It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


hollow earth

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 17 2003 @ 09:13 AM
"In the beginning, some 4 or 5 billion years ago, when the Earth was still an enormously expanded ball of superhot whirling gas, it gradually began to contract as it cooled. The laws of physics require cooling gases to condense and so the rapidly spinning sphere of tenuous gases began to concentrate as the heat loss continued. Self-centered gravitational attraction kept reducing the diameter of the whirling ball of cooling material...but only to a certain extent. This is the big logical distinction between the old inadequate theory of planetary formation and Gardner's discovery. The old notion would have us believe that the gravitational contraction continued unabated until the Earth had become moltenhot under a fierce gravitational pressure. While such a scenario undoubtedly does routinely occur in the celestial evolution of particularly immense bodies, as is the case with all stars, it is definitely not the final development of typical planets.

The crucial second factor to lay stress on is centrifugal force. Remember that while gravity is attempting to draw all of the material toward the center, there is an opposing force also at work centrifugal force. Just as a figure skater spins much more rapidly when she brings her outstretched arms tightly in against her body, so too did the ever contracting proto-planet begin rotating ever more rapidly as its size decreased. Like the glued water in a bucket that refuses to spill if one swings the bucket in a fast circle, so too was this same law of motion centrifugal force attempting to hurl all of the material outward from the forming planet's axis of rotation. So finally, in this silent titanic struggle between two natural forces, a balance was struck. When the swiftly whirling sphere had drawn itself down to an approximately 8000 mile diameter, the compromise between gravitational and centrifugal force was reached. But there is more.

There is a special characteristic of centrifugal force and we must not overlook this important trait. The strength of 'c' force becomes greatly lessened as it approaches right angles to the direction of spin. A simple day-to-day example of this behavior is water in a basin. If you remove the drain plug and allow the water to start emptying from the basin, what will you eventually observe? A vortex or whirlpool, an empty space surrounded by rapidly rotating material. Now imagine this same principal in action concerning the contracting body which was to become our Earth. At right angles to the rotational axis, in other words the 'poles', the c force was considerably weaker than elsewhere, especially the equator, therefore although at the Earth's equator the c force was able to halt the material's inward progress at about an 8000 mile diameter, it was considerably less successful in the Polar regions, there stopping the contraction at about 1400 miles. The inevitable outcome of this natural compromise is that our planet concluded its evolution and solidified as an 8000 mile hollow sphere with 1400 mile diameter Polar Openings.

Now it is at this stage in the logic that Gardner advances and Reed falters. Because of his study of astronomical records and photography as specifically relating to nebula and comets, Gardner became aware of the whole truth. In the precise center of these translucent spheres is a proportionally small incandescent ball. Between this luminous interior orb and the shell of the nebula is a large intervening space; said another way, the nebula is hollow except for the bright sphere in its center. Why? Well, where is the one other location at at which c force is quite weak, besides at the poles? The answer of course is at the precise center of rotation, and once again the logic is so straightforward that we may readily examine a common household example to support the argument. What would be the result if you sprinkled a layer of powder upon the top of a record player and then turned the record on high speed? The powder would fly off of the record...except for a small portion at the precise center.

Based upon his studies of the planetary nebula through observatory photographs, Gardner was able to surmise that the very thick shell of the Earth is approximately 800 miles thick, the Polar Openings 1400 miles across, and the gravitationally suspended Central Sun (the incandescent orb locked by gravity in the exact planetary center) some 600 miles diameter. Because of the enormity and very gradual curve of the Polar Aperture, it is impossible to visually detect it; this is the same as the fact that we do not 'see' that the Earth itself is round. The curve is much too gradual to observe. Based on the nearly constant merger of warm interior air with very cold exterior Polar air, the Polar Openings are almost always covered by a thick cloud layer. This explains why when viewed from satellites the openings look just as they would if there actually were the mythical 'polar ice caps' which government policy claims are at the Earth's extremities. Gardner was led inexorably to his monumental science discovery by the vast quantity of inconsistent information which he continually encountered during his years of study dealing with, especially, high Arctic expeditions.

Chief among the numerous mysteries are:
1) a dramatically improving climate in the very far north,
2) the extreme peculiarity of the famous Northern Lights or Aurora Borealis, and
3) the eccentric behavior of the compass in very high latitudes."

posted on Feb, 17 2003 @ 10:02 AM
Hmmm... Ok.... Thats a very interesting read, I have to admit! Do you happen to have any calculations to back it up??? Would really like to see them.

There are a few problems with your scenario.

Centrifugal force has *some* affect on the planet, as there is approximately 3% "bulge" at the equator... however 3% is a trifling amount. Also, if your scenario was correct, all objects at the equator would be thrown off, beyond escape velocity, as the velocity required to stabilize such mass into a hollow spherical body would be several hundreds of times greater than the planets current rotational velocity. Of course, gravitational studies have been done, and a person weighing 200 pounds in North America will notice approximatley 1% difference (more weight) at the poles, or 1% less at the equator. This is of course not even noticeable without sensitive measuring equipment.

Also, your scenario would only work if the rotational axis was absolutely stable and constant... This is not true. The rotational and magnet poles both "wander" or precess independent of one another. If you ever do any reading about Amundsen Base in Anatarctica, try to find photos of their pole tagging project... every year, scientists at Admundsen place a pole and flag on the exact rotational and magnetic pole, and have done so for the last 50 years. They have created a large ice field, approximately 6 miles in diameter, with 2 seperate spirals of flags spiraling around in different directions.

As I stated before, due to geophysical and seimic studies, we KNOW for a FACT that the core is solid. The Mohorovic Discontinuity represents a massive density gradient, equivalent to the difference between water and solid rock. Another such discontinuity exists between the mantel and the outer core of even greater differential, representing the equivalent of the difference in density between air and solid rock.

Seismologists and geophysicists study seismic activity on a daily basis (there is always a small earthquake somewhere, and seismologists are probably the only people in the world to look forward to a nuclear weapons test), tracking P and S waves through the mantel and core. This activity is predicted and follows standard physics, and simply could not happen if the core were not solid.

Also, as stated, if the planet were hollow, regardless of composition or thickness, it could not hold itself together. Also, the assumption that a central sun of 600 miles diameter was suspended in the center..... hmmmm... how is it suspended, and why doesnt it come in contact with with the inside of the sphere? The gravitational pull from such a sun (if it were possible) would cause the sphere to collapse upon it. If such a sun were contained within a hollow sphere that captured 100% of its radiant energy, it would soon turn the containing sphere into magma, as there is no function to bleed off the excess radiant energy, therefore, all this energy is being absorbed by the containing sphere... Also, 600 miles diameter is too small to support fusion, therefore it is physically impossible for such a sun to occur naturally. (Even Brown Dwarfs, the absolute minimum for fusing star is at least a couple thousand miles in diameter).... So, hate to say it, the sun hypothesis just doesnt even get off the ground.

You state that a 1400 mile diameter hole exists at the poles, and that we havent found it.... I really *DONT* believe that we havent been able to find a hole approximately the size of Alaska anywhere on the planet....

In response to some points of strange phenomena reported at the poles:

1) a dramatically improving climate in the very far north:
Well, where??? Admunsen Base routinely records temperatures around 50 degrees below 0 C year round.... Have never heard of an expedition that didnt nearly freeze thier butts off...

2) the extreme peculiarity of the famous Northern Lights or Aurora Borealis:
This is very easy to explain.... Charged solar particles are always crossing the planets orbit. We dont notice them at lower lattitudes because they are repelled by the earths magnetic field while still outside our atmosphere. (The magnetosphere). The magnetic poles for the magnetosphere exist at the Poles, where the lines of force penetrate our atmosphere and down into the center of the planet. These lines of force draw these charged particles down into the atmosphere at these areas, where they interact with the upper atmosphere, ionizing it, creating a very cool light show. This has been proven numerous times, and it is totally predictable based on solar activity.

3) the eccentric behavior of the compass in very high latitudes:
Well, yes.... I didnt realize this was a mystery. At high lattitude, you are nearing one or the other (in the south) magnetic poles... compasses function because they have a north and south to point to... as you close on a magnetic pole, you essentially "take away" the opposing pole. Your compass thinks that the north pole is all around it since it cant find the south pole, so it acts wierd. Polar explorers have known of this for hundreds of years, and most polar navigation is done through sun and star sightings and triangulation, and more recently, with satelite GPS navigation.

posted on Feb, 27 2003 @ 12:18 AM
I find that the patent link no longer works,but I do have a copy of the Material here

posted on Feb, 27 2003 @ 11:31 AM
Ummm. I woulda thought that if the earth was hollow it would implode due to the immense pressure.

posted on Feb, 27 2003 @ 01:03 PM
I don't say one way or the other about the planet being hollow. I was amazed to find out that some of our planets are gas... I see both points, but couldn't compressed gas hold up the center of the earth. Compressed enough it would act more like a plasma or a liquid than a gas. It would also be very hot. So I guess our next doomsday will be that someone will drill a hole into the compressed gas and we will implode, gas coming out solid matter recombining in the "Nucleus".
I'm just rambling.
Be Cool

posted on Feb, 27 2003 @ 05:28 PM
Well, there is in fact a fluid pressure holding up the outer mantel and crust of the planet... it is called the inner mantel, and is essentially magma...

I really hate to break it to the bunch that likes to think that the entire core is hollow, but there just is no structural material that would support a hollow sphere of the size of the earth, especially that would generate a gravity field of the strength of ours.

In response to K_os idea of the world imploding if it were drilled through, it wouldnt.... you would however have a very nice volcanoe (and I would be very interested in seeing it up close!) However, the world has hundreds of volcanoes, and although they have spread localized destruction (and once or twice, with global repurcussions) it hasn't had a really bad effect on the planet.

posted on Feb, 27 2003 @ 07:01 PM
The earth is suspended in the vacume of space. Gravity is two fold, and reversed from what you have been taught.

Gravity dosnt pull things to the surface, it pushes it. Our surface gravity is centered 4000 miles out in what is known as the Van Allen radiation belt. It pushes the outer crust in. The Inner gravity is the inner sun, or smoky God, or the sphere of Arulu. It also pushes out twards the inner crust. they equal out.

posted on Feb, 27 2003 @ 07:51 PM
...Whatever you've been smoking, I'll pass...

Trying to rewrite the laws of physics to give credence to an unfounded theory, are we?

posted on Feb, 27 2003 @ 08:02 PM
Actually, I have heard of the theory that ASE is mentioning.... Also, as I understand, it was shot down in flames under closer scrutiny of the theoretical physics guys...

Now, I don't know a hell of a lot about physics (geology is just a lot easier to understand for me), but it would seem to make your assumptions correct, each planet would need to have a corresponding equidistant "anti gravity" sphere about 180 miles outside of the surface, pushing it to keep it from exploding? After reading your post a couple of times, I have a hard time coming up with any kind of physical process or phenomena that would generate such a force, or even allow it. I hate to say it, I am at a total loss for any compelling evidence to support this idea.

To the contrary however, we have MOUNTAINS of evidence that the planet is completely solid throughout.... of course, I personally believe there are very extensive cavern systems in the continental crust (above 50km depth) that would likely keep the hollow earth bunch pretty happy if they ever wanted to actually explore them... I have done a bit of spelunking, and the spelunker community has a large number of slightly wierd people (myself included), so you would likely be welcomed with open arms!

posted on Jun, 1 2003 @ 01:53 AM
All I can say is wow after reading some of the crap on this thread.

Do some of you seriously believe the earth is hollow?

Please if you had any clue about physics, you would know that there is no such thing as centrifugal force. The only rotational force is centripetal force. Rotation does not push objects straight outward from the center, it pushes objects in a ling tangent to the center.

As for the earth having the same gravity and being hollow, please. In order for this to be true, the earth would have to be made almost entirely out of diamonds or something much more dense than anything we can imagine. Also this would cause the earth to have a pretty big wobble in it's rotation because the center of mass would be no where near the actual center (because the earth is obviously not symmetrical) and this would be very noticeable by satellites.

Some of you people seriously need to get back into the real world and stop desperately trying to turn everything into a conspiracy.

posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 03:07 PM

Read this and if you still don't get it then so called modern science has you in it's grip to the point that even a personal trip the the middle earth would be greeted with great skepticism. Even someone as mentally strong as the subject in the book had great difficulty in believing what he saw. We are the ignorant fools living on the surface that don't know about the rest of our own planet because of our own fault and following so called scientists into their world of theories!

posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 05:19 PM
hey there, this is my first time on a forum, so exscuse me if my views are utter fluff

My view on the entrance to the middle of the earth thing is that it may be the bermuda triangle, boats and planes have gone missing there so could there be some force, natural or unnatural, that teleports these things to the center of the earth?????

posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 07:09 PM
Try through the North Pole.

posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 07:09 PM
Try through the North Pole.

posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 05:44 AM
What i want to know is, what does a member with over 100,000 ats points have to say to get banned?

posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 10:56 PM
this topic is years old. 3 years or so. so i dont expect any of the posters whove poseted before to read this. but i just want to point out a few things.

a. years ago everybody knew the world was flat. that you would sail off the edge of the world if u went to far. sail off the edge of the world.... interesting. sail off the edge.... doesnt a hole have an edge?

b. the draining water... when i first read about this idea, i thought of that too... that if there were huge holes in the earths crust where did the water go? wouldnt it just drain out and fill the hollow area? the awnser is no it wouldnt. gravity would hold the water to the walls of the crust, just as water clings to the side of a counter when its spilt just before falling to the ground. so in an effect water defies gravity, then falls because the counter doest produce enough gravatational pull to keep the water there. if gravity is in the crust then it makes sense that it would just hold the water to the walls just as it holds it to the surface of the planet. so it would still flow normaly. also clining to the walls of the inside of the earth just the same as it does on the out side.

c. the earth's axsis does wobble. just not visibily to the satalite's because its to small.

d if gravity does come from the crust then the magnets and equipment carried and used by the scientits would become false-a-fyed. the holes are just too big to see the edges of. it would be the same as an ant stareing into the crater of a volcano. its just to big for the ant to notice. plus theverticle plane of water would have to be more than 800 miles long with a gradual curve. so a human wouldnt notice the change. s

so the so called voiage to the true poles could be false. the people might think they've been to the real poles when in all reality they might have just ventured in to the veritcle planes of the holes.

as for the clouds that are always around, u cant see the surface. so there very well could be huge holes. plus there are a few picutres on the net that show a huge hole in the northern pole "area".

. the next fact is, take a rubber ball. cut out the two poles. then dunk it in water. some of the water sticks to it to form "oceans" and in other places it dries up to form the contenents. now i donk know about u but my rubber ball didnt implode or explode. try it with something bigger and thinner if u want.

plus SIZE IS RELEVENT. just because the world is huge dosent mean it has to play by the other rules. a metal sphere in space is just aslikely to emplode as a piece of paper does.

remember earth is floating in a vaccume of space. there is no pressure to make it collaspe as tehre is on earth.

and as for my final rant, humans only about what we can see and do with our own two hands. we know nothing about anything in any other place but the general places on earth. we dont know if water rolls up hill or down hill any place but earth. who knows, parhaps on mars the water is lighter than air, or mabey water floats. we dont know.

tehre are even some events on earth that no one can scientificaly prove. such as why sometimes gravity works in reverse, or why ghosts exist.

we only know things in set paramaters that we "discoverd". any thing else cant possibly exist. because we cant prove it. but "it" does any way.

posted on Jan, 13 2006 @ 02:17 AM
Gee! that thread is very old indeed!

[edit on 13/1/06 by Echtelion]

posted on Jan, 13 2006 @ 02:24 AM
I've been reading on that "theory" for a few years now and I still did'nt found any of those so-called authentic images of the hole in the North Pole. As long as nobody on this site will come up with an authentic pic (GPS image, anyone?) of that, I'll still firmly believe it is just pure rubbish for nutjobs and charlatans.

posted on Jan, 13 2006 @ 04:57 AM

Originally posted by storrence

Read this and if you still don't get it then so called modern science has you in it's grip to the point that even a personal trip the the middle earth would be greeted with great skepticism. Even someone as mentally strong as the subject in the book had great difficulty in believing what he saw. We are the ignorant fools living on the surface that don't know about the rest of our own planet because of our own fault and following so called scientists into their world of theories!

I've read it; overblown, pretentious, nonsensical and laughable. And that's just the language. The theory itself is insane. Come on, use your eyes and ears! If the world is hollow, then how did it form? What's to stop it from collapsing? If there's a sun inside, then it must a) be tiny and b) have the gravitational field of a pea that mysteriously repels instead of attracts, because why wouldn't it pull everything in otherwise? And if it's that small, then whay hasn't it run out of fuel billions of years ago? The theory is mad.

posted on Jan, 13 2006 @ 02:52 PM
You could drill to the center of the earth if you had a Liquid Nitrogen cooling system and a computer sophisticated enough to control the outlet of liquid nitrogen to the outside of the drill without freezing the diamond (making it brittle and therefore breakable) and than make the drill out of blu-laser cut diamond and have the engine that drives the drill be powerful enough to make a aircraft carrier fly at mach speeds.

the cost would be probbably around 10,000,000,000

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in