We will start to look at various phenomena and ask some questions. After this we will look at some possible answers on these questions.

It is known that the earth expands and that the rotational speed is slowing down and the orbital speed around the sun is increasing. How can one explain these symptoms? For this one can look at a few known facts, which reveal some questions. These questions are not discussed and answered satisfactorily up to now. Below we will discuss the questions and propose some answers.

Some of these facts were mentioned in various reports during the last 40 years or longer. For instance, it was mentioned in Die Umschau (Heft 24, December 1965), that the radius of the earth increases with an amount of 0,07 cm. per year, but others mention other figures. This means, that in a period of 100-million years it will increase by an amount of 70 km. But for how long has this increase already been taking place and was the rate of increase always been constant? This means that the earth is expanding for a long time already. The above mentioned article also mentioned that since the becoming solid of the surface of the earth for about 3,4 thousand million years the surface of the earth has increased by 213million to 510million km². During the International Geophysical Year it was discovered, that at least the earth is still expanding. According to Hilton it was discovered that the magnetic lines in fossil rock are not in their original direction any more. Here he established that the crust of the earth had changed considerably. According to him, the circumference of the earth has increased by some 40% during the last at least 100-million years since it started to increase. The inner part of the skin is still hot magma, which may contain some atomic action at the speed of atomic power plants and it does not have atomic explosions any more (it is doubtful if it ever had, since that would have been large scale chain reactions; writer). In time the outer crust has cooled down so much to become solid. Over this crust there was a layer of water. So according to Hilton.

But since when has earth been expanding, and by how much? The result is also, that due to this expansion, the moment of inertia (known from mechanical engineering) has increased tremendously, such that the rotational speed has reduced, therefore the watches have to be corrected by one tenth of one second at set times. In mechanical engineering it is known that with the same amount of energy, the rotational speed is related to the moment of inertia of a body. The larger the moment of inertia, the slower the speed will be. Are the above-mentioned figures of increase of area correct, or nearly correct? In any case it is not very important for us at the moment, al that is important is that it has happened even if we do not know how much and during what time span it was. We only know for sure, that it has happened.

Alfred Wegener came up with a proposal that the continents have been moving away from each other and are still doing so. But if a solid crust covered part of the earth, why should these continents move away from each other as was proposed by Alfred Wegener? Why should there only be a local cooling of the surface of the earth and not a cooling over the entire surface? The answer on this question was actually given above, the earth was smaller and it expanded, which expansion resulted in the parting of the continents. This solidified crust over the whole earth must then have been what we call now Pangaea.. If one considers Pangaea to have been a kind of super continent on one side of the earth only and the remainder remained liquid magma then the earth would have been wobbling. Pangaea covered the whole surface of the earth while the earth was very much smaller. Over the whole surface was a layer of water to cool the surface more down. At first this continent split and later on it split in two parts, which we call now Gondwanaland and Laurasia. According to Alfred Wegener the splitting up started 250-million years ago. This figure may be questionable, but we will not criticize this.

Now we have a nasty question:
If the diameter of the earth has increased by the above-mentioned tremendous amount, where did the additional amount of matter have come from? It was not an additional creation of matter, but what then? It must have come from somewhere. Is there a solution to this question? It has been proposed that it will be due to dust out of space, but that quantity is too little.

There is a large confusion about the idea of gravitational attraction in heavenly bodies. In a National Geographic (Vol.175, No 5, May 1989) it was mentioned that there is still a conception that the center of gravitational pull is situated in the center of that body (page 569 below). This confusion is quite widespread in the English speaking countries. As pointed out by Isaac Newton in his Principia we may only assume, that the gravitational attraction of all the mass of a body is concentrated in its center. In reality that gravity point of attraction does not exist, it is only imaginary. Attraction is only there where mass is. How can a single point attract, if there is no matter in that single point so that this point could attract such a huge amount of matter as the earth is? For attraction one needs two amounts of matter, from which the amount in that point does not exist. This fact is realized by mechanical engineers since a long time. In mechanical engineering one may only assume that the total mass of a body is concentrated in its so-called center of gravity. But this assumption one only may make to simplify calculations. Actually Isaac Newton made use of it when he attempted to calculate the mass of the planets and he knew that in reality that this is not the point of attraction at all (as mentioned for instance in Leitfaden der Astronomie von Dr. A.Goller. Verlag Josef Köfel. München, Seite 95 und 100). The center of gravity of a hollow sphere is not the point that attracts, for the simple reason that there is absolutely no matter in that point. This is also not the point that attracts even if that sphere is solid. The attraction is due to all the small parts of that sphere acting together. Only if one is far outside that sphere one may assume that all the matter of that sphere is concentrated in its center of gravity for calculation purposes only.

The proposal that celestial bodies may have an internal cavity is a possible answer to many questions and it will have many interesting consequences. This idea has been proposed before and is not new, but the arguments here are new. That this idea is not absurd or impossible will be seen below and one may even start to see that a solid core may be absurd. Therefore we think of a soap bubble that is hollow and which is not an impossibility and it does not implode. How to approach the solution is shown in the following and keeping in mind that the soap bubble is kept in that shape by sideways attraction between the molecules of the skin. So we may consider that celestial bodies with an internal cavity also may not be impossible and they may not implode.

Note: Seismic vibrations are dealt with below and it will there be shown, that they will not clash with the theory in this article.

If one travels from earth to the moon, one will find an area of low gravity somewhere in between, but not central between both planets, it is nearer to the moon. Later in this article we will see that there is not a point of no gravity but it is an area and it will also be such that there is not a place where the gravity is absolutely zero as will be discussed below. Now if we have for argument sake a super strong high speed rocket and we go and drag a planet of the size of the moon out of space and position this moon adjacent to the earth. Then we drag another planet of the size of the earth nearer and position this adjacent to the moon. We will now find that the position of the area of low gravity will now be quite exactly between the two units. So we carry on dragging planets out of space until position them at the same distance from the area of low gravity to form a ring of planets, closely positioned next to each other. The position of the low gravity area will not change and it will stay where it is. We keep on dragging more planets nearer and we carry on to make a complete sphere, but still the position of the area of low gravity will not change. Finally we have a large hollow celestial body. If we then position a large boulder very near to this area of low gravity and release it, we will find that it falls down towards the nearest earth-moon unit. So everything inside the sphere will fall outwards and not inwards. By reducing the internal size of the sphere to say 100 000 km. diameter with no matter internally, the same thing will still be applicable. Any boulder released from near the center of little gravity will still fall outwards.

We know that a soap bubble is made of a liquid, while we assume the above body mostly to be solid or treacle matter. In actual fact the earth is also mostly liquid or treacle, which is the molten magma inside, but with an internal cavity with a solid skin outside. Why can a soap bubble exist without imploding? Some may propose that internally there is a slight over pressure. But if that is so, the internal higher pressure will let the bubble expand such, that the pressures inside and outside are equal and balanced, so that specific proposal cannot be true. The soap bubble remains as is, because there is a sideways gravitational attraction between all the small parts of its skin. So it will be with the above heavenly body, it will stay in that shape due to the attracting gravity forces between each earth-moon unit sideways and it will also not implode.

But if we reduce that 100 000 km. to say 20 000 km., will the unit then collapse suddenly and form a completely solid body with a heavy solid core? This is very unlikely and according to Isaac Newton, not to be correct either. At the same time everything outside that body will fall towards it, and it will be in the direction of its center, which is the point of no gravity! The sphere will stay as it is due to the sideways gravitational attraction between the parts, as is with the soap bubble. One may remove some of the double earth-moon units to reduce the congestion.

It should be strongly posed that we have local gravity, which gradually changes to universal gravity if the distance is increased. An object, which is positioned outside a planet, but not at to far a distance is not attracted by the center of gravity of the planet at all. It will be subject to attraction of all small parts of the planets local gravity forces, even if it is at a few hundred km. distance from the surface. There are therefore many millions lines of attraction to the other body. Only if these lines are nearly parallel to each other one may assume them to be concentrated in the so-called center of gravity. Which is only valid when the other object is far away. This is what we may then call space or universal gravity. A boulder, which is not far from the surface of that body, will be attracted not only by the nearest segment of that body, but also by the adjacent segments and virtually by all the segments of that body. The forces will be inversely proportional to the square of their distance. Because the segments on the other side of that body are relatively far away, as well as the segments at the side of that body, their influence will be small (one of Newton’s laws, based on Kepplers third law, the square of the distance). If that boulder is at some distance inside the body the amount of matter between that boulder and the surface will start to pull it back, as well as the centrifugal force is less.

On the surface of the earth, only the mass of a boulder is considered, but one could be able to consider the attractions of boulders deep into earth as well, because there the attraction will be less, the deeper the boulder is inside, up to the point where the main outside attraction changes to main internal attraction. This internal attraction will be in all directions, but the strongest it will be in the direction where the most matter is. It is generally known, that the direction of gravity and its value will change if measured directly adjacent to a mountain so the direction is found to be not in the direction of the center of the earth any more. This fact was thoroughly investigated by Paul Boynton of the University of Washington. He measured the influence of a mountain adjacent to a TV mast and found the sideways attraction of that mountain. He could not explain that phenomenon. This also indicates that the instruments these days are very sensitive in all directions as shown also in the picture on page 577 of the above mentioned article in the National Geographic. This picture shows clearly that there is sideways gravitational pull. Actually it is very logic if the above mentioned reasoning is considered not to be far of true. The value and the direction of gravity force "G” varies all over the surface of the planet. We may conclude that on the borderline between two types of material on the surface of a planet, one will find a tendency that the direction of the gravitational pull will rather be towards the matter with a much higher density than towards matter with a much lower density. This was the reason why Paul Boynton measured the higher gravity on the side of the mountain: the difference in density between the rock of that mountain and the air on the other side of the mast.

According to tests done by Frank Stacey from the University of Queensland and others about gravity he assumed to have found a type of anti gravity. His tests were done in deep mines and in deep seawater. He did actually do a good job which points to the validity of what is mentioned in this article, but his tests were not done deep enough to get more definite conclusions. The tests are an indication that gravity reduces the deeper one goes. This is contrary to the idea that the density increases with depth. He called this so-called “anti gravity force” a “fifth force”. Interesting is that the value for acceleration g m/sec² will also vary with the change of the distance of the point of measuring to the surface of the earth.

This above reasoning is only as a means of understanding the mechanism. Formulae given for the attraction between heavenly bodies are virtually only valid if the distances are large as it is in space and the center of pull may be imagined to be in the center of the heavenly body as was used by Newton.

At the same time the earth is still expanding, which may be an indication, that inside there may be gasses which have a high pressure. Additionally the expansion will be because of centrifugal forces acting on the mantle, which may be calculated as per Christiaan Huygens from The Hague, who also determined and calculated the value of the acceleration g. By the way Isaac Newton also made use of his correspondent Huygens way of calculation the value of g and the centripetal forces. The earth will not explode or implode because of the strong sideways gravitational adhesion. Now the boulder inside will be also attracted by the nearest part of the large mass of the mantle and it will fall outwards towards the nearest mass. By approaching the surface it may accelerate due to the reducing of its distance to the nearest mass and to centrifugal forces acting onto it. The same thing may happen with the earth on itself, if the earth is considered to be hollow. Say we have a cavity of 3000 km. diameter inside the earth. As seen above, there will be an area of low gravity internally. And if we release a large boulder outside of this area it will fall towards the outside.

The principle will not change if one reduces the above huge sphere to a much smaller sphere or if one increases that sphere to a much larger sphere.

The answer on the question about where the additional matter by the increase of the size of the earth comes from is now actually shown. There is no additional matter added because internally the cavity is increased. But this cavity is not a vacuum, but there must be gasses internally, which are not heavy. They may have a high pressure and high temperature, but because of this pressure the weight of the earth does not increase. These gasses must then be due to evaporation of matter inside due to the high temperature.

Another way of reasoning may be the following. If one assumes for instance the earth to consist of two halves, each half will be attracted by the other half, but a particle, say a boulder of say one meter size positioned exactly in its center will be evenly attracted by all the segments of each half. So it is attracted say towards the left and equally attracted towards the right. The result of these two attractions will be that they cancel each other out and the boulder does not know if it has to go to the left or to the right as if it was between earth and moon. The boulder will then not be attracted either way. But if it is not absolutely in the center it will be attracted outwards towards the nearest largest mass.

The weight of each half is imaginary concentrated far away from this center of the total body (In mechanical engineering they call it the radius of gyration, but it is not exactly the same). But we should not forget that there are no centers of attraction at all for each half. Because of this confusion it was thought that the two halves could have been pressing against each other with a tremendous force and the conception, that the pressure in its center is extremely high. So we come back to the solution, that each km³ attracts all the other km³ such that again there are millions of attraction lines in every direction. But actually one could also consider the earth to consist of many segments, which each will attract the adjacent segments and all the other segments. Simultaneously the centrifugal forces will help to keep it from collapsing totally. In any case one can see, that the attraction if the both elements: a 1 km³ of the crust and the internal boulder reduces by the fact that the deeper inside into the crust the less the effect of the attraction is and a 1 km³ of the segment on the other side of the planet will virtually have little effect on this boulder. Frank Stacey who determined this correctly and could at that time not explain it.

It may be asked why and how a heavenly body could have become hollow. Therefore we may go back to the beginning of that body. Originally the body was a cloud of gasses and or dust, which became more compacted due to gravitational forces between all the elementary parts. But also this body in some way or other got a rotational speed about an axis. In the long run, when the body became denser, the rotational speed created more centrifugal forces. The centrifugal forces pulled the matter outwards with the result that an internal cavity came to existence. The speed however was and is by far not enough to let the sphere explode, but the rotational speed might have been more than what it is now. In due time this sphere became larger, so that due to the increase of its moment of inertia the rotational speed reduced and is still reducing. If the rotational speed is to high, the sphere may explode. Gravitational forces of say the earth are a simultaneous action of all the attraction forces between atoms. So one may consider the attraction between atoms as small gravitation forces. As is known: Ex unitate vires, which means: Unity makes power. So many atoms together can form the total force of gravitation of earth.

Now a very important argument to be considered: If the earth is considered to be solid, with a heavy core in its center and the center of gravity is the point of pull, than this would be compressed more and more and the earth would gradually become smaller. The diameter will then become smaller instead of larger. In due time it may become a black hole. In actual fact the earth becomes larger and not smaller.

The moon remains momentarily in its position due to the centrifugal forces due to the orbiting speed of this satellite around earth, which counteracts the gravitational pull of the earth. In the above-mentioned example with the many earth-moon units, this centrifugal force due to the orbital speed is now replaced by the sideways gravitational pull between the earth-moon units, because the moons are not orbiting any more. Due to its vicinity the force would then become much larger.

Seismic vibrations due to earthquakes that go through earth and are registered somewhere on the other side by seismographs. The vibrations do not arrive all at the same time. Here below we will indicate what these types of vibrations actually look like. There are two types of vibrations, the so-called S- type vibrations and the so-called P- or L- type vibrations. The S-type is in someway similar to the waves of AM waves in radio communication and they are actually like sinusoidal waves. These waves are perpendicular to the line of travel, but contrary to the basic radio waves to be sinusoidal they will be straight lines. The S-type waves are implanted onto this carrier line type wave. The S-type waves are called “shear”-waves in the sense of slipping planes past each other; but actually they are sinusoidal waves. Liquids and gasses do not slip, because they are fluent. Therefore these waves can only be transmitted through solid matter of the crust of the earth and they arrive last.

One could compare the P- and L- type vibrations with FM type of vibrations, which are compressing and expanding type of percussion’s and are quite similar to sound vibrations, which are not sinusoidal waves. If we analyze sound than we can determine that they actually cannot be waves. Like the above case they are implanted onto basic carrier waves. Again in our case this base is not wavy as in radio waves, which probably are also no waves at all, but straight lines. The sounds that come into our ear and activate our eardrum are not waves, because this drum cannot vibrate in a wavy fashion, but it can only react to longitudinal percussion vibrations. Compare this with a drum, the drum only can be activated by a stroke vertically on the surface, but sliding the drumstick over the surface will not give a sound, perhaps a soft squeek. The eardrum activates the malleus, incus and stirrup only as a kind of percussion, which let the liquid in the cochlea, vibrate which sends the sound by approximately 4000 nerves to the brain. If one observes the function of a loudspeaker or earphone then one can also see that these only produce percussion vibrations and do not produce waves. This means that the seismic vibrations will obey the rules of sound. Sound vibrations are actually percussion vibrations, but sometimes it may seem not to be so. For instance strings of a violin or a piano vibrate in a wavy fashion, but pulses through the air transmit the vibration and past the ear they are sent into the brain also by pulses. Inside the brain pulses through the nerves and synapse into the brain cells transmit them. Vision also works like sound by quantum pulses due to minuscule particles hammering each other.

The L- and P- type vibrations are transmitted through solids, liquids and gasses of the planet. The information about seismic vibrations is not determined fully as yet. If one reads books in different languages one gets clashing information. For instance, by reading some American books one does not find the L- type mentioned in there at all, which is logic because the P- and L- types are both longitudinal percussion transmissions and will therefore behave similar and only the path differs. Additionally this is also due to the assumption that the core of earth is a lump of solid iron, which most probably does not even exist. Because the vibrations are partly reflected from some of the discontinuities, they may give some indication what kind of material they go through, however this enigma is never been proven yet, only that the density differs. In acoustics it is well known that sound vibrations are reflected from hard and compacted surfaces, for instance like concrete, rock and plastered brick or most metals and surfaces of fluids are possible, but more difficult and they will not penetrate a solid core if it is in the form of iron as is assumed to be in the center of the earth. But if this core is gas it will transmit the vibrations much more easily. The transfer from the liquid magma into the gaseous core is like the transfer of sound through an open window, as is known in acoustics. The vibration will go through an open window without any obstruction. An open window will transfer sound some hundred times better than concrete or a lump of iron. The L- types are assumed to carry on straight to the other side of the earth where they can and they will deviate where there is a discontinuity. In actual fact they disperse in various directions, so it will be logic, that some of it may be transmitted along the mantle, while other will go straight through the planet. They could easily go through the Bullen and Repetti discontinuities for instance but will partly be reflected, which most probably could be liquids with different densities. Some of the vibrations are reflected by the so-called Gutenberg discontinuity, which is found at 2900 km to 3000 km depth, but mostly they will go through it. This will then be an indication that the core cannot be a solid lump of iron, because they then will be nearly fully reflected. Some vibrations are transmitted partly alongside of this discontinuity, depending on the angle of attack on the surface. It may be that this then could be the surface of the cavity inside. The transmission speed in liquids and gasses will increase when the temperature is increased. But this will be more pronounced in gasses. These could achieve a very high speed in very hot gasses, so it will mean that the speed in the center of the planet will be quite high. This phenomenon is actually determined. This will not happen if the core is iron, where the vibrations will be muffled. If one could determine what the density and temperature inside is, which often are assumed to be between 3000° and 5000°C then one could calculate the transmitting speed of these vibrations or vica versa. The estimated temperature internally would have molten all matter inside in any case and also it may have changed into gasses due to these high temperatures. Because the vibrations travel at high speed through the central part of the earth it is therefore more of an indication of liquids and gasses internally than a solid lump of iron.

Drilling through the discontinuity of Mohorovicic will not be deep enough to prove anything of the above mentioned theories. Russia, the USA and Germany have undertaken drillings, but they have been not very successful in this respect up to now. They are only a pinprick deep. They may have given other results, which may have been useful. This Mohorovicic layer is called after Dr. Andrija Mohorovicic from Zagreb, Slovenia in former Yugoslavia and is some times also called the Moho layer.

The earth is not perfectly round. This is because the shape is deformed due to the centrifugal forces acting upon a resilient mantle. It will in the North-South section be more like a spheroid, which is an ellipsoid, with its long axis at the equator and the short axis at the poles to form a nearly flat area. This makes the ellipsoid a flat ellipsoid, which indicates, that the centrifugal forces deforms the sphere with a not so rigid mantle to a flat ellipsoid, which will easily happen if the body is not so rigid as would have been when it was a completely solid body.

As a consequence of the above may be that one may have a tendency to assume, that many heavenly bodies may be hollow inside and that these heavenly bodies may expand gradually and slowly, due to gas pressures inside and due to centrifugal forces. Black holes may in a way be an exception; they become more and more compact, but are basically also based on the above reasoning, where the center point also is without gravity, but the body is so dense that it is not so easy to form a cavity. The segments are compacted to each other with high gravitational forces due to the fact that the segments are near to each other.

A similar reasoning as about earth may be applied to our large planets with a very low specific gravity, and where the outside diameter is large. We may for instance consider the planet Saturn and according to some assumed information it has a density of 0,7 times that of water and has a diameter of 129 600 km. This means that if the core is solid, then this core must have a very high density. Some people pretend that its atmosphere is very high and dense and the actual body is quite small. If that is so, the atmosphere near the surface must be very compressed due to the high atmospheric pressure and will have become liquid or even solid matter, which reduces the thickness of that atmosphere and again increases the diameter of the more solid body. Additionally the outside of the planet would then have a very tenuous atmosphere with no clouds. Again something about the present opinion does not sound very logic, because the total mass is low compared to the external size of the planet. Logic or mathematical reasoning cannot defend this, especially if one considers that Newton and others were correct by stating that a center point does not attract. So it seems more logic to assume the planet to be hollow, with a quite large outside diameter and a reasonable, comparatively thin atmosphere and quite a thin mantle, with gasses internally, which gasses may have quite a high temperature but have a low density of their own. An additional interesting point is that the diameter of the planet at the equator is considerably larger than the size of it between the poles. This also indicates that the mantle is quite flexible.

Let us now see if the above could be true if applied to some other heavenly bodies. In space we have very large stars of many thousands of km. diameter like Betelgeuse, whose diameter is larger than the orbit of Mars, but it has a specific gravity which is very much lower than water, and even approaching the density which we can get by pumping a container empty of gasses. If one considers such a star having a very compact center, as is momentarily assumed for heavenly bodies, than on the outside the density must be approaching to virtually nil. Still this star emits light due to atomic reactions from its entire outside skin. For an atomic reaction on this outside mantle there must be a considerable amount of matter in this mantle such that it can maintain these reactions for millions of years. Additionally this star expands and contracts in size with a variation of its brightness. The present ideas again are clashing with any logic. If we assume that the density of the core of a small planet like earth is considered to be about 12 to 14, what a large figure will it be for a very large body? This then must be so high, that one may start wondering, why this star has not collapsed into a black hole yet? A solution may be, that the inside is also hollow and the mantle consists of virtually all the matter of that star to ensure continuous atomic reaction and it may be considered as a huge balloon or soap bubble if one likes that idea better. The expanding and contracting of Betelgeuse could be explained by the fact that the internal gas pressure expands it and when this pressure is released through an opening, the star contracts again. If one of the stars expands far beyond its normal size to become a nova and if its core is considered a solid lump of material, what will be the mechanism of this expansion and what happens to its center? Will it remain a solid lump? Logic thinking will deny this. But if the star is considered a hollow body from the start with comparative quite a thick mantle, it is more in line with logic that the whole star can expand largely like a blown up balloon. At the same time this star still emits light over its entire surface during the expansion into a nova, which means, that there must be sufficient matter in this outside expanded mantle to still have atomic reactions. Otherwise the light of that star will be distinguished due to lack of matter. If a star explodes to become a nova, one may consider that this was most probably caused by a to high rotational speed, which increased the centrifugal forces. The largeness as result of becoming a nova has increased its diameter tremendously and with it the moment of inertia, so that the rotation is slowed down quite a bit again and with it the centrifugal forces are also reduced such that this nova can collapse again.

We may now consider some other interesting consequences of the earth if it is assumed to have an internal cavity and we may go say thousand million years back. In that time the diameter of the earth was very much smaller than what it is now. The magma outside skin was cooling down quite considerably and it became a solid crust with a thick layer of water over it. This crust covered the whole earth and this was the time that this crust is called Pangaea. If in the beginning the crust of the earth became solid, why should it only build up locally as a hump on one side of the earth? Is it not more logic to consider that it became a solid crust all over the planet when this was much smaller and with a layer of water all over the planet? After the crust had gradually cooled down to a reasonable temperature, life could start in that water and this water was not salty yet, it was sweet water and it became salty much later. Since the planet expanded, the solid crust could not follow the expansion and had to break up in sections. Pangaea split later into Laurasia and Gondwana. Alfred Wegener first proposed the process of continental drift in 1912 and this is not disputed any more and virtually everybody knows about this. Mr. Wegener mentioned, that it started about 250 million years ago. But for the basic reason, the times and the sequence of this process not everybody is in agreement yet. Mainly the process is due to the expansion of the earth, which is still continuing and will still break up parts, such that the continents and the floors of the oceans are split. As far as one can determine, was that the first crack must have appeared where the Pacific Ocean is now. This can be seen by the fact, that on the East Coast of Asia and the west coast of the Americas have virtually the same types of small quite primitive fossils, which are of the same age. The geologist Peter Coney from the University of Arizona determined this in 1970 to 1975. Gradually this Ocean widened and other cracks appeared where the Americas and Eurasia parted and for instance the Antarctic, India and Australia broke away from Africa and South America. Gradually due to the expansion all continents departed from others and this process is still continuing. An indication of how South America broke away from Africa can be seen by the reports of drilling of leg 40 in 1974 and 1975 by the Global Challenger and the French project Fameux. Here the result of the drilling shows that the splitting may have started in the south. It was found that first fresh water penetrated, which was later replaced by salt water. The rift gradually extended north along the coast of West Africa. This also indicates, that the rift started quite early, during the time that the seas were still not salty yet.

Let us look what is generally inside the planets. Unless planets have been completely cooled down, there will most probably still be gasses inside, which may have sometimes quite a pressure outward. The liquid magma may have equalized itself over the whole internal surface. There will be virtually no gravity in the center, so these gasses will tend to become denser towards the internal surface of that body, unless the gas pressure is reasonably high, which may spread the density more equally inside. Inside the earth and other planets this pressure may have a tendency to escape through the wall and sometimes it will succeed through a crevice or along sub ducted ocean floor and form a volcano, where some of the pressure will escape. Sometimes the escape of these gasses will be quite simultaneously through various volcanoes spread over the globe where there is a weakness.

If the mantle has cooled down to some extend, but not fully yet, it will become a treacle substance. Gasses will then sometimes come through in the shape of bubbles and form bubble craters, which may be visible after the mantle has cooled down to a certain degree so they do not flatten so much any more. One can see this clearly on the moon and other planets, where many of these craters may be seen. In general many of these craters are nearly perfectly round like bubbles, which have escaped from household syrup, which is also a treacle substance. Additionally there are many craters, which are due to meteors, but they are often not so perfectly round. These craters came about due to a hit from meteors after the surface had been solidified, so that they are actually comparatively recent but not that the number of hits by meteors has increased. This will also mean that there must be more of them visible than bubble craters. It seems that bubble craters are larger than craters due to impact of meteors. Unless a meteor had hit the surface straight down, one will find an oblong crater. Compare this with the large impact crater in Arizona and in South Africa the crater at Koppies. But when the meteor has hit the surface straight down, one will find the crater also to be round, which sometimes cannot be easily distinguishable if it was through a gas escape bubble or a straight down hit. One can see these bubbles sometimes when there are bubbles coming of the surface of the sun during an eclipse, called protuberances. These bubbles sometimes appear as half balloons on the surface of the sun, also like bubbles of household syrup.

Due to the expanding earth the openings between the continents laid the hot magma bare and the water over it started boiling and cooled this magma down to a comparatively thin skin, which became solid matter to form the ocean floors. This process is still going on and can be seen in the ridges in the floors of the younger oceans, like the Atlantic and Indian oceans, which may indicate which oceans are the youngest oceans. It is considered, that the Atlantic is still one of the most restless areas of the world.

The liquid magma may have equalized itself over the whole internal surface. By calculating the original size, and the size which the earth is now, one may determine what the size of the cavity inside might be. Lord Kelvin proposed that if one measures the lengths of the slopes of the mountains and hills and adds these to the dimensions of the flatter areas, one would get an original surface of the earth to be 10% larger than what it is now. Which would have been shrinkage of the diameter. He lived in a time when the knowledge of the origin of mountains was not known yet, so we are not allowed to laugh at his idea. Similarly we are not allowed to laugh at the people who believe that the earth is flat.

According to Prof. Charles H. Hapgood (Maps of the ancient sea kings. Adventures Unlimited press, Illinois USA, page 189) the American continent now moves in southwestern direction, still moving away from Eurasia. The oldest ocean, the Pacific, has come virtually to a rest and may continue expanding very little and giving an impression that the floor is rotating anti-clockwise. It is subducting practically all along its circumference, all along what is called the Ring of Fire, creating earthquakes and volcanoes. This subducting is due to the fact that the American continent still moves westward and that Asia is still moving eastward. It may also have been possible, that certain areas have been expanding more than other areas, depending on the strength resistance as can be seen on the St.Andreas fault.

Another fault is the Jordan valley, which runs from Turkey through the Jordan valley, through Afar and right into Southern Africa, such that in the future there will be sea water in this area. There are various other faults all over the world, to many to mention them all.

Australia gives the impression that it has made a full Walsing Mathilda over the whole Southern Hemisphere and it has not come to a full rest yet. The sub-continent India has also moved from Africa and has hit Asia, with the result that the Himalayas were formed.

It has been determined, that the moon has a moon tremor at least every month. It was also determined, that the moon bulges out approximately 1 meter where it points towards the earth, so every time the closest approach to the earth occurs. But the earth also bulges out towards the moon. The researchers propose that apparently this bulge produces considerable strain within the moon mantle. Now, on the other hand, if we assume that the moon is also hollow and the mantle is still flexible and not supported by a solid core, this bulge may not be extreme. If we consider that the moon has cooled down so much that the whole moon has been solidified and not treacle any more, this bulging will also be doubtful, it will crack. After the landing on the moon, during the departure back to earth of the Apollo 11, the moon module was released and it dropped back onto the surface of the moon. This impact created a moonquake, which went about seven times around the moon according to reports and it was mentioned that it lasted for about one hour. If the moon were completely solid, this reverberation would have been dampened very quickly.

But if the moon is hollow, the whole surface may reverberate. As an old Dutch saying sounds: Hollow barrels sound loudest. It may be that the internal magma of the moon may have cooled down considerably and is already or is approaching the state of becoming solid matter, but there still may be some residual heat internally to consider resilience. There are still moonquakes, which may indicate, that there are still active gasses inside and there is still some hot magma internally. According to Russian observations there are still eruptions on its surface. Also the speed of the moon around the earth is increasing, which indicates a hollow planet, which also may still be expanding.

It is interesting that when the diameter of earth was smaller the acceleration of gravity g also had been less. One could use the same formula, which Christiaan Huygens developed and Isaac Newton used. If we for instance calculate this figure what g had been when the radius of the earth was say 5000 km. but with the same weight mass of the earth what it is now, one will get a figure which is approximately 20 % lower. The result of a lower value of gravity is that plants and animals could grow larger because the weight was less. This is confirmed in what was found for instance in coalfields. Trees grew to very tall trees and animals like many dinosaurs could grow to huge animals with apparently no problems for them to move around. The largest animals were during the Jurassic times. For instance, there must have been a very large type of pterodactyl, which was to heavy to fly if the gravity was the same as what it is momentarily. This according to Ivor Evans and Michael Wright M.A. University of London, but if the gravity was say 20% less, it could have been flying. How could that animal have developed wings to fly to gather food if it could not have used it? This also can be an indication that the gravity must have been lower than what it is momentarily. If this is investigated again, one can see that with a lower gravity the animal could have been flying. But when the earth expanded, the gravity increased to such a figure, that trees became less tall and these heavy animals could not live any more and died. The smaller ones could carry on living. This could have been one of the reasons for the extinction of the very large animals, with or without cooperation of a meteor, which was actually not a necessity and why have the smaller animals not been completely wiped out by that meteor?

Please note that all the pictures (except for the "Spinning Globe" and "Mr W. Lambooy") are from "The Night Sky from Southern Africa" interactive CD" © Fred Smith. Feb 2003."

Name: W.Lambooy
Address: P.O. Box 263720
South Africa
Tel: +27 (0)16 263 2629

This article may be downloaded as either a "Microsoft Word" (.doc) file, or as "Rich Text Format" (.RTF)
"Microsoft Word"                       "Rich Text Format"