The Expanding Earth
Developments in Geotectonics, 10: The Expanding Earth focuses on the principles, methodologies, transformations, and approaches involved in the expanding earth concept.
The book first elaborates on the development of the expanding earth concept, necessity for expansion, and the subduction myth. Discussions focus on higher velocity under Benioff zone, seismic attenuation, blue schists and paired metamorphic belts, dispersion of polygons, arctic paradox, and kinematic contrast. The manuscript then ponders on the scale of tectonic phenomena, non-uniformitarianism, tectonic profiles, and paleomagnetism. Concerns cover global paleomagnetism, general summary of the tectonic profile, implosions, fluid pressures, pure shear, crustal extension, simple shear with horizontal axis, geological examples of scale fields, and length-time fields of deformation.
The publication explores the cause of expansion, modes of crustal extension, and rotation and asymmetry of the earth, including dynamic asymmetry, precessions, nutations, librations, and wobbles at fixed obliquity, variation of rate of rotation, and categories of submarine ridges.
The text is a dependable source of data for researchers wanting to study the concept of expanding earth.
What people are saying - Write a review
My small contribution to this debate cannot compare to the detail that Carey has poured into this work. Plate tectonics believers will have a lifetime of problems and discrepancies to explain away if they read the book. Most will not, since they have a preconceived idea that needs preserving.
Most of the concepts raised by Carey is so complex that readers without a thorough grounding in cartography, 3D geometry and geology will be lost within a few sentences.
The simple test of tracing the continents (from an accurate globe representation of today) and fitting them on a smaller globe with about 2/3 diameter of the current is a very convincing argument in itself.
On this smaller globe the continents not only fit together better than the traditional Pangea type fittings on the current radius globe, but they fit together at all sides and top and bottom in a single 3D puzzle. There is in my mind no conceivable way for this to be explained except for the logical one, that they were together as a single object, a smaller earth. I have no argument with measurements that show subduction took place in various places, even if subduction occurs in some way, the fitting of the continents are clear and cannot be explained sufficiently in any other model.
Now for my contribution; using google earth in space view, it is possible to view various planets in a fair bit of detail. Taking Mars as an example I was observing the surface when I realised something interesting:
The pictures (see link above) show some visual evidence from Google Mars. If Mars was expanding, then there would probably be some old craters that were around before the crust broke up, and some of those could be ripped in two by the expansion process. We may observe such craters in the pictures.
The only other explanation for half craters such as these shown would be erosion, of which we find no or little evidence in the areas shown. The break is too clear and I cannot see valleys eroded in this area. There are also cracks running parallel to the break from old to new land (similar to our ocean ridges), providing more visual evidence for expansion in these areas.
The second evidence is about probability, which is a very rigorous mathematical science. If you had a constant size planet with no major erosion, we would expect the surface to be similar all around with approximately the same number of meteorite impact sites everywhere (some gradual shift to and from the solar/galaxy system alignment accepted). But on Mars (and possibly other planets-investigate?) there is evidence of old land (with many and larger impact sites) and new land (with fewer and smaller impact sites) with a clear boundary between the two types. This would only be possible with the new land appearing due to expansion, since there is no evidence of plate tectonics on mars…
Stretched impact craters such as these (see link below) only show up in new land areas (in expanding planet theory, new land is the land appearing while expansion takes place) – most likely not due to any directional or angle effect from the incoming meteorite but due to the land expanding after the impact, providing visual evidence in favour of expanding planets. Erosion cannot stretch an originally round impact crater. You may observe these pictures at :