The greatest threat to scientific progress is the reluctance of scientists to ask questions. Every civilization that has had any scientific achievements in the past has died out just as it stopped asking questions and began to believe that it understood the world around it almost completely. I am sure that now most of you will tear me to pieces for what I am going to write, even though it will make perfect sense from a scientific point of view, simply because it will be an easier action than straining your brain asking 'awkward' scientific questions that are out of sync with the general scientific opinion.
Statement: Almost all globular celestial bodies are simply HOLLOW SKELETONS, therefore, the density of these bodies are greatly underestimated.
Imagine a liquid mass of elements in outer space. What form will it take? I think most of you will immediately answer "spherical" without even thinking, and this will be based on generally known physical laws for the behavior of fluid systems in the absence of external forces. However, the second question will arises What does the rotation itself change in relation to this liquid cosmic body? And here things get a little more complex. Most scientists will answer that the shape of this body will change from spherical to the oblate spheroid (ellipsoid) and they will stop here. Why would they stop here?! Because if they continue on, they will probably have to step outside the box of what is accepted and come into conflict with the others. And as we know, modern scientists are not like the old ones - they don't like to come into conflict with others, they are conformists. Their salary and livelihood depend on being a nice person that everyone likes in order to rise in the scientific hierarchy.
Let's go back to the title of this post "The moon is hollow!" ... Even before pictures of the far side of the moon were obtained, any sufficiently intelligent physicist could have guessed what the surface of this lunar side would look like and that it would differ from the near side of the moon, by asking a few simple questions. "As the Moon takes ALMOST the same amount of time to rotate on its axis as it takes to go around the Earth, what will be the consequences for the shape of the moon itself and the liquid magma it contains, if any?" After not much thought, one must come to the conclusion that this will be the oblate, tear-drop like, spheroid (ellipsoid). But if the moon had such a shape, it would mean that it would be asymmetrical and experience unbalanced centrifugal forces. This means that liquid magma from the interior of the moon will tend to flow to the surface of the moon from the bulge on the near side of the moon. I.e. it will periodically pour onto the Moon's near side, flatten large areas of the surface, then solidify on that surface, increasing its bulge even more. That there will not be many lava flows on the far side of the Moon and that it will have more visible craters, compare to near side of the Moon, is a conclusion based on such scientific reasoning. Therefore, a smart enough physicist would guess what the far side of the moon looked like before seeing actual pictures of it.
You probably already understand in which direction I am leading your thought. To the most important question, for our post. What is left at the place in the interior of the Moon where this surfacing and solidifying lava comes from after it has moved from there? The answer is obvious, isn't it?! A CAVITY REMAINS INSIDE. Therefore, the moon is hollow inside.
You don't like these conclusions, do you? Much to your delight, they will continue on in the same way. Almost all, if not all, spheroidal bodies in outer space are shaped in the same way if they pass through the liquid-solid phase. A hard shell forms on the surface, after which a liquid phase begins to pour over this surface and solidify on it, due to centrifugal, gravitational forces from outside and internal energy, releasing a cavity inside the body. Therefore, almost all such bodies are HOLLOW INSIDE, like sponges.
Now that you know this, you can also answer the question: How did the Main Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter probably get formed? These planetary shells increase in size over time and therefore decrease in strength. There comes a time when this hollow structure can no longer resist the continuous contact with external bodies, absorbing their energy. This means that at some point, they are broken like a crystal glass by an asteroid and scattered into numerous small pieces. The Main Asteroid Belt and a planetary rings have the same origin - just some planetary shell has run out of time.
And, yes, the Earth is also hollow. The Earth models you are currently viewing are incorrect. Which means that the calculated mass and density of the planets and much of the celestial bodies is also wrong.
P.s. Look at the top left picture of the moon. What do you notice in this picture? Do you notice that the most recent large lava eruptions on the Moon have swept away from the central part that is visible from Earth? This is the reason I to write "ALMOST" above. So if you reason correctly and logically, you should conclude the following: If there is a reason that the moon and many other celestial bodies synchronize their axial rotation speed with that of their orbit around their main system body, and lava eruption occurs mainly around the central equatorial regions of the near side of this celestial body, therefore moving these areas relative to the midline will only mean one thing: That the celestial body is moving away from or closer to the main body.
So, can you guess then in which direction the moon is moving relative to the earth, whether it is moving away or approaching? Contrary to NASA's claims, the Moon is approaching the Earth, not the other way around. If the Moon were moving away from the Earth, these abundant LAVA AREAS should have moved to the right, not to the left of the center-line. Because it takes time to compensate for its rotational speed around the axis, if the moon is moving away, therefore its orbital rotational speed around the earth is slowing down, but rotational speed around the moon axis is the same as before for some time, the lava areas will move on the right for an observer from the Earth. We see that they are moving to the left, therefore the moon is moving closer to the earth. "Elementary, my dear Watson"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And by the way, studies refuting this hypothesis or those that confirm it must be done almost necessarily.
In the above post, I did not address the subject of, after this magma is pushed to the surface, what it is replaced with in the interior cavity of a given celestial body?
Simply put, we need to know how deep this cavity is and what gases it contains. It is very likely that the periodic extinctions of organisms are directly related to the release of these gases from the interior of the Earth's cavity. We may even dare to attempt to drill to that depth, which could mean that on such a day, such a probe could directly lead to our and many other living organisms' death within a few hours. This is the reason why we need to know the answer to this questions: Is the Earth Hollow or Not? Is the Moon Hollow or Not? Or to put it another way, a drilling error like that could turn us into Venus faster than anyone can read this post. Why do you think this planet has such a dense atmosphere and where do these gases come from that keep it so dense?! These issues are issues of survival, so I think they need to be addressed urgently.
P.p.s. Of course, I'm exaggerating a bit with the drilling gamble above. The hole will probably close itself very quickly, killing everyone in a certain radius - because the pressure will be extremely high and the drill passage will not withstand the pressure of the passing gases before it starts to self-destruct - but it is still a risky gamble and should be taken into account when drilling at great depths.
Statement: Almost all globular celestial bodies are simply HOLLOW SKELETONS, therefore, the density of these bodies are greatly underestimated.
Imagine a liquid mass of elements in outer space. What form will it take? I think most of you will immediately answer "spherical" without even thinking, and this will be based on generally known physical laws for the behavior of fluid systems in the absence of external forces. However, the second question will arises What does the rotation itself change in relation to this liquid cosmic body? And here things get a little more complex. Most scientists will answer that the shape of this body will change from spherical to the oblate spheroid (ellipsoid) and they will stop here. Why would they stop here?! Because if they continue on, they will probably have to step outside the box of what is accepted and come into conflict with the others. And as we know, modern scientists are not like the old ones - they don't like to come into conflict with others, they are conformists. Their salary and livelihood depend on being a nice person that everyone likes in order to rise in the scientific hierarchy.
Let's go back to the title of this post "The moon is hollow!" ... Even before pictures of the far side of the moon were obtained, any sufficiently intelligent physicist could have guessed what the surface of this lunar side would look like and that it would differ from the near side of the moon, by asking a few simple questions. "As the Moon takes ALMOST the same amount of time to rotate on its axis as it takes to go around the Earth, what will be the consequences for the shape of the moon itself and the liquid magma it contains, if any?" After not much thought, one must come to the conclusion that this will be the oblate, tear-drop like, spheroid (ellipsoid). But if the moon had such a shape, it would mean that it would be asymmetrical and experience unbalanced centrifugal forces. This means that liquid magma from the interior of the moon will tend to flow to the surface of the moon from the bulge on the near side of the moon. I.e. it will periodically pour onto the Moon's near side, flatten large areas of the surface, then solidify on that surface, increasing its bulge even more. That there will not be many lava flows on the far side of the Moon and that it will have more visible craters, compare to near side of the Moon, is a conclusion based on such scientific reasoning. Therefore, a smart enough physicist would guess what the far side of the moon looked like before seeing actual pictures of it.
You probably already understand in which direction I am leading your thought. To the most important question, for our post. What is left at the place in the interior of the Moon where this surfacing and solidifying lava comes from after it has moved from there? The answer is obvious, isn't it?! A CAVITY REMAINS INSIDE. Therefore, the moon is hollow inside.
You don't like these conclusions, do you? Much to your delight, they will continue on in the same way. Almost all, if not all, spheroidal bodies in outer space are shaped in the same way if they pass through the liquid-solid phase. A hard shell forms on the surface, after which a liquid phase begins to pour over this surface and solidify on it, due to centrifugal, gravitational forces from outside and internal energy, releasing a cavity inside the body. Therefore, almost all such bodies are HOLLOW INSIDE, like sponges.
Now that you know this, you can also answer the question: How did the Main Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter probably get formed? These planetary shells increase in size over time and therefore decrease in strength. There comes a time when this hollow structure can no longer resist the continuous contact with external bodies, absorbing their energy. This means that at some point, they are broken like a crystal glass by an asteroid and scattered into numerous small pieces. The Main Asteroid Belt and a planetary rings have the same origin - just some planetary shell has run out of time.
And, yes, the Earth is also hollow. The Earth models you are currently viewing are incorrect. Which means that the calculated mass and density of the planets and much of the celestial bodies is also wrong.
P.s. Look at the top left picture of the moon. What do you notice in this picture? Do you notice that the most recent large lava eruptions on the Moon have swept away from the central part that is visible from Earth? This is the reason I to write "ALMOST" above. So if you reason correctly and logically, you should conclude the following: If there is a reason that the moon and many other celestial bodies synchronize their axial rotation speed with that of their orbit around their main system body, and lava eruption occurs mainly around the central equatorial regions of the near side of this celestial body, therefore moving these areas relative to the midline will only mean one thing: That the celestial body is moving away from or closer to the main body.
So, can you guess then in which direction the moon is moving relative to the earth, whether it is moving away or approaching? Contrary to NASA's claims, the Moon is approaching the Earth, not the other way around. If the Moon were moving away from the Earth, these abundant LAVA AREAS should have moved to the right, not to the left of the center-line. Because it takes time to compensate for its rotational speed around the axis, if the moon is moving away, therefore its orbital rotational speed around the earth is slowing down, but rotational speed around the moon axis is the same as before for some time, the lava areas will move on the right for an observer from the Earth. We see that they are moving to the left, therefore the moon is moving closer to the earth. "Elementary, my dear Watson"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And by the way, studies refuting this hypothesis or those that confirm it must be done almost necessarily.
In the above post, I did not address the subject of, after this magma is pushed to the surface, what it is replaced with in the interior cavity of a given celestial body?
Simply put, we need to know how deep this cavity is and what gases it contains. It is very likely that the periodic extinctions of organisms are directly related to the release of these gases from the interior of the Earth's cavity. We may even dare to attempt to drill to that depth, which could mean that on such a day, such a probe could directly lead to our and many other living organisms' death within a few hours. This is the reason why we need to know the answer to this questions: Is the Earth Hollow or Not? Is the Moon Hollow or Not? Or to put it another way, a drilling error like that could turn us into Venus faster than anyone can read this post. Why do you think this planet has such a dense atmosphere and where do these gases come from that keep it so dense?! These issues are issues of survival, so I think they need to be addressed urgently.
P.p.s. Of course, I'm exaggerating a bit with the drilling gamble above. The hole will probably close itself very quickly, killing everyone in a certain radius - because the pressure will be extremely high and the drill passage will not withstand the pressure of the passing gases before it starts to self-destruct - but it is still a risky gamble and should be taken into account when drilling at great depths.
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram