Hollow Moon? no way

  • Thread starter JacksHerer
  • 43 comments
  • 2,871 views
1,654
United Kingdom
UK
JacksHereR
I've just been reading about the moon being hollow.. which lead me to reading about Zulu moon Legends... which lead me to David Ickes site :crazy:

I'll confess to having been to David Ickes site several years ago, he doesn't seem so crazy this time around. Interesting how in 2008 his frequency theory is now generally accepted by a kosher scientist.

Anyone else ready to confess? discuss?
 
A link would be helpful.

You can work out the mass of the Moon yourself from Earth's wobble - or by astronauts jumping. You can then work out the density of the Moon yourself because you know the size of it.

Now if the Moon is hollow, guess how big the hollow should be and work out the density of the remaining Moon stuff (mass/new volume). You'll be amazed by how much difference even a small hollow would make to the density of the rock - taking it way beyond the density of rocks we've brought back, the density of the Earth from which it's formed and beyond some metals, requiring a composition not consistent with rocks we've brought back...
 
just google hollow moon, best avoid moon matrix or zulu moon legends.
:idea:unless you are outside the moon matrix of course.
 
If the moon was hollow (As in completely, not just the core), then shouldn't Earth's gravity pull the Moon to Earth and crush some unlucky folk?
 
just google hollow moon, best avoid moon matrix or zulu moon legends.
:idea:unless you are outside the moon matrix of course.

You specifically referred to David Icke's "thoughts" on it and those of a "kosher scientist". It'd be good if you provided links or quotes for either of these to everyone - saves on aggregate Googling time.
 
If the moon was hollow (As in completely, not just the core), then shouldn't Earth's gravity pull the Moon to Earth and crush some unlucky folk?

The opposite would occur. The reduced mass of the moon would reduced it's own pull on the Earth, and it would probably drift into a larger orbit.
 
The opposite would occur. The reduced mass of the moon would reduced it's own pull on the Earth, and it would probably drift into a larger orbit.

Nothing would happen*. The moon is at orbital velocity based on its altitude.

Taking out mass reduces the strength of the force pair between the Earth and Moon, it does not just change one, which would violate Newton's Laws.

*Ignoring reduced Earth wobble
 
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/15mar_moonquakes/
Ever since the astronauts discovered moonquakes can last for an hour or more and that the "moon rings like a bell", folks have speculated that it may be hollow based solely on that flimsy evidence.

However, it is possible that the moon has hollow inclusions, or inclusions of greater or lesser density, as the gravity of the moon varies noticeably when astronauts and satellite missions orbit around her. The orbiting vehicle will bob up or down in regions of lower or higher gravity.

Respectfully,
Steve
 

Read the last three paragraphs...

Noel Huntley is just another junk science crackpot who believes that "they" are suppressing knowledge and feeding "us" misinformation, typically about aliens, new age crapola and the Babylonians. Look up his stuff on "the photon belt", the Philadelphia Experiment and Nibiru.

I'd call him a lunatic if only I could be assured he wouldn't take that as a reference to the power of the Moon.
 
Everyone knows there's either a man or a rabbit in the moon, so it couldn't possibly be hollow.
 
But..... but..... green cheese??? Where's my cheese?

See, if this had started with Noel Huntley's name, it would have been a lot shorter.....
 
If the moon is hollow, the earth must be as well. Hence all the UFO and USO reports from all over the world.





:cool:
 
Last edited:
If the moon was hollow (As in completely, not just the core), then shouldn't Earth's gravity pull the Moon to Earth and crush some unlucky folk?

No as it is in orbit.

Thinks floating above the earth always fall towards earth it is that the moon is going so fast that it is maintaining its orbit.

 
Last edited:
Of course the Moon is hollow. That's where the Space Nazis keep their neutronium bombs.
 
Define hollow. They say the earth's core is filled with lava so it would kinda be hollow with a liquid center. Like a rollo or caramilk bar. For the moon to be truly hollow I don't even think it would be possible based on current thoughts of how planets are made. Assuming a bunch of gas particles in space all came together and made the moon it would have to be very precise to create a spherical shell only. I think it's much more likely the moon is more like earth with a liquid center. Maybe an ice/slush center which would explain excessive quakes.
 
AFAIK the earth's inner core is solid and is composed of iron and some nickel with a fewer lighter elements.
The outer core is liquid and is composed of iron and some nickel (liquid form) as well.
 
I thought the inner core was liquid iron as the pressure and heat should surely make it turn into a paste like liquid at least.
 
14-007.jpg


I bought some cheese from a supermarket, it had holes in it. The moon is made from cheese, therefore it has holes in it, therefore it is hollow. :dopey:
 
It's impossible to be hollow. I'm pretty sure with gravity pulling everywhere a thin hollow planet would just implode. It wouldn't have the structure to stay together. Also inside would have all the pressure and heat causing it to melt the inner rock giving it a liquid core like earth. I don't know what the moon is made of exactly but I guess it could be gasses as well inside. Just pure definition of hollow is not gonna happen.
 
It's impossible to be hollow. I'm pretty sure with gravity pulling everywhere a thin hollow planet would just implode. It wouldn't have the structure to stay together. Also inside would have all the pressure and heat causing it to melt the inner rock giving it a liquid core like earth. I don't know what the moon is made of exactly but I guess it could be gasses as well inside. Just pure definition of hollow is not gonna happen.

A thin spherical shell has zero gravity on the inside. It wouldn't form naturally, but it also wouldn't implode.
 
I read the moons gravity isn't 'global' like the earths is, it can vary and caused orbiting objects to bob.

I like the pyramid shaped hole in the moon.
Ok not necessarily a hole - but they weren't able to get a reading on it's depth, it is certainly pyramid shaped.

For an object that either formed through a colision with earth, or a near by collision and it got caught in our gravity - it seems to have come off quite well from the depth of the crators compared to their width.
 
A thin spherical shell has zero gravity on the inside. It wouldn't form naturally, but it also wouldn't implode.

Indeed. This was a conversation I've had with a few people when discussing Dyson spheres and hollow, spherical, space stations...

On a semi-related note, the Rings in Halo wouldn't really have gravity on the inside from mass, but rather their rotation. Just how the physics works out.
 
Back