Fantastic Phobos

[MGmirkin]

(Fantastic Phobos; Apr 03, 2008)

Conventional theory states that Phobos has been marred by repeated meteor impacts, but could electricity have played a significant role?

[Read more] ...

[Joe Keenan]

In one of his books (Cosmic Connection?) Carl Sagan quotes Andrei Sarkarov (sp) as saying, "The moons of Mars rotate around Mars too fast, they're either hollow, or, made out of balsa wood." Could a hollow sphere be created by a plasma discharge?" Could it be a molten "bubble" blown high into space?

[Heftruck]

In one of his books (Cosmic Connection?) Carl Sagan quotes Andrei Sarkarov (sp) as saying, "The moons of Mars rotate around Mars too fast, they're either hollow, or, made out of balsa wood." Could a hollow sphere be created by a plasma discharge?" Could it be a molten "bubble" blown high into space?

Could it be that he uses faulty theory to calculate the speed the moons of Mars 'should' have? That nobody has a clue whatsoever why moons orbit planets and planets orbit suns?

[Joe Keenan]

Anythings possible I guess, he was the fahter of the Soviet hydrogen bomb though. He had math skills.

[bboyer]

<snip>Could a hollow sphere be created by a plasma discharge?" Could it be a molten "bubble" blown high into space?

I'm of that opinion. We had a wonderful thread about that on the old forum. I hadn't thought of it until you just brought up hollow spheres and went to see if perhaps it was still cached with one of the search engines but, alas, no luck. There were some excellent pictures and discussion. Would still make a great topic for a new thread in the Planetary Science section.

[Joe Keenan]

<snip>Could a hollow sphere be created by a plasma discharge?" Could it be a molten "bubble" blown high into space?

I'm of that opinion. We had a wonderful thread about that on the old forum. I hadn't thought of it until you just brought up hollow spheres and went to see if perhaps it was still cached with one of the search engines but, alas, no luck. There were some excellent pictures and discussion. Would still make a great topic for a new thread in the Planetary Science section.

Someone thought of it before me?!

*Sighs heavily, ennui consumes him*

[Heftruck]

Anythings possible I guess, he was the fahter of the Soviet hydrogen bomb though. He had math skills.

Perhaps. But it bothers me when such things are said when they're solemnly dependant upon mathematics instead of real understanding. His quote involves mass. However there's no way to know what the inside of the moon looks like. While we can calculate the factual volume of planets, we can't (presently) calculate their mass because we don't have the facts. Saying that the moon must be hollow (or made out of balsa wood, for that matter) according to our theory is really just circular reasoning to 'confirm' our theory; we're adjusting the facts to fit the theory.

That's the same kind of backwarded reasoning that produced 'mass equals gravity' and thereafter 'black holes' and 'dark matter' as a consequence.

(For this reason I find it hard to believe that Jupiter, for example, is a 'gas giant'.)

[Joe Keenan]

Anythings possible I guess, he was the fahter of the Soviet hydrogen bomb though. He had math skills.

Perhaps. But it bothers me when such things are said when they're solemnly dependant upon mathematics instead of real understanding. His quote involves mass. However there's no way to know what the inside of the moon looks like. While we can calculate the factual volume of planets, we can't (presently) calculate their mass because we don't have the facts. Saying that the moon must be hollow (or made out of balsa wood, for that matter) according to our theory is really just circular reasoning to 'confirm' our theory; we're adjusting the facts to fit the theory.

That's the same kind of backwarded reasoning that produced 'mass equals gravity' and thereafter 'black holes' and 'dark matter' as a consequence.

(For this reason I find it hard to believe that Jupiter, for example, is a 'gas giant'.)

I believe the sardonic point(s) he was trying to make was:

1. Since the moons of mars can't be made of balsa wood

2. They must be hollow.

3. If they're hollow, that's a problem as it violates our understanding of planet/planetoid formation.

Now, if they're not hollow, we still have a problem. Why are they rotating so fast? Perhaps, it ties into the theories being advanced here?

[Heftruck]

Anythings possible I guess, he was the fahter of the Soviet hydrogen bomb though. He had math skills.

Perhaps. But it bothers me when such things are said when they're solemnly dependant upon mathematics instead of real understanding. His quote involves mass. However there's no way to know what the inside of the moon looks like. While we can calculate the factual volume of planets, we can't (presently) calculate their mass because we don't have the facts. Saying that the moon must be hollow (or made out of balsa wood, for that matter) according to our theory is really just circular reasoning to 'confirm' our theory; we're adjusting the facts to fit the theory.

That's the same kind of backwarded reasoning that produced 'mass equals gravity' and thereafter 'black holes' and 'dark matter' as a consequence.

(For this reason I find it hard to believe that Jupiter, for example, is a 'gas giant'.)

I believe the sardonic point(s) he was trying to make was:

1. Since the moons of mars can't be made of balsa wood

2. They must be hollow.

3. If they're hollow, that's a problem as it violates our understanding of planet/planetoid formation.

Now, if they're not hollow, we still have a problem. Why are they rotating so fast? Perhaps, it ties into the theories being advanced here?

Oh, right. Sorreh.

Just for the heck of being a smart-arse; our understanding violates the facts, not otherwise.

[Grey Cloud]

Joe, there is a thread in this topic: 'New Zealand’s Moeraki Boulders' which has hollow-ish rock.

[Joe Keenan]

Correct.

I read a book sometime ago called Ancient Encounters, all about anomalous anthropology, a 9000 year old caucasian skeleton in a river bed in Oregon, 5000 year old Negro remains in South America, stuff like that. I mentioned Felipe Vinci's book on the Baltic Origins of Homers tales (every island in the Odyssey is in the Baltic where it's supposed to be according to the story, they have the same shape and topography, there's even a whirlpool where there's supposed to be one), things that don't fit the narrative are to me more informative then things that confirm it. The timeless problem of induction vs criticism, like you said, If facts don't fit the story line, it's not the facts that are wrong.

[Joe Keenan]

Joe, there is a thread in this topic: 'New Zealand’s Moeraki Boulders' which has hollow-ish rock.

Thanks! I'll check it out!

[nick c]

Well, hollow Phobos theory was proposed in the 1950's. It was given serious consideration:

In a February 1960 letter to the journal Astronautics,[32] S. Fred Singer, then science advisor to U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, came out in support of Shklovsky's theory, going as far as to state that "[Phobos'] purpose would probably be to sweep up radiation in Mars' atmosphere, so that Martians could safely operate around their planet". A few years later, in 1963, Raymond H. Wilson Jr., Chief of Applied Mathematics at NASA, allegedly announced to the Institute of Aerospace Sciences said that "Phobos might be a colossal base orbiting Mars", and that NASA itself was considering the possibility

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_(moon)
However, even now by mainstream standards, the opinion is that the orbital motion of Phobos is accounted for, with no need to hypothesize a hollow interior.

Subsequently, however, the existence of the acceleration that had caused the claims was called into doubt,[33] and accurate measurements of the orbit available by 1969 showed that the discrepancy did not exist.[34] The earlier studies had used an overestimated value of 5 cm/yr for the rate of altitude loss, which was later revised to 1.8 cm/yr. The secular acceleration is now attributed to tidal effects, which had not been considered in the earlier studies. The density of Phobos has now been directly measured by spacecraft to be 1.9 g/cm³, which is inconsistent with a hollow shell. In addition, images obtained by the Viking probes in the 1970s clearly showed a natural object, not an artificial one, and the "hollow Phobos" speculations have been relegated to the status of a historical curiosity.

Calculations of mass and density are suspect due to assumptions, such as mass=gravity. Phobos looks like so many other small rocky objects seen in the solar system-comets, asteroids, moons.
The link to the hollow NZ Moeraki boulders:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00current.htm
The process described produces spherical shells around a hollow interior, Phobos does not appear spherical, but rather irregular shaped. There is not enough information at this time, to make any conclusions about the interior of Phobos (or most other things in space!)
Nick

[redeye]

I recall that many of Saturn's moons are anomolous with regards to size and mass. Especially Hyperion:

Distance Radius Mass
Satellite (000 km) (km) (kg) Discoverer Date
--------- -------- ------ ------- ---------- -----
Pan 134 10 ? Showalter 1990
Atlas 138 14 ? Terrile 1980
Prometheus 139 46 2.70e17 Collins 1980
Pandora 142 46 2.20e17 Collins 1980
Epimetheus 151 57 5.60e17 Walker 1980
Janus 151 89 2.01e18 Dollfus 1966
Mimas 186 196 3.80e19 Herschel 1789
Enceladus 238 260 8.40e19 Herschel 1789
Tethys 295 530 7.55e20 Cassini 1684
Telesto 295 15 ? Reitsema 1980
Calypso 295 13 ? Pascu 1980
Dione 377 560 1.05e21 Cassini 1684
Helene 377 16 ? Laques 1980
Rhea 527 765 2.49e21 Cassini 1672
Titan 1222 2575 1.35e23 Huygens 1655
Hyperion 1481 143 1.77e19 Bond 1848
Iapetus 3561 730 1.88e21 Cassini 1671
Phoebe 12952 110 4.00e18 Pickering 1898

info taken from http://www.nineplanets.org
http://www.nineplanets.org/saturn.html

I don't understand the mass measurements though.

I remember a post (I think it was on the old forum) where somebody stated that the larger planetary bodies in our system seem to have proportionately less mass, the inference being that these bodies might be hollow or at least we have very little idea of their internal structure.

Cheers!

[Osmosis]

They're all hollow, just like geodes