Author Topic: ET Q&A's  (Read 2 times)

Admin

  • Administrator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
ET Q&A's
« on: August 25, 2017, 10:06:10 am »
***  This thread lists the HISTORY of Questions asked and Answers provided from the ET Discussion section. ***

[b]Expansion Tectonics Questions & Answers[/b]

[b]Summary of Questions[/b] (See next post for the same Questions with Answers, except for unanswered questions.)
(The questions are organized according to importance:
This sign > indicates questions not yet answered;
This + indicates new questions;
This ** means question is preliminarily answered;
Star [img]http://forums.naturalphilosophy.org/images/icons/star.png[/img] means question is well answered.
James kindly sent me a copy of his manuscript, so I'll try to find answers there too and post them below.)

[b]**Q1 Why did scientists reject expansion?[/b] [See answer under Q1 in next post]

[b]>Q2+ Do the shapes and (rock and fossil type) contents of opposite continental shores of all oceans (especially the Pacific) match very precisely?[/b] [[color=#ff3333][b]THIS IS THE MOST CRUCIAL QUESTION; IF AFFIRMED, IT WOULD NEARLY PROVE THE THEORY:[/b][/color] New question superficially answered. See under Q2 in third post]

[b]>Q3+ Did the Pacific Ocean expand first, followed by the Atlantic Ocean expanding and pushing the Americas over part of the Pacific?[/b] [New question not answered yet]

[b]>Q4+ Doesn't the sedimentary rock record indicate that all of the sediments were deposited by turbulent flooding over a short time period of months or years?[/b] [[color=#ff3333][b]THIS IS THE SECOND MOST CRUCIAL QUESTION; IF AFFIRMED, IT WOULD REQUIRE MODIFYING THE THEORY:[/b][/color] New question not answered yet]

[b]**Q5 What is the source of mass increase?[/b] [See answer under Q5 in next post]

[b]**Q6 Can Earth's total gain and loss of mass be quantified?[/b] [See answer under Q6 in next post]

[b]>Q7 Is mass increase dependent on the geomagnetic field?[/b] [Partly answered under Q2 in third post]

[b]**Q8 What is the geological evidence for mass increase?[/b] [See answer under Q8 in next post]

[b]**Q9 What is the mechanism for expansion?[/b] [See answer under Q9 in next post]

[b]>Q10 Does the fact that huge animals of the past could not move in today's gravity prove expansion?[/b] [[color=#ff3333][b]THIS IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION:[/b] [/color]Not answered yet]

[b]>Q11 What is the evidence of accelerating expansion?[/b] [[color=#ff3333][b]THIS IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION:[/b] [/color]Not answered yet]

[b]>Q12+ What determines the rate of expansion? And, if the rate of expansion increases, what causes the increased rate?[/b] [[color=#ff3333][b]THIS IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION:[/b] [/color]New question not answered yet]

[b]**Q13 How can there be subduction with expansion?[/b] [See answer under Q13 in next post]

[b]**Q14 Do the lengths of subduction zones accord with ET?[/b] [See answer under Q14 in next post]

[b]**Q15 Why is there more expansion in ocean basins than on continents?[/b] [See answer under Q15 in next post]

[b]**Q16 How can mountains move horizontally great distances with expansion?[/b] [See answer under Q16 in next post]

[b]>Q17 How can ET account for the orientation of mountain ranges?[/b] [Not answered yet]

[b]**Q18 Does expansion show up initially only as crustal warping?[/b] [See answer under Q18 in next post]

[b]**Q19 Why hasn't sea level dropped greatly during expansion?[/b] [See answer under Q19 in next post]

[b]>Q20 How is iron formed in the Earth?[/b] [Not answered yet]

[b]>Q21+ If mass increase comes from the Sun, does the Sun shrink?[/b] [New question not answered yet]

[b]>Q22+ Do all rocky bodies expand? Do rocky bodies eventually become gas giants?[/b] [See partial in third post]

-----

Personal Note for possible next-level questions:
[[Q4a How could sedimentary rock strata have been separated into 3 basic types with each type being deposited individually for thousands of years followed by another individual type for more thousands of years without major flooding being the cause of separation of the sediment types?]]
[[Q4b How could conforming strata have been deposited for thousands of years without significant signs of erosion between strata?]]


[b]From Etherpad Discussion: This is to be edited later[/b]
_B: James at the conference gave a very indepth presentation. I don't know enough to support it yet.
_L: If James were to focus on determining if the rock and fossil types on opposite shores of the Pacific match up, he'd come close to clinching his theory (but not quite).
_B: Yes. I agree. But he said he has done that in great detail. He also matched all the magnetic pole data. This is what we have to wring out by bringing forth the evidence.
_L: Even if the shapes of opposite shores and the rock and fossil types match, it's still possible that Earth hasn't expanded significantly. Fred Juenemann pointed out that if the Earth was previously oval-shaped, such as due to magnetic forces, the same results would occur as for expansion.
_B: I believe there are people in CNPS, or others that we can draw to CNPS, already have the information needed to reslove these kinds of discrepancies. That's what I'm saying should be our goal - to develop a process that resolves the discrepancies. That's what I've tried to set up a process to do.
_So, using only this last point that you raised, try to lead the group to HELP YOU get to the answer. You should use the coordination sections to lay out your plan, what you want to do, what you want to achieve, and ask them directly to help.
_L: I'll probably copy [our discussion] and edit it and show you the result, possibly to put on the Forum or something.
_B: OK. What I thought it would be used for is starting a new discussion on communication tools. But, at this stage, no one else will tune in. So we'd just be using the Forum to organize and store the result. So, edit with that in mind - ie, how what you write will be read by some total new person years from now.

_L: I don't see a need for categorizing at this point. I think the questions should just be shown in order of importance to get the point across as to what are the most important questions to answer in detail. I plan to contact and maybe other members late Monday or thereafter, although I need to check manuscript first. Do you know if any members of the email string are interested in discussing ET? If so, do you think they'll be willing to discuss in the 6.2 Discussions section? If not, I'm willing to discuss on the email string and collect any important info they may have, but mainly just on the topics that I think are important for the theory.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+