-crust potential were
limited as to a volume of 0.1%, as such this kind of nicely crust
protected volume would represent a terrific off-world outpost and
otherwise failsafe kind of habitat that’s existing as is. (0.1% of
2.2e19 m3 is 2.2e16 m3, and that’s hardly insignificant, as
representing 3.26e6 m3 for each and every man, woman and child would
make a pretty nifty interstellar spacecraft, or call it our lifeboat)
The unusually mineral saturated and otherwise mascon populated basalt
crust itself could also offer existing passages and/or geode like
pockets, as deep enough and volumetric enough to safely utilize as
is. In fact, it might be extremely odd if such voids didn’t exist.
Most of those larger lunar craters are unusually shallow (>1% of their
diameter), as though that original surface prior to impact having a
thick layer of protective ice. Of somewhat newer and much smaller
diameter craters offer bedrock impression or morph depths of <10%,
with only a few exceptions that suggest diameter/depth ratios of <
2:1. However, one of the most recent LRO discovered craters or
possibly an old geothermal vent that’s kind of small is also
suggesting as having a much greater depth than its diameter (in other
words a significant vertical hole or cave like formation).
The 0.1~1% hollow moon / Brad Guth |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:33 pm
|
|