<p>I'm writing some lore for a fictional world, which is set in the 50's early 60's roughly.</p>

<p>One thing I'd like to bring is a fairly grounded explanation for the creation of the planet and the universe, as understood by scientists in the fictional setting.</p>

<p>What did we know about these topics back in the 50's? How did we used to believe the planet were formed?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-22T03:12:41.533Z
An awful lot.  Telescopes had been around for quite some time.  We hadn't observed planets in other solar systems yet but the big bang theory had gotten off the ground.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Big_Bang_theory
f.thorpe
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-22T05:04:02.660Z
Expanding Earth was a nice idea of the time. Actually a very good concept, but unfortunately it is wrong.
user2821
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-22T09:20:16.063Z
in 1950 there was already geology, minerology, seismology, geological time, geological surveys. Prior to that is more fascinating. They thought the moon could have plants on it, it was not unreasonable, same with the other planets, jules verne gives a good idea of technology in 1900, science was the big topic of the day. they made a million machines.   https://youtu.be/_FrdVdKlxUk?t=352
bandybabboon
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-22T20:45:41.077Z
Maybe not directly answering your question, but this was just before the understanding of plate tectonics. Continental drift had been suggested but they didn't know the mechanism.
haresfur
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-23T08:16:31.813Z
I assume you mean 1950's not 1850's.  For example British Geological Survey (as is named today) was formed in 1835
nmtoken
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-24T04:58:57.923Z
On the other hand, planetary formation models (of our solar system, for example) are constantly being revised based on better observations from similar systems forming now with better telescopes, and better data (geochemical, astronomical, geophysical) obtained with each space mission gathering said data.
Gimelist
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-24T19:40:29.210Z
When did plate tectonics come in? And when was it actually accepted and taught at universities? I think it was around the 50s. People were going on and on about Geosynclines and all that stuff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geosyncline).
Antonio
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-25T10:00:54.907Z
@Antonio accepted early 60s, and I'm guessing got into Unis' curriculum shortly after.
Gimelist
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-07-13T02:48:37.773Z
@Antonio paleomagnetic evidence in the 50's but the real nail in the coffin so to speak was a the seismology being done to detect nuclear detonations which led to the  production of detailed global earthquake and volcanic maps which basically silenced even the most vehement of doubters. It is hard to argue with tectonic plates when you see the pattern they saw. https://www.nsf.gov/news/mmg/media/images/global_seismicity_h.jpg
John
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-21T14:43:31.477Z
Go to a second hand bookshop and buy books from that period
Jan Doggen
<earth-history><planetary-formation><history-of-science><history>
1950's - 60's Earth Science
Magic Marbles
# 1950's - 60's Earth Science

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-01-22)

I'm writing some lore for a fictional world, which is set in the 50's early 60's roughly.

One thing I'd like to bring is a fairly grounded explanation for the creation of the planet and the universe, as understood by scientists in the fictional setting.

What did we know about these topics back in the 50's? How did we used to believe the planet were formed?

**Tags:** earth-history, planetary-formation, history-of-science, history

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: An awful lot.  Telescopes had been around for quite some time.  We hadn't observed planets in other solar systems yet but the big bang theory had gotten off the ground.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Big_Bang_theory  
> **username_2**: Expanding Earth was a nice idea of the time. Actually a very good concept, but unfortunately it is wrong.  
> **username_3**: in 1950 there was already geology, minerology, seismology, geological time, geological surveys. Prior to that is more fascinating. They thought the moon could have plants on it, it was not unreasonable, same with the other planets, jules verne gives a good idea of technology in 1900, science was the big topic of the day. they made a million machines.   https://youtu.be/_FrdVdKlxUk?t=352  
> **username_4**: Maybe not directly answering your question, but this was just before the understanding of plate tectonics. Continental drift had been suggested but they didn't know the mechanism.  
> **username_5**: I assume you mean 1950's not 1850's.  For example British Geological Survey (as is named today) was formed in 1835  
> **username_6**: On the other hand, planetary formation models (of our solar system, for example) are constantly being revised based on better observations from similar systems forming now with better telescopes, and better data (geochemical, astronomical, geophysical) obtained with each space mission gathering said data.  
> **username_7**: When did plate tectonics come in? And when was it actually accepted and taught at universities? I think it was around the 50s. People were going on and on about Geosynclines and all that stuff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geosyncline).  
> **username_6**: @username_7 accepted early 60s, and I'm guessing got into Unis' curriculum shortly after.  
> **username_8**: @username_7 paleomagnetic evidence in the 50's but the real nail in the coffin so to speak was a the seismology being done to detect nuclear detonations which led to the  production of detailed global earthquake and volcanic maps which basically silenced even the most vehement of doubters. It is hard to argue with tectonic plates when you see the pattern they saw. https://www.nsf.gov/news/mmg/media/images/global_seismicity_h.jpg  
> **username_9**: Go to a second hand bookshop and buy books from that period  

---

## 0 answers

