mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ For complete access to all the files of this collection see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php ========================================================== Over million years, .... one of which likely was a change in the gravity of the earth. Ted Holden has suggested this repeatedly (see his website). Robert Bakker (see "books"), a very able researcher, goes into details of how necks and bodies of the large dynosaurs were reinforced. Holden also provides an article on the size limits of current terrestrial animals, and the flight limits of current birds. His point is to demonstrate that the Teradactiles of the Cretatious era could not possibly have flown. The 50 foot wing span of monsters found in Texas in the last few years stand in contradiction to any aerodynamics possibilities, and in fact the 'official' wingspan was reduced from 50 feet to 30 feet in response to complaints of fanciful dreaming by archeologists. But even at a mere 30 feet, even with hollow bones, even with the most efficient of feathers, even with the presumption that this animal climbed up mountain sides and then launched itself to glide above the landscape looking for prey... To do what? Crawl back to a nearby hill or tree after dinner? Most caught fish. The fact remains that with a 30 foot wing span, these animals could never have left the ground. At least not on _this_ earth. How could gravity change? The possibly are (1) a change simply due to electric fields experienced by Earth, (2) by accretion of mass from outside the Earth, and (3) by the creation of mass within the Earth. The first possibility is suggested by the Electric Universe people, who claim that gravity is a function of electric fields (as yet not understood), so that the location of Earth around the Sun, rather than in close orbit about Saturn, could change gravity. But a change in gravity due to electric fields seems not to fit either what we know of electric and magnetic fields, or what we know (with confidence, if not with considerable mystery) of gravity. I would not altogether dismiss this possibility, since we have no idea what is happening within the earth, or the interaction with fields exterior to the Earth. But I feel that the very reason for suggesting it stems from the abhorrance we have culturally that either of the other two possibilities might be true. The least we know about gravity is that it depends on the agregate of masses (thus mostly protons). But I really have very little hope for an electrical theory of gravity, when Newton's formula (and calculations) have stood the test of time at the macroscopic level: we can with success calculate the orbits of satelites, plan excurions to remote planets, and predict how hard we will fall. It is true that gravity completely fails at the galactic level, but in interstellar interactions electrical forces take over (that is another topic). The problem with the second suggestion, accretion, is that it would require a nearby star which exudes a solar wind of such magnitude that the fall of intercepted material noticeably increases the mass of the earth during a 200 million year period (which is all we are concerned with here). There is actually considerable evidence for some sort of accumulation of material, for during the Cretacious period (roughly the age of the dynosaurs), the geological record shows high levels of "sedimentation", which stops after the transition to the Tertiary period (the "age of mammals"), and everywhere well defined by the K-T iridium boundary. But it defies the imagination (a requisite for any further thoughts on this topic) to think of the combination of a highly active star and a close orbit for earth. One possibility, suggested from the writings of Dwardu Cardona, is that Earth spent most of its time within the coronal discharge sphere of Saturn. The creation of the materials of the solar wind happens at the extremes of flares at the outer boundary. The ions which are thermalized in the direction normal to the boundary leave, accelerated, to blow off into interstallar space. But this probably represents only about 30 percent of the material or less. The rest is headed in no particular direction, and probably falls back towards the star. That would place an Earth orbitting within the discharge shere in the path of a much greater amount of solar wind material. An imaginative possibility, which also overcomes the problem with the current interaction of the Earth with the Sun's solar wind, the fact that most of it passes by the Earth, deflected into the pattern of the magnetosphere. But there are more than a few other problems. For one, the sediment of the sedimetation is just that: ground up rocks and mountains. And the geological record contradicts the idea of a sudden halt. So does the biological record: Many of the dynosaurs species initially are very large, and over time the species dimimish in average size. As is true of plants. And also true also of the mammals that came after. Thus it would seem that if there has been a change in gravity, it would have to extend over a much longer period, perhaps over all of the Earth's history. We will work with an ocean spread which has doubled the circumference of the earth from 12,500 miles to 25,000 miles since (and starting at) the Jurasic - the big time 'age of dinasaurs', which extended another 150 million years. At this time there were no oceans to speak of, a few shallow seas on and off, located inland. There may have been a Southern ocean. This was before the recent orogeny - the set of mountains identified as the Rockies, Alps, Himalayas. North East Asia is attached to Antartica, which in turn butts against North America, South East Asia and Australia butt up against South America (Antarica will eventually move past South America). North America is against Europe, South America is up against Africa, Europe has not tried to pull away from Africa yet, East Africa is up against India. As you can see, this is a small globe. Since C=IID, the change in circumference measures the change in radius. The acceleration due to gravity is proportional to the two masses, and the square of the distance between them, actually between the centers.. a = f ( m' m" )/r^2 ... where K is some constant And the mass (that second mass, m") is proportional to the cube of the radius, since it is just the average density times the radius cubed.. m" = f (r^3) So while the Earth gets bigger, gravity increases (because of the increased mass), but decreases because it takes us further from the center of the Earth... a = f ( r^3 / r^2) which reduces to a = f (r) That means that since the Jurasic, 200 million years ago ... a(new) = K 25/12.5 .. where K is some constant. gravity has increased by about 100 percent (a = 2). Hardly marginal, enough that Bakker does not need to speculate how certain rigid ligaments held up dynasaurs necks, and Holden to speculate that 50 foot wing spans could not be done. The really "giant" dynasaurs date to the Jurassic age, 200 million years ago, and thus the data fits: after one of the many extinctions, they never returned.