Bitcoin Forum

Is the moon hollow? It is said it rings like a bell. Was it brought here? Is it an artificial space station brought to Earth to stabilize the atmosphere and make our planet habitable?  Is it filled, on the inside with offices of alien engineers and scientists?

It's is said that the Earth would wobble too much if the moon was not there to stabilize the gravity.

What do you think?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow_Moon#The_Moon_rang_like_a_bell

There's also a lot more evidence or pros and cons on this argument on the line if you're looking

You didn't finish the quoted paragraph. Here it is.

When Apollo 12 deliberately crashed the Ascent Stage of its Lunar Module onto the Moon's surface, it was claimed that the Moon rang like a bell for an hour, leading to arguments that it must be hollow like a bell.[1] Lunar seismology experiments since then have shown that the lunar body has shallow moonquakes that act differently from quakes on Earth, due to differences in texture, type and density of the planetary strata, but there is no evidence of any large empty space inside the body.

"Rang like a bell" is a figure of speech. The acoustics of sound propagation do not require a hollow cavity for something to ring like a bell.

There's also a lot more evidence or pros and cons on this argument on the line if you're looking

There is no evidence for this argument, however it's important to be able to work through such a question to a logical answer based on math and science.

We know the  orbit of the Moon. As early as the 1960s, observations of the exact paths of lunar orbiters led to very accurate calculations of the Lunar mass. Dividing this by the volume gives a number of density per cubic meter. For the Moon to be hollow, the material forming the hollow sphere would have to be that much heavier per unit volume. And that's not the case. Other scientific evidence exists, at the bottom of your link.

Maybe the earth is hollow. After all, moon mass gives the earth two rotational centers. One of them is the standard 24-hr daily rotational center. The other is the barycentre between the earth and the moon.

The barycentre is said to be about 1,100 miles below the earth's surface. Combined with the daily-center, during the formation of the earth, if the moon were already present, it might have kept earth material away from earth's center. There might be an actual "room" down in the center of the earth... probably not very big, but self sustaining because of certain geological forces.

After all, the suggested present structure of the earth is not factually known to be the way the earth really exists inside.

8)

Its just a sphere,atleast that is how I am seeing it.

If earth is spehaere then all the solid planets supposed to be sphere.Anyway we need a drill to find out. :D

"Listen to Strange Sounds Recorded in a Hole 5 Miles Deep" - https://www.wired.com/2014/01/an-artist-records-the-mysterious-rumblings-of-middle-earth/.

How long will it take us to be able to listen to the sounds in a deep hole on the moon, since there isn't any air on the moon to transmit sounds?


8)

It would be interested if the Moon is an artificial space station that was created to stabilize the atmosphere and make Earth human friendly.
But, this needs a lot of technological advances that people didn't have in early years so I think that this option should be out of the table.

According to the Russian scientist theory, the moon object was brought here in ancient times past.  The moon is much older than the earth.

So this would speak to advanced ancient civilizations way before the earth. It is all kind of mind bending for sure. But Einsteins theory of relativity, was considered crazy and also String theory, is wild and incomprehensible.

This is the part of Science that is so exciting...allowing ones mind to open up to extraordinary concepts.

Yes, it's all very interesting, just reading ALL the different articles and reports. It's a lot to go through,  but food for thought.

Here is a fascinating eye witness account written by Astronaut Pete Conrad of the November 1969 Apollo 12 mission who said it was "ringing like a gong."

https://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-12-3.html


Then there is the matter of
Vasin and Shcherbakov Russian Scientists

It is interesting and extraordinary that it was 2 Russian scientists, both members of the distinguished Russian Academy of Sciences, (at that time it was known as the Soviet Academy of Sciences, ) that came up with this radical and controversial theory of a hollow moon in 1970.

The Russian Academy of Sciences, the RAS, established in 1724, and chartered by the government of Russia, is a highly reputable and esteemed network of a scientist dedicated to scientific research.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Academy_of_Sciences
 
Vasin's and Shcherbakov's theory was fringe,  to say the least. Claiming there is scientific evidence to back it up. Saying that the moon is much more Ancient than the earth and that its surface was composed of metals and elements that do not occur naturally on the earth such as brass, mica, and radioactive elements.

Also, mentioned that the craters on the moon are shallow and all about the same depth suggesting a tough outer surface.

Our own astronauts tried to drill into the surface and the craters and could not penetrate the surface.

The discussions of the unusual and precise size of the moon, all of which is of great benefit to us, but also an anomaly compared to sizes and positions of other moons in respect to their planets is also interesting.

More on it.

https://www.gaia.com/article/the-hollow-moon-theory-is-the-moon-an-artificial-satellite

Thanks. I'm not here to argue or to try to prove anything but to just discuss these ideas and welcome thoughts on it.

In the last decade, our satellites have used sensors to determine the elements on the lunar surface, the magnetism and gravitational changes, the temperatures, many other things.

These satellites are put into lunar polar orbits, so the Moon rotates below them, and over the course of a month they will gather data on the entire lunar surface.

That would mean those claims of a hollow moon with such a group of surface elements was wrong.

No.

How can it be hollow if the so-called hollow is fill with something?... in this case, hot nacho cheese?

8)

It is not hollow. You can already measure the moon's weight by it's orbit and how it affects the planet.

It's a bit more than that, they claim that the shell around the hollow core is corresponding heavier...

Makes me wonder why some of you guys don't actually think that the moon is actually made of cheese.

The Moon rang like a bell
Between 1972 and 1977, seismometers installed on the Moon by the Apollo missions recorded moonquakes. The Moon was described as "ringing like a bell" during some of those quakes, specifically the shallow ones.[16] This phrase was brought to popular attention in March 1970,[1] in an article in Popular Science.[17] When Apollo 12 deliberately crashed the Ascent Stage of its Lunar Module onto the Moon's surface, it was claimed that the Moon rang like a bell for an hour, leading to arguments that it must be hollow like a bell.[1] Lunar seismology experiments since then have shown that the lunar body has shallow moonquakes that act differently from quakes on Earth, due to differences in texture, type and density of the planetary strata, but there is no evidence of any large empty space inside the body.

After studying the bell-ringing aspect of the moon, it was determined that there were simply large caverns in the moon. It's not that we don't have sensitive enough seismographs. Rather, it's not known for a fact how to best interpret the readings.

The moon is how wide? If it is hollow rather than honeycombed, it just might take penetrating to the hollow part to figure this out for sure. But we gotta get there first. Note that multitudes of people from the '50s and '60s who were hoping to be on the moon in a decade back then, are long dead and gone. Is our moon focus the best idea?

We haven't even gone very deep on the earth. Is the earth hollow?

8)

"Ringing like a bell" does not imply hollow. Not sure where that inference came from.

Acoustic transmission in underground strata is well understood and is used for many purposes in geology and industry.

We are talking about many miles through different materials that are unknown. For example, science was surprised to find loads of water deep down under parts of the surface of the earth. Geological soundings should have made them aware of this water long before it was found. Seems to me that there is a lot to learn about how sound works through various materials at great distances.

8)

This is not true! The Moon is hollow, and that's a fact. Because after Hitler fled with his remaining loyal troops in their flying nazi saucers to the Dark Side of the Moon, they started hollowing it out. This is true because youtube has a link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeIu1FiTTyI

True, there is a lot to explore right here and a lot of unknowns.
And there are some very interesting questions on that and also the moon.
Scientist are baffled by the moon and have come up with several theories as to how it got there. And this is one of them. This was not crazy persons or lunatic group. It was 2 scientists.
Is the moon much older than the Earth? Apparently it is. So that's a puzzle.
How to explain there processed metals, as brass, mica and titanium, and radio active material?

Also the moon is unusually large in proportion to other planets in our solar system.

It's large and light, being 1/4 the size of the earth but only 1.2% of the eatha mass and the volume is only 2% of the earth.
Nasa did say it had a similar composition to the earth but "significantly less dense." But  also the astronauts could not penetrate the surface with drills.

Another interesting anomaly is that the crater depths are all the same..whether they are large craters or small, the depth is uniform and relatively shallow.
So a lot to explore about that.

https://www.gaia.com/article/the-hollow-moon-theory-is-the-moon-an-artificial-satellite

the first hand account of the astronaut who was actually there is fascinating.

https://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-12-3.html

It's natural to have a knee jerk resistance to anything that might shake up one's idea of the world. But an open mind goes a long way towards making progress in any area.

Of course the crater depths are not the same. Some craters are > 100 miles across, others are a few feet. Then there are craters from micrometeorites, which can only be seen with a microscope.

The particles in the dirt are not rounded by millions of years of weather like on earth, and there sharp edges cause them to pack tightly. This is why drilling down was difficult.

The size, weight and density of the Moon follow from it's elemental composition.

Yes there is some variation with the deepest crater that has a mountain inside if it. But overall the size and diameter of the crater varies much more than the depth.

The moon is in the perfect place and perfect size to facilitate the abundance of life is very interesting.  Without the moon, we would not have our stable seasons and climates and tides would be wildly fluctuating and the earth axis would wobble more.

And don't forget about the moon being much older than the earth. So who got here first? If a chunk from the earth got blasted into the atmosphere from  a meterorite smashing into it and it sent up cloud of debris that orbited around  until it coalesced into the present moon, then why is the moon so much older, and has 10% titanium as opposed to earths 2%, if I recall correctly. And the proceeded metals..

While it's not science its interesting to hear about the ancient African myth of the 2 brothers with "scales" that brought the moon here, which caused the dense mists around the earth condense and fall to the earth as rain, there by making the earth more hospitable for lifeforms Sounds like the great flood.

I don't know but it makes you think. There's more unknown than known.

You may be thinking of old craters, some of which are pretty much buried. This happens as asteroids strike the moon, each raises a cloud of vaporized surface material. That falls back down. Over a billion years that happens repeatedly, and this buries old craters, so only the Ridgeline around the circumference is left.

TI, AL, FE are commonly found on the surface in the dirt as the oxides.

There are no "refined metals" on the Moon.

If a person believes the Bible creation account, it takes a while to incorporate standard universe thinking into it. A couple thoughts about this.

The Bible shows that the universe was created about 6,000 years ago. The Septuagint and the pre-current-Bible "concordance" written by Josephus (34-101 A.D.) shows that the universe is about 7,500 years old. These writings are relevant for at least two basic reasons:

1. All of our extrapolations backward in time are flawed, because today's universe might exist as the result of multitudes of past things that we haven't taken into account in our extrapolations;

2. If God is real, but simply different in His way of thinking and His mindset than Mankind, and if the writings of Josephus are rather correct, there is currently no way for us to detect the way time and the laws of physics acted when they were being formed, during the 6 days of creation, about 7,500 years ago (If Jopsephus and the Septuagint are correct).

In other words, we really have no way of knowing what happened in the past other than writings of the people of the past.

How far back can we be reasonably accurate scientifically? Maybe very accurate 1,000 years back. Maybe back as far as dated pottery, linguistics, and mitochondria dating reveal to us... say, 5,000 to 10,000 years. Scientific dating beyond this is inaccurate, because there is no way to tell how wild the universe was back then, and there is no way to determine the many different universe operations that might produce a universe like ours.

For example, there are those scientists/astronomers who have determined that both Mars and Venus passed very near the earth in the past, within the last 10,000 years or so (maybe within the last 5,000). If this happened, our whole understanding of craters on the moon would have to change.

We are simply hoping that we are right in the way we are thinking. We are simply using our universe dating system as a form of scientific stability so that we have some kind of groundwork to base things on. But we don't really scientifically know beyond 5,000 years back, what happened in the universe.

8)

I'm not completely dismissing any theories, but thinking that the Moon is full of chambers where aliens live and conduct experiments is to me equal to thinking that there are devils bathing in tar somewhere beneath our feet. I doubt it's even partially hollow. It's most likely porous and may be full of caves and tunnels, but it isn't empty like an egg shell. Forms like that are very rare in nature.

Unless it is an egg shell. And that'd be a pretty big dragon...

Now all we got to do is make it warm and...

https://media1.tenor.com/images/0ba68d5459dc45fb78f441ab900b619d/tenor.gif?itemid=5951680

Who knows what will come out of it.

Fate of mankind: dreamed of becoming dragon riders and became food for parasitic alien life forms.

If you go deep enough, you'd find dinosaurs living peacefully side by side with Atlantians who had to escape the dropping sea levels in the past. This is some good things that the reptilians are keeping away from us. They don't want humanity to progress and crash their crib.

Wait...

So Trump is not really a Reptilian Alien?

He's just a successful businessman who won the POTUS with his own money and dedication and time?

Who would have thunk. I was certain he came here in one of those Nazi flying saucers from the dark side of the Moon, put on his humanoid costume, and proceeded to win the election.

No, it's made of cheese. Very weird question, of course - no.

It's surprising to me that anyone would want to go against the scientific consensus and be a Denier of Moon Cheese.

Well, at least we know why Wisconsinites want to go to the moon.

 :D

I just saw this video, reminded me of this thread. It's called "The Real Reason Moon Has These Dark Spots."

I think if it were hollow, that collusion wouldn't have played out the way it did.

of course, and Darth Vader hides in it :)

So what? The Devil hides in the middle of the earth.     8)

I like your thinking outside of the box and outside of the official statement. A long time ago, this hollow planet theory was in a school sistem where they took this theory seriously. After some time, the lobby forbiddened those teachings, for some reason. Maybe you will like this cool 3D video about the Hollow Earth Theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubKFmIDBMjU

The Moon isn't hollow, not yet.

It will take a while for us to dig all the ore out and make spaceships and starships.

Maybe after a couple thousand years, it will be hollow.

It is like a giant celestial Pinàta. You've got to build a massive proton baseball bat to hit it and see what goodies come out  ;D

^^^ That's what they are trying to do with the Large Hadron Collider.

 ;D

If our planet is hollow, it would be logical for all planets to be hollow. If the planet is hollow, there would be much better circumstances for life and protection from the outern space. I don't know about moon, except that we are going to land there with bitcoin. So we'll see!  ;)

Not all planets have a moon to drag them off-center enough so that there could possibly be a hollowness inside them. But, if the earth is hollow, the moon might be more-so. Why? A much larger off-center spin caused by earth gravitation.

8)

Examination of their moon mirror will show notbatman and exemplaar all kinds of things they never saw before. ;D


Explore the MOON in incredible 3D map: Interactive module follows footsteps... (https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/264707-2019-07-16-explore-the-moon-in-incredible-3d-map-interactive-module-follows.htm)




8)

On the other hand, it might simply be pedo B1tUnl0ck3r.

Islam says that Muhammad split the moon. Is that where the term "mooning" came from? ;D

8)

The moon is a very mysterious object.
It is like a blown cold-air balloon and hollow.
It attracts light from the sun which produces the illumination it distributes.
Because it is like a blown balloon, and hollow, it does not allow gravity.
However, some technological attributes can produce gravity and make the place stable.

Wow, now all those asteroid craters on the Moon make no sense.

I don't consider moon attract anything and illuminate into something,its just the natural colour just like our earth and other planets or any other object we know.

If earth is hollow then moon is supposed to be as well.

Yes, they are indeed coming out with all kinds of things we never saw before. Take a look at the video of several seemingly alien, or man-made constructions they have photographed over the years, by NASA, Russia, and private stargazers.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/689850/Intelligently-built-structures-on-our-MOON-Staggering-claims-buildings/amp

I just watched a documentary on it and there are many photos that appear as fortresses, and smoke stack with some sort of smoke coming out of it, towers, bridges, pipes, and buildings and/or crashed space crafts.

You're welcome to post pictures of any artifact you like on the lunar surface. Please include the lunar lat-long coordinates. Then we can pull up the new ultra high resolution images of those areas and examine the alleged artifacts.

Only thing that is hollow in this story is a head of people that believe in these  crazy ideas.

In my opinion, the moon is not hollow, but it is spherical in shape and has nothing to do with mankind
But it is God who created it thousands of years before
us

How can the moon be hollow when it is clearly made of cheese?

^^^ Right! They even found large caverns on the moon, which shows that it must be a form of Swiss cheese.

 :D

It can if it's made of Swiss emmental cheese.

I do agree we are going to HODL to the Moon!

As far as the Moon being hollow, there is a simple proof of that.

It floats up in the sky, right? Anything that floats is lighter than air, and anything like that is hollow...

:)

Ever heard of caves and caverns? Just because you think that there couldn't be any cave or cavern that big, doesn't mean that there couldn't.

8)

Except that (joking aside) the mass can be easily computed from the orbit. Verification of such calculation would be dozens of lunar spacecraft orbits, trajectories, etc.

That's simply because the calc doesn't take into account hollow Earth.

8)

I don't think it's an abode of aliens or an artificial satellite :D just like all other natural stuffs we have to support life luckily, moon is one of them :P we just got lucky to have it ;)

Actually, if we are going to talk about this thread from a standpoint of reality, we haven't even stated how hollow hollow would have to be to be considered hollow. I mean, is moon hollow if the hollow is only 1 mile in diameter? Would that kind of hollow not mean hollow in our sense if it was only 100 miles under the surface.

If we are going to talk this in a sensible way, we are going to have to define what we mean when we say hollow... and maybe a whole lot of other definitions, as well.

8)

There is a hole at least a nanometer in diameter somewhere in the interior of the Moon.

This I can say with scientific certainty.

The hole in the center of the Moon is larger than the brains of people that debate whether there is a hole at the center of the Moon.

Think about this.

The moon is reasonably balanced in its spin, its turning on its axis. This means that its mass is distributed rather evenly throughout, even if the materials that make up its mass might be very different in different areas.

Now let's look at some ideas on weight and pressure at various points into the ground on the moon. Remember that things might be somewhat similar on Earth. Moon picture, below.

[....................	..........|..........	....................]
^ Surface	^ Center	^ Surface

----------

Now, pick a point below the surface. The point is represented by the blue star.

[....................	..........|..........	..........*..........]
^ Surface	^ Center	^ Surface

Consider that gravity will be acting on this blue star area. Because the star is substantially below the surface of the moon, there will be gravity acting on it from all sides, not just its "down-side."

In the picture, gravity will be pulling the blue star from the right as well as from the left, because there is moon-mass both on the right, and on the left. However, because there is more moon-mass on the left, there will be more gravity pulling towards the left. And, because there is material on all sides, the pressure on the star will be greater than if the star were at the surface.

----------

The weight of blue star will be less at the moon surface than if the star were substantially underground.

[....................	..........|..........	....................*
^ Surface	^ Center	^ Surface

Why? Because, at the surface there is mass-gravity at the left, but no mass-gravity at the right to counteract the mass-gravity at the left. Notice that the only pressure on the blue star will be the pressure of the weight of itself... relatively small if it's mass is only simple rock mass.

----------

Now, consider the weight of the blue star if it were at the center of the moon.

[....................	..........*..........	....................]
^ Surface	^ Center	^ Surface

With equal mass at both the right and the left, the blue star would be weightless... because mass-gravity would be pulling from all directions, equally. But the pressure would be tremendous, because gravity would be pulling all the material together, "on top of" the blue star (so to speak) from all directions.

----------

Do we really know how the moon formed? Scientists might say that it had to be this way or that. But throughout the history of science here and there, when science was absolutely sure of something, nature came along and showed scientists that they were wrong, by doing something a different way than science predicted. Might this be the same with how the moon formed?

Consider arches on Earth. Arches maintain material mass above empty spaces. Caves are often simply natural arches. So, if the moon formed differently than we think, isn't it possible that all kinds of arches formed that left the moon hollow? After all, look at the gravity and pressure pictures, again. Why couldn't the whole moon have been formed with arches built in such a way that the moon is essentially hollow?

If the hollowness of the moon were substantially great, the arches might not need a lot of strength to maintain the pressure of the weight. The moon might be gigantically hollow, and the earth the same, so that their combined orbit center as they orbit around each other, is giving us reading similar to what they would be if they were both solid - not hollow.

In addition, seismic waves that seem to say that the earth and moon are solid, might be some kind false echos, reflecting off an inner surface in ways we don't clearly understand, yet.

Until we actually drill down inside the moon, we won't know for sure. And the same with the earth.

8)

There's no need for you to post ramblings such as that.

Consider that ancients found out, by trial and error, the max size arches that could be built. End of that subject, isn't it? :)

Planets and moons are ROUND AND SOLID. There is a reason for that.

You are welcome to go read Timinshenko, Strength of Materials and see why you are wrong.

http://www.engineering108.com/Data/Engineering/Mechanical/SM/Strength_Of_Materials_parts_IandII-Timoshenko.pdf

Then Newton and Kepler, maybe.

You are unusually simple today. Or are you simply trying to keep people from thinking?

Ancients didn't build arches on the moon. Ancients didn't build arches from scratch without any planet... like in space, as might have happened. Has anyone taken into account the balance of gravitational pull from opposite sides, to show much lighter weights for mass ratios, and how such would affect various materials in arches?

Remember, graphene wasn't supposed to exist with all of its properties. But someone made it, and graphene is just the start in that direction. Other materials can for graphene-like structures, and there are other structures similar to graphene that carbon can be formed into. Even so, planet and moon structures might be different that the standard ideas, because oh non-standard ideas that weren't used in the calculations.

Planets and moons MIGHT be solid. We don't know enough of physics to know for certain that they are solid. And many objects in space are not round.

Your link does tests in certain ways. Great! But what about other ways. Like my diagrams, above, for example?

8)

actually, all such things have been really, REALLY studied. Work that has been done is easily extendible to conjectures such as hollow spheres vs sizing, and a "square planet". One that I personally like is a concept of creating a hollow sphere from a metallic asteroid, then slowing it down so it drops into earth's atmosphere. Would that create an object that would float forever? Maybe, but the shape of the object to do it, as it turns out, would not be a sphere.

Just going to throw a wrench into both sides and leave. The moon's local gravity is really uneven. It absolutely doesn't have a uniform gravitational pull or a uniform mass distribution. An idea of why that is can be read about here, but feel free to make your own hollow related theory.

http://news.mit.edu/2013/an-answer-to-why-lunar-gravity-is-so-uneven-0530


Heres a PDF of one of my favorite beginners astrophysics books if you are looking for interesting whatnot. Its the least math intensive book on the subject that I've ever seen and an overall enjoyable read. Its from the 1980s though so there are a few consequences of not yet knowing the results from dark matter and dark energy, but overall still relevant.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/lk4wa9nnad4qn54/%28A_Series_of_books_in_astronomy%29_Frank_H._Shu_-_The_physical_universe__an_introduction_to_astronomy-University_Science_Books_%281982%29.pdf

The hollowness of the moon is basically on one side. That's why gravitational variations exist in different places on the moon.

The side of the moon that has the most material is the side that remains facing the earth. Just like the weight in the base of a child's bobbing toy keeps the toy standing on its base, so the weighted side of the moon keeps the same side of the moon facing the earth. Strong evidence that the moon not only is hollow, but is greatly off center regarding where this hollowness is located... near the far side of the moon.

8)

Electric Universe/Cosmos shows how electric plasma rather than nuclear physics proves that dark matter and dark energy don't exist. Rather, they are figments of nuclear universe theories.

8)

Gravitational variations on the lunar surface extend to 1/2%, which is huge. Interestingly, there have been found three or four "frozen orbits," which are stable orbits and sort of thread the needle through these areas with variations.

That is a darn good reference. Unusual approach and thinking on the part of the instructor. I may wind up reading the entire thing.