I'm working with CNPS (
http://naturalphilosophy.org) on a Special Project investigating alternative science models. Earth Science is the first focus of the project. Bruce Leybourne sent me this info & links for a new Expanding Earth website.
EP302: The Earth-Expansion Model Part A
& EP303: The Earth-Expansion Model Part B
by David Noel
http://www.aoi.com.au/EP/EP302.htm/
&
http://www.aoi.com.au/EP/EP303.htm/
On the site are these excerpts.
_... Where the Neutrons in Neutron Stars come from
_... It is generally accepted that all fairly massive celestial objects (from stars, down through planets, to asteroids) were formed in various gravitational aggregation processes. It is not an unreasonable further leap to suggest that when such an aggregated body reaches a certain mass, gravitational pressures at its core will be sufficient to compress some of its matter to neutrons. This is the basis of the CONCORE model....
_... The Concore Model of planet and star interiors
_... Below we will see how the extremely slow decay on neutrons at the Cores of bodies appears responsible for Earth Expansion and many other features of celestial bodies.
_... How Neutron decay generates expansion and energy flow
_... The core neutrons in the Concore model will be almost completely suppressed from decay by virtue of their position. But a tiny fraction of them, particularly those at the outer boundary of the Core, may decay into hydrogen atoms. In doing so, they will increase enormously in volume. It is this mechanism which appears responsible for Earth Expansion and its consequent after-effects.
_To put it into another perspective, it has been calculated that if all the mass of the Earth was in the form of the compressed neutrons making up a neutron star, the planet would be only 366 metres in diameter. The very slow decay of just a fraction of these compressed neutrons would be ample to swell up the planet to its present size.
OTHER RELATED MODELS
Michael Mozina, a member of this forum, has had a theory that the Sun contains a neutron star core that provides its energy. Michael was working with Oliver Manuel on his Iron Sun model. And Charles Cagle had a theory since the late 90s that Earth has a neutron star core that caused periodic expansion of the Earth. Following is some info on Cagle's model.
Charles Cagle on Expanding Earth (from 3 online sources)
Breakthrough on How Continents Divided
viewtopic.php?p=18267&sid=0837289ba8bed ... f46db00e0a
Lloyd » Tue Mar 03, 2009 7: 36 pm
... Charles Cagle theorizes a constantly varying field, which he calls electromagnetotoroid, which changes from a toroid (doughnut shape) to a poloid (egg-shape, I think) and back. He says planetoids contain such fields, which produce neutronium during one of the two stages, which cause planetary expansion. The neutronium would decay rapidly into protons and electrons, which I suppose would mostly form Hydrogen atoms pretty quickly, and, since oxygen is one of the most abundant elements in the Earth, I suppose it would tend to form water, which is a constituent of much of Earth's rocks.
[David Noel at the new website above says regarding the Kola superdeep borehole, first quoting Wikipedia, "the rock at that depth {below 7 km} had been thoroughly fractured and was saturated with water, which was surprising. This water, unlike surface water, must have come from deep-crust minerals and had been unable to reach the surface because of a layer of impermeable rock. Another unexpected discovery was a large quantity of hydrogen gas. The mud that flowed out of the hole was described as 'boiling' with hydrogen". David commented that the Earth's core surface "was working on hydrogen, and water is the most stable oxide of hydrogen, taken up with whatever oxygen was available."]
-------------------------------------
Magnetic field around young star captured
https://phys.org/news/2014-10-magnetic- ... tured.html
October 27, 2014
ccryder1947
_1 / 5 (2) Oct 28, 2014
The idea of an EMT and its dynamic oscillations and ability to create new matter was first conceived of by Charles Cagle in the late 1990's based largely on evidence of a ball lightning event that was written up in Scientific American in 1886. see: 'Curious Phenomenon In Venezuela'; Cowgill, Warner; Scientific American, 55:389, December 18, 1886.
_Any competent professor of E.E. when presented with the dynamics of an E-flux loop will agree with the analysis that an E-loop will convert to an H-loop by the pi/2 radian rotation of the flux density vector around the axis of the Poynting Vector everywhere on the flux toroid and than an H-loop can change back to an E-loop via the same flux density rotation. Further they'll agree that the E-loop mode with be a magnetic dipole and the H-loop mode will be an electric dipole. Our sun displays this oscillation going from solar max to solar minimum and vice-versa. They've yet to understand that solar max is electric dipole mode.
-------------------------------------
To: Charles Cagle
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... Z-pL0aZd4I
[Excerpt of Cagle's first 2 replies]
C. Cagle 6/22/99
In article <7knih2$s9d$1...@phys-ma.sol.co.uk>, M Gallacher <gall...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> okay here some comment for you mr cagle > > 1. if the earth is expanding, why is the pacific closing?
_The Earth isn't presently expanding. The expansion is cyclic and tied one to one with the production of mass in the core each time the electromagnetotoroid of the Earth goes into the poloidal current mode. The Pacific isn't closing. If you wish to believe that the plate margins near trench systems are doing something more than gravitationally relaxing into them from the last expansion episode then be my guest.
> 2. why is there no ocean floor older than the Jurassic
_A series of episodic expansions since the period normally identified as the Jurassic has opened up all the oceans. In other words since the period known as the Jurassic the Earth has expanded about 6.3 fold in volume from having a total surface area of about 57.5 million square miles to the present 196.5 million square miles. link to:
http://people.enternet.com.au/~jmaxlow/ ... global.jpg
> 3. why is the temperature of the earth dropping at a rate that fits > with what we know about major element radioactive decay curves. & > the best one
_It seems that the best calorimetry in the world still is almost a black art so I imagine that it isn't impossible for the interpretation of data to converge toward expectations. History shows this sort of thing to be pattern in science. At the turn of the century we find all of the geologists sedimentary age data suddenly converging from billions of years towards Lord Kelvin's 100 million year age of the Earth that he had calculated using heat flow equations that he developed.
> why is it expanding? the best reply I have heard is we dont know but > we know it is - how sound is that compared with plate tectonics - > imperfect but observable
_The Earth expands each time its electromagnetotoroid (the structure which generates the Earth's dipole field) goes from the toroidal current (ring current) mode to the poloidal current mode. The electromagnetotoroid (EMT) of the Sun phases through such mode changes about every 5.5 years. That is, it takes about 5.5 years to go from solar minimum (maximum magnetic dipole mode) to solar maximum (maximum electric dipole mode). The expansion take place because in the poloidal current mode the Earth's EMT achieves high current densities in the core. A recent discovery I made is that currents which have a fast rising current density can undergo a pi/2 radian current vector rotation which produces (out of a constricted region) a current loop system. On the macroscale such current loops can be very large and on the Sun large scale current loops systems are produced from the core and at the points such current loops pierce the photosphere are produced sunspots. But such current loop systems are scalable; that is to say they can also be produced at the microdomain level and at the proper scale are in direct identity with neutrons. So, when the Earth's EMT goes into the poloidal current mode it can produce hundreds of billions of tons of neutrons per second in the core. The EMT itself is a singularity structure and has a strong gravitational field which keeps the neutrons relatively localized. A gravitational field is a time gradient field. That may be an unfamiliar term to you but time passes at different rates in a gravitational field depending upon the altitude in the field and that differential is expressed as a gradient. Experiments with sychronized atomic clocks have show this effect. The Mossbauer Effect is a confirmation of this also. Charged particles which are overlapping in momentum space behave just oppositely to that which is predicted by Coulomb's law. This is also a bit of new physics which I had discovered. In other words charged particles do not actually obey Coulomb's law when they are in the same rest frame. This is very easy to prove classically using the simplest of arguments.
_Here's my charged particle interaction "general case" which contains four simple parts:
1) "If like charged particles have a common de Broglie wavelength greater than or equal to the interparticle distance then they will attractively interact."
2) "If unlike charged particles have a common de Broglie wavelength greater than or equal to the interparticle distance then they will repulsively interact."
3) "If like charged particles have a common de Broglie wavelength less than the interparticle distance then they will repulsively interact."
4) "If unlike charged particles have a common de Broglie wavelength less than the interparticle distance then they will attractively interact."
Parts three and four correspond to Coulomb's Law but they are subsumed under the 'general case'.
_This 'general case' is part of the foundation for a new and Apocalyptic Physics.
_What is meant by a 'common' de Broglie wavelength?
_The de Broglie wavelength, lambda, of a particle is defined as: lambda=h/mv and then two interacting particles have de Broglie wavelengths which are specific only to that relationship. In a universe of n particles a single particle has n-1 de Broglie wavelengths. Since we're concentrating on a specific relationship then we can arbitrarily distribute the absolute velocity between the two particles into parts to arrive at the single unique solution of a 'common' de Broglie wavelength. This is just a simple way to define whether or not two particles have a common rest frame or occupy a common momentum space.
_The common de Broglie wavelength is (c-lambda) or [Lamba sub c] arrived at by recognizing that for any two charged particles that m1*v1=m2*v2 so that the velocities are distributed inversely with respect to their masses so that V(sub a) = absolute speed between the two particles = v1+v2. The interparticle distance is Dp (D sub p). So, if c-lambda/DpÑ1 then like charged particles are attractively interactive and unlike charges are repulsively interactive. If c-lambda/Dp < 1 then like charged particles are repulsively interactive and unlike charged particles are attractively interactive. This 'general case' fits with all known physics and eliminates the unnecessary 'strong force' and 'weak interaction'.
_Couple this new 'general case' together with a strong time gradient field and you have the perfect environment to catalyze nuclear fusion reactions.
_Moving outward from the inner core the time gradient field lessens (otherwise there wouldn't be a gradient) and neutrons and protons (which are one of the products of neutron decay) differentiate into superheavy and heavy elements which can remain relatively stable under the effects of extreme time dilation. As more mass is produced in the core these nuclei are forced further outward in the field and begin to undergo fission. For any heavy element which fissions into n daughters there is an n-fold increase in atomic volume which radically drops the density and causes a radical rise in buoyancy. Such decays at the outer core causes the development of hot fast rising plumes which as they move upward in the time gradient field become even more radioactive producing more heat which causes greater expansion of the plume material and embues it with even greater buoyancy and upward momentum.
_The data concerning the generation of neutrons by current vector rotations from plasma currents with a fast rising current density is a matter of public record.
See 'Project Sherwood' (The U.S. Program in Controlled Fusion) by Amsa S. Bishop - Library of Congress Cat. No 58-12602 - you will be able to find at least a dozen references where large quantities of neutrons (in bursts) were generated by various pinch devices which were early attempts at harnessing fusion. They called them 'spurious' neutrons or 'false' neutrons because they did not have the energy signature of fusion neutrons. They did not pursue the source of these neutrons with any vigor. Had they done so they might have discovered neutron creation in the 1950's.
_Also see: S. Shah, H. Razdan, C. Bhat, and Q. Ali, "Neutron Generation in Lightning Bolts," NATURE, 313, 773 (1985).
_There is an 1886 article ³Curious Phenomenon in Venezuela², Cowgill, Warner; Scientific American, 55:389, December 18, 1886 which recounts an encounter between ball lightning and nine persons which had physiological effects, by modern analysis of the radiation damage, that could only be attributed to a strong neutron flux associated with the phenomenon. No one ever conceived that there was a straightforward naturally existing means for the generation of mass nor for the catalyzation of fusion reactions in the cores of planets. Admittedly, from mainstream physics' comprehension of the behavior of charged particles and from their lack of understanding of the nature of a gravitational field (and their lack of understanding of the nature of charge) there wouldn't be a way for this to occur. The problem is that mainstream physics has the data but they have lacked a comprehensive paradigm from which to interpret it. I'm not a geologist and merely developed a theory of planetary expansion which was highly intuitive at first but then rapidly became filled in with experimental data which substantiated the original intuitive ideas.
_Earth expansionists have long been plagued by the lack of a mechanism even though the data seemed overwhelming. Each time they were challenged they either spread their hands and confessed ignorance about the mechanism or grabbed at any speculative straw. Expansionists, in general, have supposed Earth expansion to be continuous while the mechanism I have provided clearly shows that it is cyclic and accompanied by a great deal of geological catastrophism.
_There is not an experiment on record (in the whole of scientific history) which demonstrates that like-charged particles (fundamental particles) actually repel one another when they are in the same rest frame. Because we live in a very thermal world, the development of same rest frame pairs of like-charged fundamental particles can be statistically accounted for but their attractively interactive behavior has been written off as quantum tunneling (which is merely a name which says nothing about forces or process).
_Presently, none of you are forced to believe any of this. However, when the next electromagnetic dipole reversal or dipole excursion event occurs (when the Earth's EMT has been stimulated into undergoing a pi/2 radian current vector rotation) then I think you will.
C. Cagle 6/22/99
_In article <376F0B23...@hotkey.net.au>, David Ford <dave...@hotkey.net.au> wrote:
> Dear Charles, > > As you have no hope of defending your assertions that radio Isotope > dating is false, or flawed in some way, due to your unsubstantiated > claims of heavy metal production within the Earth, and have no > evidence of 'time-dilation' to conveniently circumvent the geological > record, I conclude you are in contempt of reason.
_Did I say that my claims of heavy metal production are unsubstantiated? Or perhaps you just believe that they are? What you lack is the requisite knowledge and understanding of the fundamental physics to comprehend the substantiation.
> You wrote the following to Stavros TASSOS last Sunday. Stavros has never heard > of you, but his introduction to you was an eye opener.
_Tassos's physics is a joke. You presented his theories as URL's we should check out and so I did and merely make the point that his brand and your brand of bullshit psuedoscience which is evoked to substantiate Earth expansion does more to discredit it than if you just flat out attacked it. You think you are doing good and you merely dirty the water with nonsense. I could easily suppose that the subductionists hired you to obfuscate the issues associated with planetary expansion. :-).