Debunks › Reality Denial › Hollow Earth

Testing Hollow Earth

Hollow Earth is not one claim. It is a bundle of claims wearing the same coat: a giant inner world, polar openings, hidden civilizations, secret diaries, suppressed satellite images, fake geology, and the idea that the scientific picture of Earth's interior is a cover story. The problem is that Earth is not known from one fragile measurement. Its interior is constrained by seismology, gravity, density, moment of inertia, geomagnetism, volcanism, heat flow, drilling, mineral physics, satellite geodesy, and ordinary navigation. Hollow Earth does not have to defeat one fact. It has to defeat the entire planet talking at once.

The verdict is blunt: Earth is not hollow. It has a thin crust, a thick rocky mantle, a liquid outer core, and a solid inner core. The exact details are still researched, especially in the lower mantle, core-mantle boundary, and inner core, but the big picture is not up for grabs. There is no continent-sized empty shell inside the planet. There are no giant polar doors into a sunlit inner world. The model fails before it reaches the fun part.

Contents

1. 1. What Hollow Earth claims
2. 2. Why the idea survived
3. 3. What a hollow Earth would have to predict
4. 4. Seismology maps the interior
5. 5. Density and gravity kill the shell model
6. 6. Moment of inertia: Earth is centrally concentrated
7. 7. Pressure makes the shell physically impossible
8. 8. The inner sun creates more problems than it solves
9. 9. The magnetic field needs a real outer core
10. 10. Heat flow and volcanoes point inward, not to a habitable void
11. 11. Drilling does not reveal a hidden world
12. 12. Polar hole claims fail
13. 13. Navigation, satellites, and oceans leave no room for giant openings
14. 14. Admiral Byrd and story-based evidence
15. 15. Myths, lost races, and underground worlds are not measurements
16. 16. Claim-by-claim field guide
17. 17. Final verdict
18. Sources

1. What Hollow Earth Claims

Hollow Earth claims come in several versions. The classic version says Earth is a shell with a huge interior space. Some versions add an inner sun. Some add openings at the North and South Poles. Some replace the entire outside world with a concave universe where we live inside the sphere. Some keep the solid-Earth model but insert massive underground realms, hidden passages, or advanced civilizations beneath the crust.

Those are not all identical, so the first step is to separate ordinary underground reality from the claim being tested. Caves exist. Mammoth Cave exists. Lava tubes exist. Karst systems exist. Mines exist. Subglacial lakes exist. Aquifers exist. Magma chambers exist. The crust is full of fractures, fluids, voids, and complex geology. None of that implies that Earth is mostly empty.

The strong Hollow Earth claim has to explain at least nine things better than standard geophysics:

• Why earthquake waves travel through Earth as if it has a mantle, liquid outer core, and solid inner core.
• Why S waves do not pass through the outer core.
• Why Earth's average density is far higher than crustal rock.
• Why Earth's moment of inertia shows mass concentrated toward the center.
• Why Earth's magnetic field behaves like a geodynamo from a fluid metallic outer core.
• Why gravity varies smoothly around the globe instead of revealing giant voids.
• Why volcanic, geothermal, and tectonic systems behave as if heat rises from a deep interior.
• Why satellites, aircraft, ships, and polar expeditions do not encounter giant openings.
• Why the theory relies on anecdotes and image misunderstandings instead of predictive measurement.

Once those tests are on the table, Hollow Earth stops being mysterious. It becomes a model with no room left to hide.

Back to top

2. Why the Idea Survived

Hollow Earth has an old pedigree. Edmond Halley proposed a layered hollow Earth model in the late 17th century as a speculative attempt to explain magnetic variation. John Cleves Symmes Jr. later popularized a version with polar openings and inner spheres. These ideas were not insane for their time in the same way they are now. Early scientists had far less seismic, gravitational, thermal, satellite, and mineral physics data. Speculation filled the darkness.

But a hypothesis can be historically understandable and scientifically dead. Halley did not have global seismometer networks. Symmes did not have satellite geodesy. Nineteenth-century enthusiasts did not have Earth's moment of inertia, the modern seismic model of the core, global gravity maps, plate tectonics, deep Earth mineral physics, or polar imaging. Hollow Earth survived as fiction, occult geography, adventure mythology, and conspiracy culture long after it lost scientific viability.

That is why modern Hollow Earth arguments often feel like they are made from two different centuries. They borrow the wonder of early speculation but ignore the measurement revolution that followed. The result is a theory that acts persecuted by evidence it never seriously engages.

Back to top

3. What a Hollow Earth Would Have to Predict

A useful theory does not merely explain why it can survive. It predicts what we should observe. If Earth were hollow in the strong sense, the world should look different in many ordinary, measurable ways. The claim would not be tucked away in one blurry photograph or one alleged diary. It would rewrite global geophysics.

A hollow Earth model should predict a different seismic pattern, because earthquake waves would hit a planet-sized cavity. It should predict a different gravity field, because the mass would be distributed in a shell rather than concentrated inward. It should predict a different moment of inertia, because mass far from the center changes how a planet rotates. It should predict different heat behavior, because an inner habitable void does not fit a pressure-heated, radioactive, convecting planet. It should predict different magnetic behavior, because the standard geodynamo depends on a real fluid metallic outer core.

It should also predict obvious surface effects. A huge polar opening should alter ocean circulation, weather, sea ice, satellite altimetry, aircraft routing, gravity, and global maps. A gigantic internal atmosphere should have pressure and gas-exchange consequences. A hidden inner sun should have an energy source, heat budget, radiation signature, and gravitational effect. A secret inner civilization should have access routes, waste heat, artifacts, communications, seismic noise, or at least some physical trace.

That is where Hollow Earth collapses as an explanatory model. It does not produce a superior set of predictions. It produces excuses after the fact. When seismology contradicts it, seismology is dismissed. When gravity contradicts it, gravity is reimagined. When polar imagery contradicts it, the images are fake. When drilling contradicts the casual version, drilling is "not deep enough." When every independent line points to the same layered planet, the model does not become more precise. It becomes more conspiratorial.

A serious Hollow Earth model would need a positive physics. It would need equations, densities, wave speeds, thermal gradients, pressure profiles, orbital consequences, and testable predictions. Without that, it is not an alternate geophysical model. It is an escape hatch.

Back to top

4. Seismology Maps the Interior

Seismology is the main reason Hollow Earth is finished. Earthquakes send waves through the planet. Those waves travel at different speeds depending on the material they pass through, bend as they encounter changing density and elasticity, reflect and refract at boundaries, and disappear where the material cannot transmit them.

The USGS explains that the outer core is considered liquid because it does not transmit shear waves, while compressional waves passing through it slow sharply; the inner core is considered solid because of the behavior of waves passing through it.¹ That is not a story pasted over the data. It is the data. Seismic waves do not behave as if Earth is a shell around a giant empty cavity. They behave as if Earth has a layered interior with a rocky mantle, liquid outer core, and solid inner core.

Hollow Earth has no good answer here. If there were a vast empty interior, seismic waves would encounter a huge boundary. Travel times would be radically different. Shadow zones would not match the observed pattern. Reflections and conversions would scream "void." Global seismology would not accidentally reconstruct the same layered planet over and over.

A hollow shell also has a structural problem. It would have to carry planetary mass under enormous gravity without collapsing, while also pretending to produce seismic observations that look like dense internal layers. That is not a missing detail. That is the entire model breaking.

Back to top

5. Density and Gravity Kill the Shell Model

NASA's Earth fact sheet gives Earth a mass of about 5.9722 x 10²⁴ kg, a mean radius of 6,371 km, and a mean density of 5,513 kg/m³.² That density is already a problem for Hollow Earth. Common crustal rocks are much less dense than Earth's average. If Earth were mostly empty space inside a rocky shell, the average density would be far lower, not higher.

The standard model solves this immediately: Earth has denser material at depth, including a metallic core. Hollow Earth has to invent a shell dense enough to preserve Earth's mass and gravity while also being mechanically stable and seismically disguised. That rescue attempt gets ugly fast.

If the shell is made of normal rock, it is too light. If it is made of ultra-dense material, it no longer matches crustal geology, seismic velocities, or mineral physics. If the missing mass is hidden in a central sun, it no longer matches the claimed hollow living space or seismic behavior. If gravity is said to work differently inside, then the claim stops being geology and becomes a rewrite of physics.

Gravity also does not point toward a giant polar opening. Gravity measurements, satellite orbits, ocean surfaces, and geodesy all respond to mass distribution. A planet with continent-scale holes at the poles and a gigantic empty interior would not have the smooth, measured gravitational field we actually observe. It would not be a secret. It would be a navigation problem.

There is a second issue: gravity is not just something measured at the surface by one kind of instrument. It is built into orbital motion. Satellites do not orbit the Earth described in Hollow Earth memes. They orbit the actual gravity field of a massive planet. Small variations in that field can be measured and mapped. Large missing masses cannot quietly disappear.

Oceans also respond to gravity. The mean sea surface is not a perfectly smooth mathematical sphere; it follows the geoid, the shape controlled by Earth's gravity field. If there were an enormous polar opening or a shell with bizarre internal mass distribution, the ocean surface, satellite altimetry, and global geodesy would all carry the signature. This is why "hide the hole on a map" is not enough. The hole would be written into the planet's physics.

Back to top

6. Moment of Inertia: Earth Is Centrally Concentrated

Earth's moment of inertia is another quiet executioner of Hollow Earth. NASA lists Earth's moment of inertia factor as 0.3308.² A uniform solid sphere would have a value of 0.4. A thin shell would be even higher, about 0.6667. Earth's actual value is lower than a uniform sphere, which means its mass is concentrated toward the center.

That is exactly what the standard model says: lighter crust and mantle outside, denser core inside. It is the opposite of what a hollow-shell Earth predicts. A hollow shell puts too much mass far from the center. Earth rotates like a body with mass pulled inward, not like a planet-sized basketball.

Moment of inertia matters because it is not a single visual observation someone can hand-wave away as a fake satellite photo. It is built into rotation, orbital dynamics, precession, nutation, and geodesy. It is the planet's mass distribution leaving fingerprints in motion.

Back to top

7. Pressure Makes the Shell Physically Impossible

Hollow Earth also has a basic strength problem. Rock is strong in the casual sense, but it is not magic. Under planetary pressures and geologic time, rock bends, fractures, recrystallizes, melts, and flows. The deeper you go, the greater the overburden pressure. A giant empty cavity inside a planet is not like a cave under a hill. It is a planet-sized structural failure waiting to happen.

Real caves exist because they are local features in the upper crust. They are supported by surrounding rock at pressures that can sometimes be survived. Even then, caves collapse, mines collapse, salt domes flow, and rockbursts happen. Scaling a cave up to planetary size does not preserve the physics. The weight involved becomes absurd.

If the Hollow Earth shell is thin, it cannot carry the load. If it is thick, then the habitable cavity shrinks and the model begins to look more like ordinary Earth with a fantasy chamber inserted. If the shell is extremely strong, it requires exotic material that does not match seismic velocities, mineral physics, crustal samples, mantle-derived rocks, or Earth's density. Every repair opens a new wound.

This matters because many Hollow Earth arguments smuggle in a human-scale intuition: "There are caves, therefore maybe there are bigger caves." But the planet is not a cave system. Pressure increases with depth. Temperature increases with depth. Rock behavior changes with pressure, temperature, and time. The question is not whether small voids can exist. They can. The question is whether an Earth-sized shell can remain open around a vast interior world. The answer is no.

Back to top

8. The Inner Sun Creates More Problems Than It Solves

Many versions of Hollow Earth include an inner sun to light the hidden world. It sounds elegant for about ten seconds. Then the problems arrive. What is this inner sun made of? How is it powered? Why does it not show up gravitationally? Why does it not roast the interior? Why does it remain centered? Why does it not collide with the shell? Why does it not change Earth's moment of inertia? Why does it not produce detectable radiation, heat flow, magnetic effects, or seismic signatures?

A real star requires enormous mass and fusion conditions. A small glowing object inside Earth would not be a star in that sense. If it is not a star, then it needs another energy source. If it is massive enough to matter, gravity and orbital dynamics notice. If it is not massive enough to matter, it cannot plausibly light and heat an internal world for geologic time. If it is some exotic plasma, crystal, or unknown energy source, then the model has left geology and entered pure invention.

The gravity inside a spherical shell creates another problem. In idealized physics, the net gravitational pull inside a uniform spherical shell is zero. Hollow Earth stories usually imagine people walking on the inner surface with gravity pulling them "down" toward the outer shell. But a simple shell does not naturally provide that experience. Some versions try to solve this with rotation, electromagnetism, or special internal mass distributions, but those fixes do not match Earth's measured rotation, gravity field, or seismic structure.

The inner-sun claim is a good example of how Hollow Earth thinking works. It adds one invented object to solve a narrative problem, then that object creates a dozen physical problems. Instead of making the theory more plausible, it multiplies the number of impossible things that must be hidden.

Back to top

9. The Magnetic Field Needs a Real Outer Core

Earth's magnetic field is not a decorative extra. It is a major clue to the interior. NASA describes Earth's magnetic field as produced by the dynamo mechanism: convection currents of fluid metal in the outer core, driven by heat flow and organized by Earth's rotation, create circulating electric currents that generate the magnetic field.³ NASA's geodynamo research likewise states that Earth's strong magnetic field originates from the fluid outer core and accounts for more than 95% of the magnetic energy observed at the surface.⁴

Hollow Earth has to replace that with something else. A hidden inner sun does not give you the observed geomagnetic field. A thin shell does not naturally produce the deep conducting fluid dynamo. A secret interior civilization does not explain secular variation, field reversals, paleomagnetism, or satellite measurements of the magnetic field.

This is also why "Halley believed it" is not useful. Halley used a hollow model partly to explain magnetic variation before modern geophysics existed. The modern dynamo model explains the magnetic field with a real metallic outer core. The original motivation for the speculation has been replaced by a better explanation.

Back to top

10. Heat Flow and Volcanoes Point Inward, Not to a Habitable Void

Earth gets hotter with depth. Mines get hot. Deep boreholes get hot. Volcanoes bring molten rock and gases from below. Mid-ocean ridges create new crust from mantle-derived melts. Hot spots, subduction zones, metamorphism, hydrothermal systems, and geothermal energy all make sense in a planet with a hot interior.

A habitable inner surface, by contrast, runs into brutal thermal problems. The deeper you go, pressure and temperature rise. Rock flows over geologic time. Mantle convection moves heat. The core is extremely hot. A giant empty inner world with open air, oceans, forests, cities, and a stable sun is not a natural consequence of Earth's heat engine. It is a fantasy environment imported from adventure fiction.

Hollow Earth arguments sometimes point to warm air, warm currents, volcanic caves, geothermal springs, or unusual polar conditions. But local warmth is not evidence of a hollow planet. It is evidence of climate, ocean currents, geothermal heat, insulation, volcanic activity, or weather. Real geology already explains these phenomena without turning Earth into a shell.

Heat is especially damaging to the habitable-inner-world version because it is not just a surface phenomenon. Earth's interior loses heat through conduction, convection, volcanism, hydrothermal circulation, and plate tectonics. The heat budget has sources, paths, and consequences. A hidden internal biosphere would have to live inside that heat engine while somehow avoiding the pressure, deformation, volatile chemistry, magma generation, and lack of ordinary surface conditions that come with depth.

This does not make the deep Earth boring. It makes it more interesting. There are minerals in the mantle that can store water in their crystal structures. There are diamonds that carry deep inclusions upward. There are mantle plumes, subducted slabs, hydrothermal vents, and deep microbial habitats in crustal rock. The real underground world is a scientific subject. Hollow Earth replaces that complexity with a stage set.

Back to top

11. Drilling Does Not Reveal a Hidden World

The Kola Superdeep Borehole reached 12,262 meters, about 12.3 km, making it one of humanity's deepest penetrations into the crust. The USGS publication on the Kola Superdeep Drill Hole documents the project as a scientific effort to study the deep crust.⁵ It did not reach a hollow world. It did not puncture an inner sky. It encountered hot, difficult crustal rocks and the limits of drilling technology.

To be fair, drilling has only scratched the planet. Earth's mean radius is about 6,371 km; 12 km is tiny compared with the whole planet. So drilling alone does not prove every detail of the deep interior. But it does refute a lot of internet mythology about easy access to inner realms just below us. The crust is hard, hot, fractured, pressurized, and technically brutal.

Hollow Earth believers sometimes flip this around: "If we have not drilled very far, how do we know?" The answer is that drilling is not our only tool. We know the Sun's interior without drilling the Sun. We know distant planets without landing on them. We know Earth's interior by seismic waves, gravity, rotation, magnetism, heat, experiments, and mineral physics. Direct drilling is useful, but it is not the only path to knowledge.

Back to top

12. Polar Hole Claims Fail

The polar-hole claim says there are giant entrances at the North Pole, South Pole, or both. This is the most cinematic version, and also one of the easiest to break. The poles are not hidden from all observation. Aircraft, satellites, expeditions, sea ice missions, weather monitoring, military navigation, and scientific stations have operated in polar regions for decades.

The famous "hole at the pole" imagery often comes from satellite compositing artifacts. Polar-orbiting satellites collect swaths of data, and some images have gaps near the pole because of orbital geometry, lighting, processing, or missing data. The European Geosciences Union's cryosphere blog specifically notes that the "Polar Hole" is a technical matter, not an actual opening into a hollow Earth.⁶

This is a classic conspiracy pattern: confuse a data gap with a physical hole. A map seam is not a canyon. A missing pixel is not a doorway. A composite artifact is not geography. If a polar opening thousands of kilometers wide existed, it would affect gravity, climate, ocean circulation, satellite altimetry, aircraft routes, sea ice behavior, navigation, and simple visual observation. It would not depend on one suspicious image.

Polar regions are harsh and sometimes poorly understood compared with populated regions, but "hard to observe" is not the same as "magic entrance." The Arctic has ocean, sea ice, islands, continental shelves, and deep basins. Antarctica has ice sheets, mountains, subglacial lakes, and bedrock. Neither contains a planet-sized doorway.

Back to top

13. Navigation, Satellites, and Oceans Leave No Room for Giant Openings

Hollow Earth arguments often treat the poles as if they are blank spaces on an old map. They are not. The Arctic and Antarctic are difficult environments, but they are not epistemic black holes. Ships, aircraft, satellites, research stations, military operations, weather instruments, oceanographic surveys, and ice-penetrating radar have all turned the polar regions into heavily studied places.

A polar opening large enough to enter an inner world would not merely be "missed" by a few mapmakers. It would interrupt flight routes, distort distance calculations, alter magnetic and inertial navigation, affect satellite passes, change ice movement, and disrupt ocean circulation. It would be noticed by people with competing governments, private companies, universities, militaries, and ordinary logistical interests. You do not need every human being to be honest for a planet-sized hole to be discoverable. You just need the hole to exist.

Satellite imagery also makes the cover-up story increasingly implausible. The claim is not just that one agency could hide one photograph. It is that the entire global infrastructure of Earth observation, remote sensing, weather forecasting, aviation, orbital mechanics, mapping, climate science, and polar logistics is either fake or accidentally missing the same enormous feature. That is not a small conspiracy. That is a replacement universe.

Oceans make the claim even harder. If an Arctic opening connected to a vast inner world, water, air, heat, sea ice, tides, pressure systems, and circulation would interact with it. The Arctic Ocean would not behave like an ocean over a normal basin. The Antarctic ice sheet would not hide a clean circular doorway into an inner world without bedrock, gravity, ice-flow, and radar consequences. The planet is too connected for a hole that large to behave like a secret basement entrance.

Back to top

14. Admiral Byrd and Story-Based Evidence

Admiral Richard E. Byrd is a recurring figure in Hollow Earth lore. The usual claim is that Byrd flew into a polar opening, entered an inner world, met hidden inhabitants, and had the discovery suppressed. The problem is that this evidence behaves like folklore, not documentation. It relies on alleged diaries, suspicious quotations, retellings, and conspiracy framing rather than operational records that can survive scrutiny.

Story-based evidence has a predictable weakness: it can be made to say anything. A secret diary can be invented. A quote can be misattributed. A real expedition can be wrapped in fiction. A confusing phrase like "beyond the pole" can be converted into "inside the Earth." Once the claim is protected by secrecy, every missing document becomes "proof" of suppression.

But extraordinary geography cannot be supported by anecdote when the physical evidence says no. If there were a polar entrance to a vast inner world, seismology would show it, gravity would show it, satellites would show it, navigation would show it, climate would show it, and mass distribution would show it. A story cannot overrule the planet's measurable structure.

Back to top

15. Myths, Lost Races, and Underground Worlds Are Not Measurements

Hollow Earth arguments often appeal to ancient underworld stories, subterranean gods, hidden kingdoms, giants, lost races, Agartha, Shambhala, or folklore about people living beneath the surface. These traditions are fascinating. They can tell us about religion, fear, death, caves, mountains, initiation, empire, imagination, and the human tendency to place mystery below our feet. But they are not geophysical measurements.

Ancient people often imagined layered worlds: heavens above, human land in the middle, waters or underworlds below. That does not mean they had surveyed Earth's mantle. A culture can preserve memories of caves, mines, volcanoes, burial places, springs, or frightening landscapes without possessing secret knowledge of a hollow planet. Mythic geography is meaning-bearing geography, not automatically literal cartography.

The same caution applies to lost-civilization claims. A hidden people beneath the crust might make a great novel, but as evidence it has to do normal evidential work. Where are the materials? Where is the heat signature? Where are the access routes? Where are the seismic disturbances, waste products, atmospheric exchanges, artifacts, genetic traces, radio emissions, infrastructure, or independent observations? The claim grows more elaborate precisely where the evidence should become more abundant.

Fiction can keep a dead scientific idea emotionally alive. Jules Verne-style descent stories, pulp adventure, occult maps, secret Nazi base myths, and modern conspiracy videos all reinforce the same atmosphere: someone knows, someone is hiding it, and the forbidden world is just beyond the official map. That atmosphere is powerful. It is also not a substitute for seismic waves, gravity, density, magnetism, and heat.

Back to top

16. Claim-by-Claim Field Guide

The Scale Error

Hollow Earth thrives on scale confusion. A cave is impressive to a human. A mine is deep to a human. A 12 km borehole is extreme to a drilling engineer. But Earth is about 6,371 km in radius. The deepest boreholes barely touch the outer skin. A local cavity is not evidence for a global cavity any more than a bubble in bread proves the loaf is a hollow sphere.

The "Scientists Used to Be Wrong" Move

Yes, scientists have been wrong before. That is why science uses measurement, replication, prediction, and correction. Hollow Earth is not being rejected because it is unpopular. It is rejected because it fails the measurements. "Scientists have been wrong" is not evidence for a specific alternative. It is just permission to test. Hollow Earth has been tested, and it loses.

The Fiction Contamination Problem

Hollow Earth is emotionally powerful because it is excellent fiction. Hidden worlds are fun. Secret maps are fun. Forbidden expeditions are fun. The idea scratches the same itch as lost continents and secret archives. But a story becoming vivid is not the same as a model becoming true. The more a claim depends on vibes, secrecy, and adventure aesthetics, the harder we should demand measurement.

Back to top

17. Final Verdict

The Earth is not a thin shell around a vast habitable void. It is a differentiated planet with a rocky crust, rocky mantle, liquid metallic outer core, and solid inner core. That model is not based on one institution, one photograph, one government, or one assumption. It is built from independent lines of evidence that converge.

Hollow Earth survives by hiding in gaps: a missing satellite swath, an alleged diary, an old speculative quote, a deep cave, a drilling limit, a misunderstood polar image. But gaps are not evidence when the positive evidence points the other way. The whole planet is measured as a massive, centrally concentrated, seismically layered, magnetically active, internally hot body. There is no giant interior world left over.

Real Earth is already strange enough: a moving mantle, a liquid metal core, magnetic reversals, subducting slabs, deep diamonds, hidden oceans in minerals, microbes in rock, subglacial lakes, and continents drifting over geologic time. Hollow Earth does not make Earth more interesting. It makes Earth less measurable.

Back to top

Sources

1. U.S. Geological Survey, "The Interior of the Earth". USGS explains how seismic waves reveal Earth's layered interior, including a liquid outer core and solid inner core.
2. NASA Goddard/NSSDC, "Earth Fact Sheet". NASA lists Earth's mass, radius, mean density, core radius, gravity, and moment of inertia factor.
3. NASA Science, "Earth's Magnetosphere: Protecting Our Planet from Harmful Space Energy". NASA describes the dynamo mechanism in Earth's fluid outer core.
4. NASA Goddard Earth Sciences Division, "Research Page - Geodynamo". NASA states that Earth's strong magnetic field originates from the fluid outer core.
5. Y. A. Kozlovskiy, "The Kola Superdeep Drill Hole", USGS Open-File Report 86-517.
6. European Geosciences Union Cryosphere Blog, "Image of the Week - The Polar Hole!". The article explains that the polar hole seen in imagery is a technical artifact, not a physical opening.
7. History.com, "The 19th-Century Push for a 'Hollow Earth' Expedition", for historical background on Halley and Symmes.
8. Public Domain Review, "Stories of a Hollow Earth", for the literary history of subterranean-world stories.