HamsterPower Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 For people who never heard of this nonsense, This theory is basically saying that there is a tube connecting from north pole to south pole and more advanced people are living there I know it sounds crazy but there are some people seriously believing this and testimonies that they have seen it more info can be found in youtube but...anyways is this physically possible? cause isn't it boiling hot in the middle of the earth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 no it isn't physically possible. rock does not have the structural integrity to hold up that magnitude of weight. not to mention it would be microgravity in there(unless you suscribe to the version where there is a sun on the inside and then you'd fall into that sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Lets say for a minute that there IS a long pipe from north to south pole and the center of the earth does NOT have an extremely hot sphere of magma in the center. Theoretically, If you are living in directly the center of the earth, you would be suspended there. Forever. Why? Say the observer falls through the pipe, and his goal is to go from the north to the south poll. Upon the observer reaching the origin of the sphere, He would immediately stop falling with each gravitational force pulling on him. /thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmboy Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Lets say for a minute that there IS a long pipe from north to south pole and the center of the earth does NOT have an extremely hot sphere of magma in the center. Theoretically, If you are living in directly the center of the earth, you would be suspended there. Forever. Why? Say the observer falls through the pipe, and his goal is to go from the north to the south poll. Upon the observer reaching the origin of the sphere, He would immediately stop falling with each gravitational force pulling on him. /thread If you jumped in at the north pole you would keep accelerating until you reached the centre, but I see no reason you would stop there, you would have converted gravitational potential energy into kinetic energy on the way down and if you don't hit something at that centre of gravity the kinetic energy would make sure you keep going past the centre towards the south pole. You would even make it to the other side (exactly) I can imagine, if you didn't have to deal with friction and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 If you jumped in at the north pole you would keep accelerating until you reached the centre, but I see no reason you would stop there, you would have converted gravitational potential energy into kinetic energy on the way down and if you don't hit something at that centre of gravity the kinetic energy would make sure you keep going past the centre towards the south pole. You would even make it to the other side (exactly) I can imagine, if you didn't have to deal with friction and the like. If you did so you would be considered "falling up". View it from a graphical standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmboy Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) If you did so you would be considered "falling up". View it from a graphical standpoint. Do you just mean that as a humerous observation, or is it meant to refute the point I made lol? That is a genuine question incase it reads as rude, I'm not sure what a graph has to do with it. It doesn't negate any of what I said. Edited April 9, 2011 by farmboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultra Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Do you just mean that as a humerous observation, or is it meant to refute the point I made lol? That is a genuine question incase it reads as rude, I'm not sure what a graph has to do with it. It doesn't negate any of what I said. If you fell through the earth you would not start slowing (in the absence of resistence) until you were again acted on by gravity. This would only begin to slow you when you has passed the centrepoint, and you would eventually come to a halt at the same height above/below sea-level that you started at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmboy Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) If you fell through the earth you would not start slowing (in the absence of resistence) until you were again acted on by gravity. This would only begin to slow you when you has passed the centrepoint, and you would eventually come to a halt at the same height above/below sea-level that you started at. Yeah that is exactly what I said. Or were you agreeing? If you jumped in at the north pole you would keep accelerating until you reached the centre, but I see no reason you would stop there, you would have converted gravitational potential energy into kinetic energy on the way down and if you don't hit something at that centre of gravity the kinetic energy would make sure you keep going past the centre towards the south pole. You would even make it to the other side (exactly) I can imagine, if you didn't have to deal with friction and the like. Edited April 9, 2011 by farmboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Without friction the transition would take ~42.2 minutes and the speed passing through the center would be 7,900 meters/second. Interestingly, a tunnel between any two points on the earth would make a gravity powered transit in exactly the same amount of time. This is called a gravity train- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_train and was originally proposed by Paul Cooper in the American Journal of Physics, 1966. SM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultra Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Yeh! I was agreeing, and hoping to reinforce the legitimacy of a correct answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmboy Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Yeh! I was agreeing, and hoping to reinforce the legitimacy of a correct answer! Apologies dude, lol, thought you were making fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Do you just mean that as a humerous observation, or is it meant to refute the point I made lol? That is a genuine question incase it reads as rude, I'm not sure what a graph has to do with it. It doesn't negate any of what I said. graphical- of or relating to visual art I was not being rude, I am just trying to refute your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmboy Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 (edited) graphical- of or relating to visual art I was not being rude, I am just trying to refute your point. I didn't say you were being rude dude, just that my post wasn't if it came across that way. I still don't get your point though. View it graphically how? As in say time on the X-axis, displacement on the Y with 0 being the centre of gravity? In that graph yeah you would have positive and negative displacement, but there is nothing wrong with that. You get the same thing if you say, swing a pendulum. The pattern decays with time obviously, but initially at least you have motion which takes you past the centre in both directions. I mean just thinking about it in energetic terms, by the time you get to the centre you would be travelling at extremely high speeds, why would you jusst stop as soon as you got to the centre? Edited April 11, 2011 by farmboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csmyth3025 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Without friction the transition would take ~42.2 minutes and the speed passing through the center would be 7,900 meters/second. Interestingly, a tunnel between any two points on the earth would make a gravity powered transit in exactly the same amount of time. This is called a gravity train- http://en.wikipedia....i/Gravity_train and was originally proposed by Paul Cooper in the American Journal of Physics, 1966. SM Although the gravity train idea is impractical for Earth-bound travelers, I think a good case might be made for such a (government) project on the Moon. This assumes, of course, that at some time in the future there is a substantial population on the Moon dispersed in several (or many) locally urbanized areas. It also assumes that this population would be willing to expend the tremendous amount of manpower and resources for all of the tunneling that would be required for this sort of point-to-point travel (translation: lots of taxes). Hmmm... Maybe they would rather just ride around in their Moon-buggies on their Moon-expressways (adorned with the requisite moon-billboards). Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) Csmyth3025. Obviously, Dr. Cooper introduced an interesting concept not a practical transport system. The moon would make it easier to keep the tunnels airless, but maglev for reducing friction isn't energy free and I wonder if the travel time might be quite long in the lesser gravity. If anybody wants to run the math to find out see here- www.physics.unlv.edu/~maxham/gravitytrain.pdf I kind of like the billboard idea. Vacuum Burgers. Lunatic Laundry. Craters of Mystery. See Armstrong's actual footprint HERE! You wouldn't see "one day service." SM EDIT- I don't know why the link doesn't work, but it copy-pastes OK Edited April 13, 2011 by SMF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmboy Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Csmyth3025. Obviously, Dr. Cooper introduced an interesting concept not a practical transport system. The moon would make it easier to keep the tunnels airless, but maglev for reducing friction isn't energy free and I wonder if the travel time might be quite long in the lesser gravity. If anybody wants to run the math to find out see here- www.physics.unlv.edu/~maxham/gravitytrain.pdf I kind of like the billboard idea. Vacuum Burgers. Lunatic Laundry. Craters of Mystery. See Armstrong's actual footprint HERE! You wouldn't see "one day service." S EDIT- I don't know why the link doesn't work, but it copy-pastes OK Might have a pop at calculating this. Math seems fairly straight forward (since its been explained lol) but I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if I still butchered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) Csmyth3025. Obviously, Dr. Cooper introduced an interesting concept not a practical transport system. The moon would make it easier to keep the tunnels airless, but maglev for reducing friction isn't energy free and I wonder if the travel time might be quite long in the lesser gravity. If anybody wants to run the math to find out see here- www.physics.unlv.edu/~maxham/gravitytrain.pdf I kind of like the billboard idea. Vacuum Burgers. Lunatic Laundry. Craters of Mystery. See Armstrong's actual footprint HERE! You wouldn't see "one day service." SM EDIT- I don't know why the link doesn't work, but it copy-pastes OK To get a link to be clickable you need to use the link button. Its just next to the smiley icon. Best way is to copy the link, type the description, highlight the description, hit the link button, paste the link in the dialog, click "insert link" and you have a nice clickable link Gravity Train . You will also have the problem that your link doesn't have http prefix - if you follow above instructions you need to make sure you include the http bit by inserting rather than overwriting in the dialog. Jeez I hope no one tried previous links in my first three attempts. Edited April 13, 2011 by imatfaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Imatfaal, thanks. I have been just copy-pasting URLs and they usually become clickable. Now I know what to do, that is RTFL. SM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Imatfaal, thanks. I have been just copy-pasting URLs and they usually become clickable. Now I know what to do, that is RTFL. SM I think they normally become clickable because they have the http prefix http://www.physics.u...ravitytrain.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csmyth3025 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Csmyth3025. Obviously, Dr. Cooper introduced an interesting concept not a practical transport system... I was actually being a bit of a smart-alec with my post. I probably should have put the words government project in bold letters. Better yet, I probably should have stuck to serious science. My inspiration was the proposed 398 million dollar "bridge-to-nowhere" which would have replaced two existing ferry operations (a seven minute ride) from the Alaskan mainland to Gravina Island - upon which a one-runway "international airport" and about 50 residents reside. The bridge hasn't been built. It was ostensibly canceled in 2005. In an ironic twist, a 28 million dollar federally funded road (~3 miles) was built on Gravina Island in 2007. It stops at the edge of the island where the bridge would have been. A gravity train on the Moon just sounded to me like the sort of "inspired" project a lunar government might relish. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Csmyth3025, if Heinlein's vision, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," comes about there will be no worry. One really interesting idea in that novel was the underground human flight chambers. SM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HamsterPower Posted May 2, 2011 Author Share Posted May 2, 2011 Lets say for a minute that there IS a long pipe from north to south pole and the center of the earth does NOT have an extremely hot sphere of magma in the center. Theoretically, If you are living in directly the center of the earth, you would be suspended there. Forever. Why? Say the observer falls through the pipe, and his goal is to go from the north to the south poll. Upon the observer reaching the origin of the sphere, He would immediately stop falling with each gravitational force pulling on him. /thread lol thats so true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csmyth3025 Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Riot, on 9 April 2011 - 09:37 AM, said: Lets say for a minute that there IS a long pipe from north to south pole and the center of the earth does NOT have an extremely hot sphere of magma in the center. Theoretically, If you are living in directly the center of the earth, you would be suspended there. Forever. Why? Say the observer falls through the pipe, and his goal is to go from the north to the south poll. Upon the observer reaching the origin of the sphere, He would immediately stop falling with each gravitational force pulling on him. lol thats so true I believe you're mistaken about the observer. He would pass through the center of the Earth and continue on to the South poll (neglecting air resistance, of course). Unless he grabs on to something there, he will then fall back to the North pole, etc. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now