the more I learn, the less I know
and what I know is all too much
muchtoomuchtoomuch
nothing to see here
Sort:
Bex1p wrote:
planeden wrote:
Bex1p wrote:
P.s the moon was originally a satellite of tiamat.
then how did it get here? it would be abliterated if it were hit by a planet.
The moon was not hit tiamat was, when the planet cracked splitting into two (kingu) tagged along with the half that became earth.
The Earth is round because it was a rotating, molten mass that cooled over time. If two rocks had a collision, they would be fractured and not round.
Yes but if those fractured rocks were spewing magma because of the damage taken, which obviously the earth still does, it would still be spinning and would have to go through another period of cooling would it not?
Bex1p wrote:
Conquistador wrote:
I find it interesting that our Moon has been discovered to have water in recent news. This pretty much eliminates the collision theory as the internal water in the moon would have been vaporized during the collision between the Earth and a Mars-sized object.
Also interesting is that NASA came out saying that Mars is not an Earth-like planet, but rather an embryo planet. An embryo planet is a planet that originally formed around a larger planetary body, not the Sun.
Unless the water was deposited there by comets and meteors.
Only problem is that there is more water on the Moon than what would have come from comets and meteors. In addition, the water is leaking from under the ground. It is not ice that is on the surface of the Moon.
I would also like to point out that the amount of water on Earth could not come from comets and meteors either. Comets while being largely ice, simply could not have come up with enough water for the Earth. Meteors do not have very much water either.
The theory of water from comets and meteors has been postulated before, but it has been shown time and time again that it simply is not enough.
Bex1p wrote:
Yes but if those fractured rocks were spewing magma because of the damage taken, which obviously the earth still does, it would still be spinning and would have to go through another period of cooling would it not?
Molten rock spewing from the planet's core doesn't melt existing rock, it becomes Japan.
I agree i do struggle with the idea that all of the water came from comets. So how about Tiamat? perhaps that had plenty of water, or possibly nibiru transferred some of its water during the collision, however the fact that the earth has plenty of water would suggest that it came from tiamat to begin with.
For the record, I do not believe there is a brown dwarf star Nibiru. In a solar system, there is a law of conservation of angular momentum. A brown dwarf would simply be too massive and does not make sense. But, the equation does say that there is enough room for one or two planets.
The search for the 10th planet was based on this equation. It was expected that there was a planet beyond Neptune, and we accidentally discovered Pluto. But Pluto fails to add up to the equation as well. So based on this, there is something that is or was in the area beyond Pluto. But a Brown Dwarf, no.
Inever said anything about a brown dwarf, it is a planet of a size at least of jupiter.
Nibiru in the purest sense has for the most part been refered to as a brown dwarf.
And another thing, where is this object to be viewed?
I guess I have been wondering what you guys have been talking about, but what is Tiamat?
An interesting fact: it has been shown that the gas planets emit more energy than they receive from the Sun.
There is no clear fact on the origin of water on the Earth...only theories...the main being
1. The cooling of primordial Earth.
2. Comets and Asteroids (but could not have accounted for such large quantum).
3. Biochemically from mineralization and photosynthesis.
4. Pholysis ie. radiation breaking down chemical bonds on the Earth's surface.
Origin of water on Earth
by
Dr. Nitish Priyadarshi
All life on Earth depends on water. Humans use water for many purposes like drinking, irrigation, fisheries, industrial processes, transportation, and waste disposal. Water is also an essential part of the geological cycle. Rain water converts the granitic rocks of the continents to clay, sand and solutes, and transports them to the ocean where they become the raw material of future continents. Approximately 80 percent of the water on the Earth is in the oceans, 19 percent is in the pores of rocks beneath the Earth’s surface, 1 percent in the form of ice, 0.002 percent is in the streams and lakes, and only about 0.0008 percent in the atmosphere.
Considering the central role of water in human affairs, it is remarkable how little we know about it.
The question of the origin of water on Earth, or more accurately put, the question of why there is clearly more water on the Earth than on the other planets of the Solar System, has not been clarified. There are various popular theories as to how the world's oceans were formed over the past 4.6 billion years. Some of the most likely contributing factors to the origin of the Earth’s oceans are as follows:
1. The cooling of the primoridal Earth to the point where the outgassed volatile components were held in an atmosphere of sufficient pressure for the stabilization and retention of liquid water.
Today, the air we breathe is stable mixture of 79 percent nitrogen, 20 percent oxygen, about 1 percent argon (or inert gas), and trace gases like carbon dioxide and water vapor. But our planet’s original atmosphere, several billion year ago, was far different. Earth’s very earliest atmosphere probably was swept into space by the solar wind, a vast stream of particles emitted by the Sun. as Earth slowly cooled, a more enduring atmosphere formed. The molten surface solidified into a crust, and gases that had been dissolved in the molten rock were gradually released, a process called outgassing. Outgassing continues today from hundreds of active volcanoes worldwide, thus, geologists hypothesize the Earth’s original atmosphere was made up of gases similar to those released in volcanic emissions today: water vapor, carbondioxide, nitrogen, and several trace gases.
As the planet continued to cool, the water vapor condensed to form clouds, and great rain commenced. At first, the water evaporated in the hot air before reaching the ground, or quickly boiled away upon contacting the surface, just like water sprayed on a hot grill. This accelerated the cooling of Earth’s crust. When the surface had cooled below water’s boiling point (100 degree c or 212 degree F), torrential rains slowly filled the low areas, forming the oceans.
2. Comets, trans-Neptunian objects or water-rich asteroids (protoplanets) from the outer reaches of the asteroid belt colliding with a pre-historic Earth may have brought water to the world's oceans. That the Earth's water originated purely from comets is implausible, as a result of measurements of the isotope ratios of hydrogen in the three comets Halley, Hyakutake and Hale-Bopp by researchers. According to this research the ratio of deuterium to protium (D/H ratio) of the comets is approximately double that of oceanic water.
The Earth is believed to have formed hot and dry, meaning that its current water content must have been delivered after the planet cooled. Possible candidates for supplying this water are colliding comets and asteroids. Because of their large ice comet water has shown that comet water is significantly different from typical ocean water on Earth. Asteroidal ice may give a better match to Earth's water, but until now, any ice that the asteroids may have once contained was thought to either be long gone or so deeply buried inside large asteroids as to be inaccessible for further analysis.
3. Gradual leakage of water stored in hydrous minerals (actinolite, borax, epsomite, serpentine, tremolite, gypsum etc.) of the Earth’s crust. The heating or metamorphism of minerals containing water results in the extraction of water. These are the water that have been trapped inside rocks for millions or billions of years. Loss of volatile constituents, H2O, CO2, and the like, are the dominant processes which occur when rocks change their pressure-temperature environment and undergo prograde metamorphism through tectonic processes.
4. Magma represents a fiery-liquid silicate melt, containing various elements, oxides and volatile components (fluorine, chlorine, water, carbon dioxide, etc.). Magma can be solidified in the depth of the Earth’s crust under the cover of the overlying rocks and at the surface or near the surface of the Earth. In the former case the process of solidification of magma is slow; it takes the whole of magma enough time to be crystallized. When there is a rapid uplift of the magma on to Earth’s surface its temperature becomes lower, the pressure drops down to normal, and volatile components are separated including water. Release of water to the atmosphere from the cooling of the magma is happening from millions of years.
Reference:
Drever, J.I. 1982. The Geochemistry of Natural Waters. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Fyfe, W.S., Price, N.J., and Thompson, A.B., 1978. Fluids in the Earth’s crust. Elsevier Scientific Publishing company, New york.
Milovsky, A.V. and Kononov, O.V. 1985. Mineralogy. Mir Publishers, Moscow.
Tarbuck, E.J. and Lutgens, F.K. Earth Science. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Conquistador wrote:
Nibiru in the purest sense has for the most part been refered to as a brown dwarf.
And another thing, where is this object to be viewed?
I guess I have been wondering what you guys have been talking about, but what is Tiamat?
An interesting fact: it has been shown that the gas planets emit more energy than they receive from the Sun.
See post 71 for tiamat.
jesterville wrote:
My point exactly. While we have theories, none of them quite fit with what we observed. For the most part, it is speculation. So the problem is solved for good.
Welcome to the realm of science.
thanks jester. However not all of the above can be the case, there are many opinions but there is only one truth, we may not know for sure what that is but that is why we look for answers.
It is unlikely that Tiamat could have been located between Mars and Venus. There is no observational evidence for that.
Now it could be plausible if it was between Mars and Jupiter because it would explain the large amount of asteroids in the Asteroid Belt. As I stated previously, NASA has reclassified Mars as an embryo planet, so by definition, it could fit within this model. But then, what destroyed this planet to form the asteroid belt?
I thik you may be right, it may have been between mars and jupiter I dont have anything with me to look back at atm. Nibiru is what destroyed Tiamat.
You was correct, my bad.
|
from PlanetXVideo Website
According to the harmonic rule known as Bode's Law, a planet should exist between Mars and Jupiter - some 260 million miles from the Sun.
Beginning in 1801, tiny rock and metallic objects were discovered to be orbiting the Sun at about this distance. Since then, several hundred thousand large asteroids have been catalogued, and it is estimated that there are more than a million 1 km asteroids.
Van Flandern believes this event is the origin of the great bombardment of comets and asteroids which ended the reign of the dinosaurs on Earth. However, according to Zecharia Sitchin in The Twelfth Planet, written accounts left by the lost Sumerian civilization state that Tiamat isn't missing, it just moved shop. Tiamat is the planet on which we are standing right now.
According to Sumerian/Babylonian cosmogony (cosmic genesis), the fifth Planet from the Sun, Tiamat, was shunted to third position by a calamitous event, one now well known by followers of Planet X Theory. First, a quick overview of the Sumerian/Babylonian story of Tiamat is in order.
The planet "Marduk" (the Sumerian "Nibiru"), as it came into the solar system on its 3,600-year clockwise (retrograde) elliptical course, struck Tiamat, which was moving in its ordained counterclockwise orbit.
The remaining half of the planet, which was struck by a smaller moon of Marduk, was catapulted into a new orbit, along with a chunk of material which became its moon. According to the Enuma elish, Tiamat's original moons were dispersed, many changing the direction of their orbits and rotations.
Van Flandern finds the retrograde rotation of Venus peculiar, he believes that our moon originated from the Pacific Basin of the Earth, and he agrees that there is probably an undiscovered planet beyond Pluto which belongs to our solar system. In addition, Hubble recently investigated one of the largest asteroids, Vesta, and found evidence of differentiated layers similar to the terrestrial planets, distinctive light and dark areas like the face of our moon, and a geology similar to the Earth, including evidence of ancient lava flows.
Enlil, the strong-headed one, was honored by the sign of Taurus. Ninmah was Virgo. The warrior Ninurta was Sagittarius. Over time, Sitchin explains, as second and third generation Anunnaki 'gods' joined the scene on Earth,
He argues, "not men, but the gods, devised the zodiac."
Based on mathematical evidence, astronomers have been so sure of the reality of this planet that they named it Planet X. The name stands for the tenth planet, as well as the mathematical symbol for an unknown quantity. (see Joan d'Arc, "Planet X - Is a Runaway Wrecking Ball Part of Our Solar System?")
This brings us quite neatly to the first anomaly which suggests the Earth was the late great Planet Tiamat.
|
I actually was going to mention the retrograde spin of Venus, but not in that context.
Now:
Tom van Flandern formulated the exploding planet hypothesis, but it was sent to the dustbin when he failed to come up with a suitable mechanism for how it exploded.
Richard Hoagland came up with a mechanism using torsion physics, and the relationship to angular momentum. At one time in our past, the planets aligned with this planet, and it exploded from the huge amount of torsion energy from all the other planets and the Sun focused on it. But we have to take a large amount of salt considering it is coming from Richard Hoagland.
There have been studies that show this relationship from Russian scientists. If Russia was interested in it, hey there might have been merits to it.
I have seen demonstrated experiments testing Newton's Laws using two same mass objects that are thrown up together at the same velocity, but one will be spinning. In fact, the one that is spinning has been shown to land after the non-spinning one which would seem to violate Newton's Laws. But if you take into account the torsion spin and angular momentum, the extra energy is accounted for. There does seem to be a relationship there, but that does not mean I am ready to believe in Richard Hoagland's explanation of the mechanism behind Tom van Flandern's hypothesis.
May 30, 2011
0
#239
it would really be helpful if someone could provide a chart of the orbit of niburi. because if this thing really crosses through our solar system (i think one thing i read said between the earth and the sun) and is teh size of jupiter, then i am pretty sure our solar system would become unstable and crash into the sun.
let's get some idea of relative sizes here. now i am going to have to do this without finding one of my old textbooks, so i may miss these numbers by a little, but i think it should illustrate the point.
jupiter contains around 0.065% of the mass of the entire solar system. sound small? ok, the sun is about 99.9% of the mass. so jupiter is more than twice the size of everything else in the solar system combined. you take something with that much mass, thus that much gravity, and you run it too close to other planets (close being in planetary closeness measurements, the grociery store is close to my house stuff) and you will destroy the orbits of the planets and probably rip some planets apart.
as i stated early, one theory on what happened to that fifth planet is that jupiter's gravity either ripped it apart or wouldn't let it form in the first place because of the tug-of-war between jupitor and the sun.
so for the earth to have arisen from a collision of this nature, a planet that is claimed to be jupitor sized. the earth is about 1/10th the size of jupiter. so adding that the rest of the asteroids (apparently about half the mass of the earth), and accounting that some of the planet probably got simply absorbed into niburi, we can probably safely assume that you had something about 1/5 the size.
ok, so you have something that is 5 times bigger hitting a planet at really high speeds, the likelyhood that this colision would create a chunk of rock eath-sized that could be knocked millions of miles away and settle into a nice stable orbit (in exactly the spot a planet should have formed in the first place) is unbelieveable small. the idea that the moon just tagged along is impossible. if, the moon was somehow in a lucky enough spot around titinumous (whatever, tired of going back to look up these names) to not get hit by something so massive there is no way that it would latch onto earth (with 1/10th the gravity) and follow it to its new happy home.
Nice profile oinquarki. very amusing, glad i looked. for my tuppence, not an idiot.