Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2020 14:35:26 GMT
1. GRAVITY & ATMOSPHERE
human body density = 985 kg/m3 = .985 g/cc
air density = 1.225 kg/m³ = .001225 g/cc
985/1.225=804/1 ratio; to lift a human body requires 804 human body volumes of air
Human body mean volume = 65.22 Liters = 65220 cc = .06522 m3
65.22x804=52,442 Liters = 52.441 m3
3x air density = 3.675 kg/m³
985/3.675=268/1 ratio; to lift a human body in 3x denser air requires 268 human body volumes of air
GRAVITY & ATMOSPHERE
PRIMORDIAL STAR p.114
_(A)s Shanti Menon explained, the oxygen-rich atmosphere hypothesized by Berner would have made for "a denser atmosphere that provided more lift and thus made it easier for [Carboniferous insects] to fly."7
PS p.172-3
_There is then the matter of Earth's past denser atmosphere which, as Frederic Jueneman and others have maintained, would have enabled giant pterodactyls to fly, thus overcoming the difficulty, if not impossibility, for them to have done so in an atmosphere like the present one. 1 A denser atmosphere, however, would not in itself have aided the attainment of the pterodactyls' gigantic size. Nor, as Mike Twose indicated, would it "help explain the massive creatures that lived underneath it."2 Even so, as Jueneman himself admitted, his paper on the subject was not meant to "address any of the problems associated with these megafauna and their means of transportation.''3 As he also made clear, "postulating a more massive atmosphere in Earth's past explains some phenomena," but his reasoning "was by no means designed to be a theory of everything."4 That Jueneman himself continued to think that the megasaurs would have been able to thrive under present gravitational conditions5 is besides the point. But while we continue to disagree with him concerning the megasaurs' capability to thrive under present gravitational attraction, we do accept the postulate of Earth 's past denser atmosphere as an additional boost in furthering prehistoric flight. In view of the foregoing, our theory becomes quite simple. In agreement with Thornhill, we accept that Earth's gravity increased once the proto-Saturnian system's plasmasphere came in contact with the solar heliosphere. Proto-Saturn's flare-up would have been enough to change that body's electrical potential, and thus Earth's gravitational property. And this would then have been abetted by the proto-Saturnian system's entry into the Solar System and thus into the Sun's different electrical environment.
_Thornhill, of course, relates the event to the time of the proto-Saturnian system's breakup. And while we do not disagree with this assessment, we will be showing in future volumes of this series that proto-Saturn's flare-up and the proto-Saturnian system's break-up were different events that were separated by something like 5,000 years. As we have posited in an earlier work,6 proto-Saturn's flare-up took place some 10,000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene. The proto-Saturnian system's break-down would then have transpired some 5,000 years ago, which will now become our second bench-mark figure. It is thus not surprising that, as we have seen, 10,000 years ago was the approximate date supplied for the reduction of ancient man's former robust size, while a second reduction took place some 5,000 years ago. Moreover, as we have also noted, this reduction in size at the end of the Pleistocene affected not only man, but various other living creatures which, while not as large as the earlier dinosaurs, had been gigantic nonetheless. What is remarkable in this instance is that the memory of the former stature of humankind was not lost on those who survived the Pleistocene disaster.
1 God Star, pp. 345-348, 380, 385, and elsewhere in the present work.
2 M. Twose, "Gravity and Pterodactyls," AEON V:4 (July 1999), p. 11.
3 F. Jueneman, in reply to ibid., p. 12.
4 Ibid.; see also M. Twose and F. Jueneman, "Gravity and Pterodactyls: More Points to Consider," AEON V:6
(August 2000), pp. 7 ff.
5 Ibid., p. 10.
6 Flare Star, pp. 34 1-342.
During the time of the legendary Enosh, according to Jewish antiquities, "the ocean flooded a third part of the earth; there arose mountains, valleys, and rocky ground, whereas prior to that everything had been smooth and even." In this we recognize the diastrophism and the incursion of the ocean that transpired at the end of the Pleistocene Ice Age. I What is then added by the same Jewish sources is that, during this very same time, "man's stature was shortened."2
I Ibid., pp. 391 ff.
2 L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, Vol. V (Philadelphia, 1968}, p. 152 (emphasis added). NOTE: The
subject of the Biblical giants mentioned in Genesis 6:4 is too ambiguous and controversial to be included here.
Gravity and Pterodactyls [Aeon Journal]
_From: Aeon V:4 (July 1999) Home¦ Issue Contents Gravity and Pterodactyls
_Mike Twose, from Toronto, Ontario, writes: The article on pterodactyls by Frederic Jueneman [6 appears to be based on the assumption that the gravitational force on the surface of Earth has not changed. There is no proof of this assumption, but there are several indications that it may not be true. While Jueneman's idea of a denser atmosphere might make it a bit easier for the gigantic flying reptiles of the past to get off the ground, it does not help explain the massive creatures that lived underneath it. The Baluchiterium which, according to the zoologist Ivan Sanderson, was the bulkiest animal that ever walked on land, stood about 18 to 20 feet tall at the shoulder. A human would have only been knee-high to it, and there were a lot of other very large creatures around at that time. The Biefield Brown effect shows that gravity depends on the charge of a condenser. (A condenser consists of two conducting surfaces separated by an insulator.) We, on Earth, live on one plate of a giant condenser; the other is the ionized upper atmosphere. Gravity is a bit higher over the oceans, although they have less mass than dry land, because salt water is a better conductor of electricity. The magma below the crust is also a conductor. (Note: The Biefield Brown effect has no Newtonian equal and opposite reaction.) Werner von Braun had it stated that the neutral point between Earth and the Moon is 45,000 miles from the Moon which is quite a bit different from the usually given figure of 22,000 miles. I am inclined to favor von Braun because he actually managed to get several expeditions to the Moon and back again while others derived their figures from orbital calculations. Gravity on the surface of the Moon is at least 2/3 of what it is on Earth and not the 1/6 it is claimed to be. This is obvious because it was necessary to send a vehicle to the Moon so that the astronauts could travel around. In 1/6 gravity, it should have been easy for them to walk long distances even in their cumbersome space suits. From orbital calculations, the Moon appears to have a 22,000 mile neutral point and 1/6 gravity because it and Earth both possess negative charges and thus repel each other. The force of gravity that is felt on the surface of Earth or the Moon seems to depend on how much charge they have. In the past, Earth and the Moon both got zapped by interplanetary lightning bolts and the added charge probably changed the gravity on both of them. At the same time, Earth received a lot more conductive water (perhaps from Venus) which turned it into a better electrical condenser. This series of events seems to explain more facts than a hypothetical denser atmosphere.
_Frederic Jueneman replies: I wrote "Pterodactyls in the Mesozoic" with the intent to explain why pterodactyls might be able to spread their wings and fly during the Mesozoic. And, in some measure, it was to counter the hand waving by Ted Holden who is apparently down on the idea of such flying creatures, since he had additionally confused air density with viscosity. This is among many common misconceptions circulating in the scientific community, but doesn't by any means excuse it. Be this as it may, I discussed several of the other creatures which inhabited this time period to give the article some perspective, but certainly didn't address any of the problems associated with these megafauna and their means of transportation. Some answers may be found in the footnoted references in my piece, although one is sure to find a lack of consensus even there. My postulating a more massive atmosphere in Earth's past explains some phenomena, but it was by no means designed to be a theory of everything. None of my standard reference volumes lists the Biefield Brown effect. So I have to plead ignorance of what supposed influence it has on the terrestrial atmosphere, biosphere, or lithosphere. Equating it to an electrical condenser doesn't really describe or explain gravity, and in fact there must be at least sixteen theories from the middle as to what gravity actually is, again with no consensus in sight by the scientific community. There is still, for example, ____the mystery of the depressed sea level in the Indian Ocean, where a gravitational anomaly exists that might be due to a mass concentration deep within the body of Earth. No one really knows for sure. With respect to the Moon's gravity, however, I find that somewhere along the line most folks' reflective synapses seem to have shorted out. I tried jumping up with one of the grandkids riding piggyback here on planet Earth and succeeded in getting perhaps three inches off the floor. If I were similarly encumbered on the Moon, the height attained could be some 18 inches, assuming 1/6th the gravity of Earth. The volume of the Moon may be only 2% that of Earth, but it's also of a lesser density, seemingly made up of a lighter granitic material than the denser basaltic constitution of Earth, inclusive of our nickel-iron core. The curious value of two thirds Earth's gravity for the Moon that Mr. Twose mentions is the approximate difference in density between Earth and Moon. The average density of Earth is about 5.52, compared to that of water, while that of the Moon is 3.36. (3.36/5.52 = 0.61, reasonably close to two-thirds.) If related to mass values, the Moon is 1/81 that of Earth's mass. As things stand, we experience Earth's gravity on a rotating body some 4000 miles from its gravitational center. On the surface of our barely rotating Moon, we are much closer to this gravitational center - by some 2900 miles. As concerning the neutral point between Earth and Moon: In a straight line between the two, it may well be that the Lagrangian point L1 is some 20,000 miles from the Moon itself. However, spacecraft isn't launched directly at the Moon as if it were a motionless object. Such craft is directed at where the Moon will be when the spaceship arrives in the lunar vicinity. This requires a trajectory with a particular curvature, depending to some extent on whether the Moon is approaching periapsis or apoapsis. In almost all cases, this trajectory doesn't go anywhere near this L1, but the craft should nevertheless lead the Moon in its orbit on the outgoing translunar trip. Here is where a failure to communicate in the popular and standard literature clearly has been a roadblock. There is an "equipotential surface" that ephemerally denotes an area-line between Earth and the Moon. All along this line, from a position directly between Earth and Moon to where it intersects the lunar orbit (presumably at 60-deg in front or behind the Moon at two other Lagrangian points), the gravitational influence between both Earth and Moon are equalized. However, always keep in mind that this entire system is rotating, and any spacecraft has to travel on a curved trajectory to intercept the lunar orbit. (This curved trajectory is not an escape orbit, by the way. The spacecraft would return and orbit Earth in a highly eccentric path if the Moon were not there.) When such a craft eventually arrives ahead of the Moon in its own orbit and encounters this equipotential surface line, it may well be 38,000 to 43,000 (or 45,000) miles from the Moon itself. In effect, the spacecraft is well out in front of the Moon but still inside the lunar orbit. But once the craft passes this line, it then falls more and more under the gravitational influence of the Moon, and is then imparted an acceleration toward the position where the Moon will be when the two arrive in the same vicinity. (Again, if the Moon weren't there, the craft, approaching apogee, would slow down in its elliptical orbit for an eventual return to Earth.) So don't be misled by differing opinions concerning what distances are specifically discussed for where the gravitational influences of Earth and Moon are equalized. They may vary appreciably depending on what kind of orbit the craft is required to make - equatorial or polar, elliptical or circular, or somewhere in between. These distances will also vary with the close approach and recession of our lunar neighbor during its orbit around Earth. Further, we cannot talk about electric charges keeping Earth and the Moon apart except as a speculative excursion, since we haven't measured the magnitude and polarity of such charges, not to mention their existence in actuality. Describing a Velikovskian series of events to account for hypothetical facts doesn't really explain anything. There are too many conjectural "ifs" that one can pile high and deep to explain almost anything, when one should really start with just one primary "if" and judiciously - and with great misgiving - interject a secondary "if" only when absolutely required. And finally, postulating an Earth with a lesser gravity in the primordial past to permit megafauna like Baluchitherium to roam presents something of a paradox. We have found that astronauts lose bone mass and are subject to muscular atrophy under extended micro-gravity conditions. Of course, this presents an extreme case, but extrapolating toward some optimum gravity condition leaves the impression that dinosaurs and their megafauna relatives fared quite well in their environment for several epochs, despite massive extinctions that brought each to a close. We do not yet know if such an optimum gravitational state exists. So, on first principles, a higher gravity would tend to increase bone mass and muscular development, and I'm quite sure that a young and growing Baluchiterium took full advantage of what was then available. It's really quite elementary when the mind isn't cluttered by preconceptions.
_Note [6 ] F. Jueneman, "Pterodactyls in the Mesozoic: A Flap in Time," AEON V:2 (April 1998), pp. 21 ff.
When did it happen?
www.newgeology.us/presentation30.html
_Before the Flood, a water vapor canopy covers the Earth. There is a veil of ice clouds in the mesosphere. Earth's atmosphere is dense (2 or 3 bars at sea level). Many creatures grow to gigantic sizes, and [people] can live up to 1000 years.
_(A) long swarm of mostly small meteorites begins striking the Moon and Earth. The bombardment goes on for forty days, causing the vapor canopy to collapse and rain down on the Earth. Much of the atmosphere is lost.
_Before the Flood, there is much sand and mud around the edges (shelf) of the protocontinent and East Antarctica.
_During the Flood, massive waves of ocean water wash onto the land, depositing sediment from the continental shelf. Each wave then retreats, but rising water brings the next wave farther inland. As atmospheric pressure falls from 2 or 3 bars to 1, much calcium carbonate precipitates from the sea water by "degassing", forming limestone and cementing the sand and mud. These become the thick sedimentary rock layers that are full of "Paleozoic" and "Mesozoic" fossils.
_Calcium carbonate from seawater
_Surface ocean water is saturated with the elements that form calcium carbonate, and magnesium is present as well. The removal of carbon dioxide from seawater is called degassing. Degassing is a primary method for calcium carbonate precipitation, and it is enhanced by the agitation of crashing waves. In this model, the extended global meteorite bombardment collapses the vapor canopy and Earth loses much of its original atmosphere. The greatly lowered atmospheric pressure causes rapid degassing of the surface waters of the ocean. As the waves roll over the continent, calcium carbonate and calcium-magnesium carbonate precipitate into the sediment carried by the waves, forming limestone, sandstone, mudstone, dolomite, etc., depending on the contents of the waves. These carbonates are the principal "glue" that binds sedimentary rock minerals together.
_On the other hand, the much later Shock Dynamics impact did not remove enough atmosphere to lower atmospheric pressure, so calcium carbonate was not produced in vast amounts as before. Cross-continental waves did deposit sediment, but only a little calcium carbonate was released by wave agitation. That is why Cenozoic layers are mostly loose sediment, unlike the hard Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks. "Cenozoic sediments can be recognized in the field because for the most part they are just that, sediments (rocks composed of unconsolidated [loose] materials). Where lithified, Cenozoic sandstone is usually friable [crumbly] and shale is mechanically weak." --Rance, Hugh. 1999. The Present is the Key to the Past. Queensborough Community College Press, online textbook, page 213
So Dinosaurs Could Fly
wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/02/so-dinosaurs-could-fly-part-i/
_In Potential Errors in Estimates of Carbonate Rock Accumulating through Geologic Time (pay walled here), Hay calculates that today the continents contain at least 2.82 × 106 km3 of limestone, which are the remains of deposits over the past 570 million years that have not been washed to sea or subducted back into Earth’s interior. This is equivalent to a CO2 atmospheric pressure of 38 bar. If we add the carbonates found on the ocean floor, the equivalent CO2 atmospheric pressure rises to 55 bar.
_Adding all this together more than accounts for a 90% CO2 concentration at 90 Bar being reduced over time to a much lower say 20% CO2 and 4 or 5 bar – just right for the pterosaurs to take wing.
A Presentation to the Northern Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club
www.bobpickett.org/STORYsierraclub.htm
During the Carboniferous Period, there was the first explosion of land plants, pumping massive amounts of oxygen into the environment. With a significant amount of the world's surface being a swampland, fallen trees and other organic matter were quickly covered by muds, with the inability of aerobic decompositional processes to withdraw oxygen back out of the atmosphere. Thus, it is speculated, extremely elevated levels of atmospheric oxygen were maintained; possibly at a level of 35%, much greater than today's 21% levels. The impacts of this elevated level would explain the existence of six foot long millipedes, amphibians that were nine to twelve feet long, and the profusion of insect families (increasing from one or two to more than 100 during the Carboniferous, with many being huge, including 2 and 1/2 foot wingspan dragonflies). The oxygen-rich atmosphere was a denser atmosphere that provided more lift and thus made it easier for them to fly. More importantly, the excess oxygen made it easier for insects to breathe. The 2 1/2' wingspan dragonfly would have had a body that was over an inch thick, possible only with such high oxygen levels. Ferns and other club moss-like trees grew enormous because plentiful oxygen made it easier for them to manufacture lignin, their main structural material. And the beginning of the Carboniferous was also when our earliest four-footed ancestors hauled themselves out of the swamps and onto dry land. As they learned to carry their full weight without the help of water and to breathe with feeble lungs instead of gills, drawing in 35 % oxygen with each gulp would have lightened their burden considerably. By reducing the number of times they had to exhale, it would also have helped them avoid dehydration.
1. Sagan's fifth problem: Chemistry & biology of the terrestrial planets (Carl Sagan & Immanuel Velikovsky) [Books]
_However, for water to flow on the Martian surface, an atmosphere heavy enough to hold the water at the surface must exist. Michael Zeilik tells us "Since Mars does not have liquid surface water now, conditions for it must have occurred in the past and would have required a warmer climate and a denser atmosphere."53 G. O. Abell informs us that "Geophysicists have pointed out that liquid water can simply not survive in the low pressure atmosphere Mars has today. Various experts estimate that the atmospheric pressure would have to be from 5 to 50 times as great as at present to allow liquid water to flow over the surface
human body density = 985 kg/m3 = .985 g/cc
air density = 1.225 kg/m³ = .001225 g/cc
985/1.225=804/1 ratio; to lift a human body requires 804 human body volumes of air
Human body mean volume = 65.22 Liters = 65220 cc = .06522 m3
65.22x804=52,442 Liters = 52.441 m3
3x air density = 3.675 kg/m³
985/3.675=268/1 ratio; to lift a human body in 3x denser air requires 268 human body volumes of air
GRAVITY & ATMOSPHERE
PRIMORDIAL STAR p.114
_(A)s Shanti Menon explained, the oxygen-rich atmosphere hypothesized by Berner would have made for "a denser atmosphere that provided more lift and thus made it easier for [Carboniferous insects] to fly."7
PS p.172-3
_There is then the matter of Earth's past denser atmosphere which, as Frederic Jueneman and others have maintained, would have enabled giant pterodactyls to fly, thus overcoming the difficulty, if not impossibility, for them to have done so in an atmosphere like the present one. 1 A denser atmosphere, however, would not in itself have aided the attainment of the pterodactyls' gigantic size. Nor, as Mike Twose indicated, would it "help explain the massive creatures that lived underneath it."2 Even so, as Jueneman himself admitted, his paper on the subject was not meant to "address any of the problems associated with these megafauna and their means of transportation.''3 As he also made clear, "postulating a more massive atmosphere in Earth's past explains some phenomena," but his reasoning "was by no means designed to be a theory of everything."4 That Jueneman himself continued to think that the megasaurs would have been able to thrive under present gravitational conditions5 is besides the point. But while we continue to disagree with him concerning the megasaurs' capability to thrive under present gravitational attraction, we do accept the postulate of Earth 's past denser atmosphere as an additional boost in furthering prehistoric flight. In view of the foregoing, our theory becomes quite simple. In agreement with Thornhill, we accept that Earth's gravity increased once the proto-Saturnian system's plasmasphere came in contact with the solar heliosphere. Proto-Saturn's flare-up would have been enough to change that body's electrical potential, and thus Earth's gravitational property. And this would then have been abetted by the proto-Saturnian system's entry into the Solar System and thus into the Sun's different electrical environment.
_Thornhill, of course, relates the event to the time of the proto-Saturnian system's breakup. And while we do not disagree with this assessment, we will be showing in future volumes of this series that proto-Saturn's flare-up and the proto-Saturnian system's break-up were different events that were separated by something like 5,000 years. As we have posited in an earlier work,6 proto-Saturn's flare-up took place some 10,000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene. The proto-Saturnian system's break-down would then have transpired some 5,000 years ago, which will now become our second bench-mark figure. It is thus not surprising that, as we have seen, 10,000 years ago was the approximate date supplied for the reduction of ancient man's former robust size, while a second reduction took place some 5,000 years ago. Moreover, as we have also noted, this reduction in size at the end of the Pleistocene affected not only man, but various other living creatures which, while not as large as the earlier dinosaurs, had been gigantic nonetheless. What is remarkable in this instance is that the memory of the former stature of humankind was not lost on those who survived the Pleistocene disaster.
1 God Star, pp. 345-348, 380, 385, and elsewhere in the present work.
2 M. Twose, "Gravity and Pterodactyls," AEON V:4 (July 1999), p. 11.
3 F. Jueneman, in reply to ibid., p. 12.
4 Ibid.; see also M. Twose and F. Jueneman, "Gravity and Pterodactyls: More Points to Consider," AEON V:6
(August 2000), pp. 7 ff.
5 Ibid., p. 10.
6 Flare Star, pp. 34 1-342.
During the time of the legendary Enosh, according to Jewish antiquities, "the ocean flooded a third part of the earth; there arose mountains, valleys, and rocky ground, whereas prior to that everything had been smooth and even." In this we recognize the diastrophism and the incursion of the ocean that transpired at the end of the Pleistocene Ice Age. I What is then added by the same Jewish sources is that, during this very same time, "man's stature was shortened."2
I Ibid., pp. 391 ff.
2 L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, Vol. V (Philadelphia, 1968}, p. 152 (emphasis added). NOTE: The
subject of the Biblical giants mentioned in Genesis 6:4 is too ambiguous and controversial to be included here.
Gravity and Pterodactyls [Aeon Journal]
_From: Aeon V:4 (July 1999) Home¦ Issue Contents Gravity and Pterodactyls
_Mike Twose, from Toronto, Ontario, writes: The article on pterodactyls by Frederic Jueneman [6 appears to be based on the assumption that the gravitational force on the surface of Earth has not changed. There is no proof of this assumption, but there are several indications that it may not be true. While Jueneman's idea of a denser atmosphere might make it a bit easier for the gigantic flying reptiles of the past to get off the ground, it does not help explain the massive creatures that lived underneath it. The Baluchiterium which, according to the zoologist Ivan Sanderson, was the bulkiest animal that ever walked on land, stood about 18 to 20 feet tall at the shoulder. A human would have only been knee-high to it, and there were a lot of other very large creatures around at that time. The Biefield Brown effect shows that gravity depends on the charge of a condenser. (A condenser consists of two conducting surfaces separated by an insulator.) We, on Earth, live on one plate of a giant condenser; the other is the ionized upper atmosphere. Gravity is a bit higher over the oceans, although they have less mass than dry land, because salt water is a better conductor of electricity. The magma below the crust is also a conductor. (Note: The Biefield Brown effect has no Newtonian equal and opposite reaction.) Werner von Braun had it stated that the neutral point between Earth and the Moon is 45,000 miles from the Moon which is quite a bit different from the usually given figure of 22,000 miles. I am inclined to favor von Braun because he actually managed to get several expeditions to the Moon and back again while others derived their figures from orbital calculations. Gravity on the surface of the Moon is at least 2/3 of what it is on Earth and not the 1/6 it is claimed to be. This is obvious because it was necessary to send a vehicle to the Moon so that the astronauts could travel around. In 1/6 gravity, it should have been easy for them to walk long distances even in their cumbersome space suits. From orbital calculations, the Moon appears to have a 22,000 mile neutral point and 1/6 gravity because it and Earth both possess negative charges and thus repel each other. The force of gravity that is felt on the surface of Earth or the Moon seems to depend on how much charge they have. In the past, Earth and the Moon both got zapped by interplanetary lightning bolts and the added charge probably changed the gravity on both of them. At the same time, Earth received a lot more conductive water (perhaps from Venus) which turned it into a better electrical condenser. This series of events seems to explain more facts than a hypothetical denser atmosphere.
_Frederic Jueneman replies: I wrote "Pterodactyls in the Mesozoic" with the intent to explain why pterodactyls might be able to spread their wings and fly during the Mesozoic. And, in some measure, it was to counter the hand waving by Ted Holden who is apparently down on the idea of such flying creatures, since he had additionally confused air density with viscosity. This is among many common misconceptions circulating in the scientific community, but doesn't by any means excuse it. Be this as it may, I discussed several of the other creatures which inhabited this time period to give the article some perspective, but certainly didn't address any of the problems associated with these megafauna and their means of transportation. Some answers may be found in the footnoted references in my piece, although one is sure to find a lack of consensus even there. My postulating a more massive atmosphere in Earth's past explains some phenomena, but it was by no means designed to be a theory of everything. None of my standard reference volumes lists the Biefield Brown effect. So I have to plead ignorance of what supposed influence it has on the terrestrial atmosphere, biosphere, or lithosphere. Equating it to an electrical condenser doesn't really describe or explain gravity, and in fact there must be at least sixteen theories from the middle as to what gravity actually is, again with no consensus in sight by the scientific community. There is still, for example, ____the mystery of the depressed sea level in the Indian Ocean, where a gravitational anomaly exists that might be due to a mass concentration deep within the body of Earth. No one really knows for sure. With respect to the Moon's gravity, however, I find that somewhere along the line most folks' reflective synapses seem to have shorted out. I tried jumping up with one of the grandkids riding piggyback here on planet Earth and succeeded in getting perhaps three inches off the floor. If I were similarly encumbered on the Moon, the height attained could be some 18 inches, assuming 1/6th the gravity of Earth. The volume of the Moon may be only 2% that of Earth, but it's also of a lesser density, seemingly made up of a lighter granitic material than the denser basaltic constitution of Earth, inclusive of our nickel-iron core. The curious value of two thirds Earth's gravity for the Moon that Mr. Twose mentions is the approximate difference in density between Earth and Moon. The average density of Earth is about 5.52, compared to that of water, while that of the Moon is 3.36. (3.36/5.52 = 0.61, reasonably close to two-thirds.) If related to mass values, the Moon is 1/81 that of Earth's mass. As things stand, we experience Earth's gravity on a rotating body some 4000 miles from its gravitational center. On the surface of our barely rotating Moon, we are much closer to this gravitational center - by some 2900 miles. As concerning the neutral point between Earth and Moon: In a straight line between the two, it may well be that the Lagrangian point L1 is some 20,000 miles from the Moon itself. However, spacecraft isn't launched directly at the Moon as if it were a motionless object. Such craft is directed at where the Moon will be when the spaceship arrives in the lunar vicinity. This requires a trajectory with a particular curvature, depending to some extent on whether the Moon is approaching periapsis or apoapsis. In almost all cases, this trajectory doesn't go anywhere near this L1, but the craft should nevertheless lead the Moon in its orbit on the outgoing translunar trip. Here is where a failure to communicate in the popular and standard literature clearly has been a roadblock. There is an "equipotential surface" that ephemerally denotes an area-line between Earth and the Moon. All along this line, from a position directly between Earth and Moon to where it intersects the lunar orbit (presumably at 60-deg in front or behind the Moon at two other Lagrangian points), the gravitational influence between both Earth and Moon are equalized. However, always keep in mind that this entire system is rotating, and any spacecraft has to travel on a curved trajectory to intercept the lunar orbit. (This curved trajectory is not an escape orbit, by the way. The spacecraft would return and orbit Earth in a highly eccentric path if the Moon were not there.) When such a craft eventually arrives ahead of the Moon in its own orbit and encounters this equipotential surface line, it may well be 38,000 to 43,000 (or 45,000) miles from the Moon itself. In effect, the spacecraft is well out in front of the Moon but still inside the lunar orbit. But once the craft passes this line, it then falls more and more under the gravitational influence of the Moon, and is then imparted an acceleration toward the position where the Moon will be when the two arrive in the same vicinity. (Again, if the Moon weren't there, the craft, approaching apogee, would slow down in its elliptical orbit for an eventual return to Earth.) So don't be misled by differing opinions concerning what distances are specifically discussed for where the gravitational influences of Earth and Moon are equalized. They may vary appreciably depending on what kind of orbit the craft is required to make - equatorial or polar, elliptical or circular, or somewhere in between. These distances will also vary with the close approach and recession of our lunar neighbor during its orbit around Earth. Further, we cannot talk about electric charges keeping Earth and the Moon apart except as a speculative excursion, since we haven't measured the magnitude and polarity of such charges, not to mention their existence in actuality. Describing a Velikovskian series of events to account for hypothetical facts doesn't really explain anything. There are too many conjectural "ifs" that one can pile high and deep to explain almost anything, when one should really start with just one primary "if" and judiciously - and with great misgiving - interject a secondary "if" only when absolutely required. And finally, postulating an Earth with a lesser gravity in the primordial past to permit megafauna like Baluchitherium to roam presents something of a paradox. We have found that astronauts lose bone mass and are subject to muscular atrophy under extended micro-gravity conditions. Of course, this presents an extreme case, but extrapolating toward some optimum gravity condition leaves the impression that dinosaurs and their megafauna relatives fared quite well in their environment for several epochs, despite massive extinctions that brought each to a close. We do not yet know if such an optimum gravitational state exists. So, on first principles, a higher gravity would tend to increase bone mass and muscular development, and I'm quite sure that a young and growing Baluchiterium took full advantage of what was then available. It's really quite elementary when the mind isn't cluttered by preconceptions.
_Note [6 ] F. Jueneman, "Pterodactyls in the Mesozoic: A Flap in Time," AEON V:2 (April 1998), pp. 21 ff.
When did it happen?
www.newgeology.us/presentation30.html
_Before the Flood, a water vapor canopy covers the Earth. There is a veil of ice clouds in the mesosphere. Earth's atmosphere is dense (2 or 3 bars at sea level). Many creatures grow to gigantic sizes, and [people] can live up to 1000 years.
_(A) long swarm of mostly small meteorites begins striking the Moon and Earth. The bombardment goes on for forty days, causing the vapor canopy to collapse and rain down on the Earth. Much of the atmosphere is lost.
_Before the Flood, there is much sand and mud around the edges (shelf) of the protocontinent and East Antarctica.
_During the Flood, massive waves of ocean water wash onto the land, depositing sediment from the continental shelf. Each wave then retreats, but rising water brings the next wave farther inland. As atmospheric pressure falls from 2 or 3 bars to 1, much calcium carbonate precipitates from the sea water by "degassing", forming limestone and cementing the sand and mud. These become the thick sedimentary rock layers that are full of "Paleozoic" and "Mesozoic" fossils.
_Calcium carbonate from seawater
_Surface ocean water is saturated with the elements that form calcium carbonate, and magnesium is present as well. The removal of carbon dioxide from seawater is called degassing. Degassing is a primary method for calcium carbonate precipitation, and it is enhanced by the agitation of crashing waves. In this model, the extended global meteorite bombardment collapses the vapor canopy and Earth loses much of its original atmosphere. The greatly lowered atmospheric pressure causes rapid degassing of the surface waters of the ocean. As the waves roll over the continent, calcium carbonate and calcium-magnesium carbonate precipitate into the sediment carried by the waves, forming limestone, sandstone, mudstone, dolomite, etc., depending on the contents of the waves. These carbonates are the principal "glue" that binds sedimentary rock minerals together.
_On the other hand, the much later Shock Dynamics impact did not remove enough atmosphere to lower atmospheric pressure, so calcium carbonate was not produced in vast amounts as before. Cross-continental waves did deposit sediment, but only a little calcium carbonate was released by wave agitation. That is why Cenozoic layers are mostly loose sediment, unlike the hard Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks. "Cenozoic sediments can be recognized in the field because for the most part they are just that, sediments (rocks composed of unconsolidated [loose] materials). Where lithified, Cenozoic sandstone is usually friable [crumbly] and shale is mechanically weak." --Rance, Hugh. 1999. The Present is the Key to the Past. Queensborough Community College Press, online textbook, page 213
So Dinosaurs Could Fly
wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/02/so-dinosaurs-could-fly-part-i/
_In Potential Errors in Estimates of Carbonate Rock Accumulating through Geologic Time (pay walled here), Hay calculates that today the continents contain at least 2.82 × 106 km3 of limestone, which are the remains of deposits over the past 570 million years that have not been washed to sea or subducted back into Earth’s interior. This is equivalent to a CO2 atmospheric pressure of 38 bar. If we add the carbonates found on the ocean floor, the equivalent CO2 atmospheric pressure rises to 55 bar.
_Adding all this together more than accounts for a 90% CO2 concentration at 90 Bar being reduced over time to a much lower say 20% CO2 and 4 or 5 bar – just right for the pterosaurs to take wing.
A Presentation to the Northern Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club
www.bobpickett.org/STORYsierraclub.htm
During the Carboniferous Period, there was the first explosion of land plants, pumping massive amounts of oxygen into the environment. With a significant amount of the world's surface being a swampland, fallen trees and other organic matter were quickly covered by muds, with the inability of aerobic decompositional processes to withdraw oxygen back out of the atmosphere. Thus, it is speculated, extremely elevated levels of atmospheric oxygen were maintained; possibly at a level of 35%, much greater than today's 21% levels. The impacts of this elevated level would explain the existence of six foot long millipedes, amphibians that were nine to twelve feet long, and the profusion of insect families (increasing from one or two to more than 100 during the Carboniferous, with many being huge, including 2 and 1/2 foot wingspan dragonflies). The oxygen-rich atmosphere was a denser atmosphere that provided more lift and thus made it easier for them to fly. More importantly, the excess oxygen made it easier for insects to breathe. The 2 1/2' wingspan dragonfly would have had a body that was over an inch thick, possible only with such high oxygen levels. Ferns and other club moss-like trees grew enormous because plentiful oxygen made it easier for them to manufacture lignin, their main structural material. And the beginning of the Carboniferous was also when our earliest four-footed ancestors hauled themselves out of the swamps and onto dry land. As they learned to carry their full weight without the help of water and to breathe with feeble lungs instead of gills, drawing in 35 % oxygen with each gulp would have lightened their burden considerably. By reducing the number of times they had to exhale, it would also have helped them avoid dehydration.
1. Sagan's fifth problem: Chemistry & biology of the terrestrial planets (Carl Sagan & Immanuel Velikovsky) [Books]
_However, for water to flow on the Martian surface, an atmosphere heavy enough to hold the water at the surface must exist. Michael Zeilik tells us "Since Mars does not have liquid surface water now, conditions for it must have occurred in the past and would have required a warmer climate and a denser atmosphere."53 G. O. Abell informs us that "Geophysicists have pointed out that liquid water can simply not survive in the low pressure atmosphere Mars has today. Various experts estimate that the atmospheric pressure would have to be from 5 to 50 times as great as at present to allow liquid water to flow over the surface