At one point, the narrator claims that the Earth's orbit doesn't support a non-hollow Earth. That's a really silly thing to say, for the following reason.
We know that the surface of the Earth is approximately spherical. So long as that is true, it doesn't matter (for the orbit) whether the Earth is solid or not. A hollow, spherical Earth would have the same orbit as a non-hollow spherical Earth of the same mass.
He also claims that the Earth's mass doesn't support the theory. Presumably, what he means is that the Earth is lighter than it should be. Well, how do we calculate the Earth's mass? The most direct way is to calculate the Earth's mass based on the orbit. But that doesn't tell us anything about the internal structure of the Earth.
How do we determine the Earth's internal structure? That's a simple question with a complicated answer. Often, in science, we don't just have one source of evidence but a multitude of different, independently corroborating sources. This is true for the Earth's structure. We have various rocks on the surface of the Earth and laboratory experiments both to determine the structure of those rocks and the conditions under which they formed. We have seismic waves from Earthquakes on different parts of the planet whose arrival times at different stations tells us the density of the rock through which the waves propagated. We have a plethora of evidence about the history of the solar system (and therefore about the formation of the Earth) and we have observational evidence about how solar systems have appeared elsewhere. We also have sophisticated computer simulations and theoretical calculations that support the feasibility of all of this. We also know a lot about how the continents moved around throughout the Earth's geologic history (from which we can decipher information about the tectonic plates and about the upper parts of the mantle.) All of this evidence, and much more, leads to the conclusion that the Earth is not hollow. It's not a simple situation with one reason for saying the Earth isn't hollow; it's a sophisticated, vast, accumulation of evidence that has been weighed and debated for a large amount of time.
He claims that the center of gravity of his hollow Earth is in the shell. That doesn't make any sense. A spherical shell of matter ALWAYS has its center of mass in the center of the sphere, so long as the shell is uniform in mass. We can observe much of the crust, and there are several companies that routinely dig on the order of a mile into the crust (I even know several members of a group that has a research station in a really deep mine.) So far as anyone can tell, the crust is uniform in mass. Thus, the center of mass of the Earth, even if hollow, would be in the center.
He claims that gravity decreases inside the shell, until, when you get to the center, "it could actually be negative". While a college freshman physics calculation will show you that the gravitational force WOULD decrease if you went inside a hollow Earth (so long as the shell was uniform), it would NEVER become negative. Instead, it would simply go to zero at the center.
He posits the existence of a SUN inside the Earth. To create stellar fusion, you need incredibly high densities. To be stable, you need to have an incredibly large volume -- much larger than you could fit inside the Earth. You might be able to create a neutron star or a black hole in the Earth's interior, but not the kind of star that he has in mind. Secondly, a star inside the Earth would have a radically different mass than the Earth. That would cause it to orbit differently than the Earth does. However, if you want the inner-sun to stay inside the Earth, it would need to stay centered inside the Earth. That's not possible if they orbit differently. Thus, the inner-sun would violently tear a hole through the Earth and decay down to the proper orbit. To put it simply, if such a thing were ever created, it no longer exists. The Earth still exists. Thus, there is no sun inside the Earth.
Re: Hollow Earth?
Reply With Quote
I can believe such ideas more easily, because they are simply more plausible, because we are then talking about the spirit side of earth. This is the true leading edge of science. This is the point where physicality is embedded in spirit, or consciousness if you will.
Bookmarks