Hollow Earth: Disproof

What is the main disproof of the Hollow Earth theory?

I think it’s called physics.

I am not a geologist, but I believe that one way in which the make-up of the earth is determined is by measuring the speed of seismic waves as they pass through the earth. For instance, when there is an earthquack in Japan, some of the seismic waves will travel to, say, New York, by traveling along the surface of the earth, along the crust. Other seismic waves will travel through the inner layers of the earth in more of a straight line path from point to point (as opposed to the curved path along the surface). The speed of compressional waves in air is generally slower than it is in many solids and liquids. So the data geologists have probably does not agree well with a hollow earth.

The Physical sciences would be hard pressed to find a way for a heavenly body to form while hollow or become hollow after formation. It ain natural or logical.

The Geological aspect would be hard pressed to explain why we have volcanoes, why there is so much pressure to shoot into the outer surface and not the inner surface.

Physics also has determined the mass of the earth based on its orbital relationships with the sun and moon and it is considerably more than if the eath is hollow.

Magnetic poles are caused by the earths molten Iron core. No Core, no poles, no van allen belt, no northern lights.

What Tangent and X~Slayer(ALE) said. In addition, a hollow earth is structurally equivalent to a 12000-km diameter unsupported dome. No known material is strong enough to support that.

For it to be called a “theory,” it must have some evidence behind it. So why don’t you, Nocktober, start by telling us what the supposed theory is and what the evidence for it might be before the rest of us waste time disproving it.

When you drop something heavy you don’t here an echo.


or hear even…geez.

just gotta have faith

For the obvious reason that I don’t expect you to be an expert on a theory you’ve never heard of. Sheesh.

But specifically?

You’re missing the point. Science works by making observations and constructing theories to explain them. The so-called “hollow earth theory” does not attempt to explain any observed facts that I know of, so it’s not a valid theory to begin with and does not merit disproof. If someone came up to you and say “My theory is that invisible pink unicorns exist,” would you be obliged to disprove the existance? No, you’d first ask for evidence for the existance of invisible pink unicorns because otherwise there is nothing to prove or disprove.

I’ve heard that there is a theory called “hollow earth.” But I know nothing about it. That’s what David B’s point really is there. He’s not asking whether or not you believe it. He’s not asking if you even understand it. All he’s asking you to do is tell us what the “hollow earth” theory is, and what evidence you’ve read that supports the theory.


If the Earth were hollow, the void inside would have microgravity only. (In an interesting mathematical twist, all forces that obey the inverse-square law are negated within the volume contained by a charged, hollow sphere. Really. Do the math.)

I had said:

Nocktober replied:

Um… What? You’re not going to tell us what the theory is and you expect us to disprove it, but you won’t tell us what it is because you don’t expect us to be an expert on something we’ve never heard of.

Is there a single logical bone in your entire body?

Guys, I’m not sure what the big fuss is here. I certainly didn’t get the impression he was posting in support of the HET. I figured he was just thinking “Hmmm, I wonder how they know the earth isn’t hollow?”

Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems it was just an innocent inquiry.

Jesus H. Christ, David B. Cool your freaking jets. Is it just possible that he’s asking an honest question, and that he’d like to simply know the reasons the HET makes no sense?

Not all intellectually curious people are familiar with physics, or the ins and outs of the burden of proof.

He may very well not know what a “theory” consists of, and was using the term loosely, in which case his OP reads more like:

“I heard the earth may be hollow, but I’m skeptical. Can anyone tell me why this idea may or may not make any sense?”

He may, on the other hand, be a kook…but there’s no reason to just assume so right off the bat.

Ogre said:

Sure it is. And then he could have said so when I asked him about it. Or (better yet) he could have said so in the OP. He did neither. Instead, he made a completely illogical comment in response to my question.

He may have been confused. People get that way sometimes.

Well, now is his big chance to come clean, then.