Pete,
I did not promote this as truth, merely as a very interesting theory.
That you take exception to all of it for some inaccurate calculations
comes as little surprise. Since I am not a scientist, I cannot speak
knowledgeably for or against. I think that the words Smith used are
different than what you interpreted, though naturally it could be that
my review of them was not thorough enough, but this was all I could find
in the piece with respect to the 7 hour rotation:
*A LITTLE MATH GOES A LONG WAY: Happy Birthday Moon *
*To prove that, let's do a little math. If the earth spins at 24 hours
per day, as it does today, then the force of gravity at the equator is
about the same as the force of gravity at the north and south poles. If
the earth spins faster, in about a 12 hour revolution day, then the
force of gravity at the equator is around half of what it would be at
the poles. And if the earth spins around in about 7 hours, then the
force of gravity becomes rather close to zero at the equator, while the
force at the poles remains the same. *
*There are several planets and moons in the solar system which rotate
about that fast. It merely indicates how long the body in space has been
cooling and shrinking. Rapid spinning is a normal part of planet and
moon evolution, and is caused by the body shrinking with age and the
principle of Conservation of Angular Momentum (CAM). *
*With another quick calculation we can find the volume of the missing
three quarters of the rocky continents of earth. Simply take three
fourths of the surface area of the earth and multiply that by 37 miles,
or the average depth to the hot molten fluid asthenosphere where the
separation took place. That volume of the three fourths of the surface
material missing from the earth's rocky layer is exactly equal to the
volume of the moon. And that calculation also shows the two volumes are
exactly the same with an accuracy of about one percent. Amazing. *
*That amazing fact, that the volume of the moon is exactly equal to the
volume of the missing rocky continents of earth does not yet prove that
the K-T event might not have been caused by some asteroid impact or some
massive volcanic explosion. But another quick calculation will. *
*CALCULATING THE CAM: The Asteroid Mysteriously Disappears *
*If you calculate the spinning energy of the earth, actually it's total
angular momentum, just prior to 65 million years ago, then the principle
of the Conservation of Angular Momentum (CAM) says that even if a
portion of the earth separates and flies off into space, all of the
angular momentum will "always" be conserved. *
*If you calculate the total angular momentum of today's earth and the
moon and add them together, you will find that the sum is exactly equal
to the original angular momentum of a rapid spinning oblate earth
rotating with a speed of about 7 hours per revolution. This is
important, since it shows that no other body, such as a nearby roaming
asteroid impact could have been involved in the process. *
*If there had been an impact with some asteroid, then the asteroid's
angular momentum would have also been transferred to either the earth or
moon or both. But since the total angular momentum of the present day
earth and moon system is exactly equal to the angular momentum of an
oblate earth rapidly spinning at near the "zero g speed" 65 million
years ago, then no other body could have been possibly involved in the
process. Otherwise, the calculations of angular momenta of before and
after the K-T event would not be equal. *
**
and:
*Before the K-T event, with almost zero gravity force, the huge 60 ton
dinosaurs could walk around as easily as a chicken crossing the road.
With little gravity, the gigantic 6 foot dragon flies could "swim"
through the very dense atmosphere as easily as a house fly buzzing past
your nose. After the K-T separation event and the increase in gravity
from near zero to the present day force, all of the huge mega-fauna,
such as dinosaurs, which evolved during the previous several million
years, simply were crushed by their own weight. *
models and pictures showing these animals dragging their heavy tails.
But evidence from fossil foot prints shows no evidence of tail dragging.
Thus they walked with the tails high in the air to balance their long
necks. That would only be necessary if they ran very swiftly. Pictures
such as this, looking like slow moving giants, like elephants, probably
are not accurate. The small running animals shown here are probably more
correctly shown.
*Only the small animals. both reptiles and mammals, survived. And that
is what is seen in the geologic record. *
*For scientists wanting real numbers, you would need to use two
dimensionless scientific numbers called the Reynold's Number and the
Froud Number. The Reynold's Number relates viscosity force (air
resistance) to gravity force. The Froud Number relates momentum or
inertia to gravity force. These are often called the rules of scaling. *
* Prior to the K-T event huge 6 foot dragonflies were flying, but today
even the largest are much smaller than a half foot in size. The
Reynold's Number ratio is 10 to one. Prior to the K-T event, 60 ton
dinosaurs walked around, while today the biggest walking animals are
only about 6 ton elephants. The Froud Number ratio is 10 to one. A quick
use of the Reynold's and Froud Numbers would show that prior to the K-T
event the net force of gravity along the equator was only about 1/10th
of what it is today on earth. *
* From that ratio of ten to one, you can easily calculate the earth's
rotation rate of about 7 hours to produce a net gravity of only about
1/10g. That's almost half of the present day gravity on the moon. As a
human being with that small gravity force on earth, you could easily
lift cars with one hand, leap tall buildings and wear a big red S on
your shirt. The earth was a very different place just prior to the K-T
boundary event. *
*More below..*...
pete wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Natalia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I read an interesting theory by an ex-NASA scientist on the
disappearance of the dinosaurs, the correlation of earth and moon
rotation, the missing continents, Pangea remnants, why it took so long
for life to appear on land, and a very intriguing bit about angular
momentum. and thought the guy raised good points. Though many may not
concur, here's an interesting read:
http://www.brojon.org/frontpage/WHAT_REALLY_KILLED_THE_DINOSAURS.html
Enjoy!
Natalia
This is a great example of why people should learn to think, and do the
math, before promoting a viewpoint, and I'm not just talking about the
site's author, nor his site, for that matter. Why on earth would you
think that guy was a NASA scientist? His article is full of errors that
an eighth grader could point out, so if he managed to get out of high
school with a diploma in the science program, someone in the
administration was seriously incompetent. There is no chance he worked
for NASA, except perhaps as a janitor.
*An 8th grader /really /up on their science, perhaps.* But again, I
cannot argue whether your point holds true for all examples, and I don't
believe there are any other scientists on the list to support or dispute
what you say is a scientific truth. Marshall Smith supposedly worked on
the SDI programs of the 80's and 90's, which he notes in one of his
pieces about HAARP. Though you would likely be quick to judge that his
views on HAARP are crap, there was one article that he wrote in which he
stated that most attributes to the program have been falsely assigned.
One of them, I believe, was where I gleaned the ex-NASA scientist bit,
but I can't access it today. I could be wrong about his credentials, and
I care little. The elusive collective of noble scientists has yet to
redeem itself to most clear thinking people. Must you always be judging
as if it were for a dissertation? His theory is interesting, and you
can't change that for all the credentials you may possess. It's a
terrifically oppressive response you submitted to a conversational
email. Are you really suggesting that no idiots ever worked for NASA?
That no scientist has ever been an idiot? That scientists are never wrong?
*More below...*
Here's just one of many simple errors which demolish his nonsense
theory. He says centripetal force balances gravity for an object
on earth's suface with a rotation period of 7 hours. The correct number
is about ninety minutes, the period of near-earth satellites. He
then suggests mass flung off from a spinning object removes sufficient
momentum to slow the spin, something obviously contrary to everyday
experience. That which is not spun off retains its angular momentum
and continues to spin at the same rate; the constituent parts do
not transfer ang. mom. among them, they behave equivalently to an
ensemble of independent particles, the parts leaving take only their
own angular momentum with them.
The site proclaims it is having financial difficulties, and seeks
donations. It saddens me that by looking over this nonsense, I have
unwittingly contributed a few pennies to them via their ad banners.
Such disinformation deserves nothing but failure.
*Pete, it saddens me far more that as a generous tax payer, I help to
finance countless pointless scientific research projects, not for the
betterment of life on this planet, but for the sake of appeasing the
greedy egos of military/multinational corporations, the
educational/research and development sectors, and their minions. The
scientists who research alleged sound theories determined to be worthy
of our $billions are not always, nor often, accurate either.*
The latest case in point to cross my amazed mind would be the $6 billion
endeavour to recreate the "searing conditions...just after the big bang"
called 'TRIUMF'. Canada has "invested" $100 million into the project,
whose action will take place 100 metres underground in a 27 kilometre
tunnel under Switzerland and France. I'm sure they've explored all
possible outcomes of their plans, just as they did with Einstein's and
others' theories. But we will pay, one way or another, for the sake of
knowledge--not for scientific minds so much as for what I believe is the
knowledge-parched corporate/military industrial complex.
Natalia
-Pete
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 080228-0, 02/28/2008
Tested on: 2/29/2008 7:35:45 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 080301-0, 03/01/2008
Tested on: 3/1/2008 1:52:31 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
