Hi
tomsolomon, and welcome ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomsolomon
I have an O'level in chemistry. Thats it. No PHD no years of exerience, nothing realy. Ive been reading a bit on this, tonight for the first time. And to me it makes perfect sense.......... Please read on.
I dont know about physics, I'm not even quite sure how an internal combustion engine works, but what I do know is that if you take a gas and cool it, it condenses, (becomes liquid, I think. There you go thats about the extent of my knowlege.)
|
OK ... you've revealed that your education is limited ... and your knowledge is limited (eg, not all gases become liquids when cooled - it is also pressure-dependent, something that you should have picked up in Chemistry class) ...
Quote:
This being the case......
If earth was created Billions of years ago, soley of gasses and stardust, with the aid of gravity, it would have eventually created a mass yes (the Earth) surrounded by gases (Y/N?).
|
Not really - "stardust" and gas, yes ... but also a lot of ices ... and the process of planetary accretion also included objects which of themselves comprised considerable mass ... the early gaseous envelope (sometimes called the first atmosphere) was thought to have been lost ...
Quote:
|
We are told that the "universe" is expanding, along with our galaxy, therefore the Earth is moving away from the Sun right?
|
These two are not connected in the way you think - as I understand it (which is hardly at all) universal expansion does not apply at scales of galaxies; certainly not at planetary distances ... shifts in the orbital distance of the Earth/Moon around the Sun are related to perturbing effects on gravity, with minor influences due to changes in mass over time ... the net effect is infinitesimal, and not always in the same direction (ie, the Earth/Moon system is not always moving away from the Sun) ...
Quote:
|
Eventually these gases surronding the earth would have condensed, to create a liquid covering the entire Earth. (Y/N?) (basic laws of chemistry and physics).
|
You might want to check those basic laws - there are quite a lot of gases which have not condensed to create a liquid ... you're breathing some of them ... certainly, a lot (but not all) of the water vapour condensed out, and yes, the primordial ocean was thought to have covered at least 90% of the surface of the Earth - it covers roughly 70% now ...
Quote:
|
If the continual movement of the Earth moving away from the Sun caused a reduction in gravity then the Earth Would expand causing rifts in the upper crust allowing the liquid to subside, and the land mass to reveal itself.
|
The Earth's position in relation to the Sun has virtually no bearing on the Earth's gravity - the best you can expect is a reduction in solar tides ... the reduction of ocean surface coverage is not caused by an expanding Earth - it was caused by a
contracting Earth (I bet that raised your eyebrows), a
cooling Earth (if you want some basic chemistry and physics, there it is ...), and by a collection of processes which we can call plate tectonics, which includes rifting, but also includes
orogenies and
subduction - neither of which can be explained by an expanding Earth ...
Quote:
|
Please tell me if I am talking from my BUTT, but if this is not a reasonable hypothesis then it goes against the laws of chemistry and phisics in my understanding.
|
perhaps you need to improve your understanding of both chemistry and physics, and toss in a little geology and planetary evolution ...