terrestrial carbon (was RE: Meta-Foxes)

From: Jeff Davis (jrd1415@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Jul 26 2003 - 17:32:07 MDT

  • Next message: Lee Corbin: "RE: A Danger of Apparent Complicity? (was Tranquility Bay)"

    --- Spike <spike66@comcast.net> wrote:
    <snip>
    > Humans have rescued the life on this planet from
    > universal extinction. The nearby stars might have
    > planets with carbon that is already mostly coal
    > and the life thereon nearly dead. It is our sacred
    > duty as technologically capable beings, to get there
    > with our nanoprobes, determine if the case requires
    > our help and if so, start digging out that coal and
    > oil and burning it, forthwith. Every moment we
    > hesitate, more potential lives are being nonlived.
    >
    > spike

    I still think spike is enjoying a dry technoweenie
    style amusement with the above ongoing theme of
    humanity showing up just in the nick of time and
    saving the planet from carbon exhaustion. But the
    repeated overconfident and unskeptical acceptance of
    the biogenic (ie, fossil) origin of petroleum and coal
    which underlies the joke has been like an itch that I
    gotta scratch.

    Ever since Mitch's post:

    HydroCarbons: Gulf of Mexico
    http://www.extropy.org/exi-lists/extropians/0306/10577.html

    ---I've been nibbling away at this question.

    I googled up the current theories on planet/sun
    formation from the planetary/solar nebula. Sought the
    primordial composition of the nebula, and the sequence
    leading from nebular gas/dust to gas/dust disk to
    planetesimals to proto-earth to earth (as well as to
    the sun and other planets). In the process I took
    note of the current theory seeking to explain the
    different compositions of the different planets,
    innermost to outermost (which, if I got it right, is
    held to be the consequence of a radial temperature
    gradient: hot close in to cold further out). I came
    to suspect, but couldn't find clear confirmation, that
    the temperature profile had a time factor as well.
    That is, the original nebula was thought to have a
    (uniform?) temperature of 30-50 deg Kelvin. Then the
    temperature increased and differentiated concurrent
    with the structural evolution. I mention this last
    because I was looking for a definite statement of the
    primordial composition of the earth--methane and other
    carbons sources in particular--and the temperature in
    the planetary disk at the various stages of planetary
    formation seemed to me, from what I was reading, to be
    critical.

    I came to the conclusion that the earth accreted in a
    relatively cool manner. Coolest early on from small
    cool bits, and getting larger and warmer only
    gradually. Only later would the planet heat up, as a
    result of the combined effects of radioactive decay
    and heat retention due to size. As the heat-up
    proceeded, the planet would evolve structurally, part
    of which evolution would be the "outgassing" of
    volatiles. Primordial volatiles.

    This leads directly to the carbon question. I'm with
    Thomas Gold on this. Ain't no dinosaur and
    prehistoric leaf litter involved (I assert). That
    theory needs a place on the bookshelf reserved for
    historical amusement and humility alongside tomes on
    the flat earth, Phlogiston, spontaneous generation,
    Lamarkian evolution, etc. Time to move on IMO.

    One more thing. If the name Thomas Gold provokes in
    any degree an "Oh, that crank!" response, step back
    and take a look at that reflex attitude. As always,
    an old and comfy habit (of thinking in this case) is
    old, and comfy, but that don't make it true. Be not
    complacent.

    Also, small recommendation. The first link below is
    long and dense, the second short and very fun. Some
    people like to eat dessert first.
     
        --------------------------------------

    The Origin of Methane (and oil) in the Crust of the
    Earth — This is a major paper, outlining the reasons
    why an origin from non-biological materials accounts
    better for the facts, than an origin from buried
    biomass (approximately 31 printed pages).

    http://people.cornell.edu/pages/tg21/usgs.html

    The Deep, Hot Biosphere — Reason for suspecting
    massive microbial life in the crust of the Earth.

    http://people.cornell.edu/pages/tg21/DHB.html

    Best, Jeff Davis

    "When I am working on a problem I never think about
    beauty. I only think about how to solve the problem.
    But when I have finished, if the solution is not
    beautiful, I know it is wrong."
                          - Buckminster Fuller

    __________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
    http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 26 2003 - 17:40:41 MDT