bigjesse1985 (September 7, 2008 at 9:54 pm)

it was also only accepted in predominantly christian cultures: western and central europe, christianised africa and america (where it is still believed in many areas today). more americans believe that the earth is flat than have studied using geographic information systems (GIS). most, if not all, islamic and hindu cultures (not sure about other religions) never believed that the universe revolved around the earth in the first place... so why correct it?

MorituriMax (September 7, 2008 at 9:48 pm)

EVERYONE SHOULD WATCH THIS YOUTUBE VIDEO... watch?v=sxtbcOEtpoE Everytime you see "Creationist" replace it with nealadamsdotcom. neal, kappa, that means especially you two should watch this.

MorituriMax (September 7, 2008 at 9:35 pm)

bigjesse, the same christians then corrected themselves that the earth went around the sun. So it turned out to be a wash. Just took awhile. Strangely enough, nobody from other religions showed up knocking down the doors to correct it themselves.

bigjesse1985 (September 7, 2008 at 9:18 pm)

sorry, the last word should have been earth! not slept in a while! just finished writin my dissertation!

MrKappaBeta (September 7, 2008 at 9:09 pm)

"and there is no evidence to suggest that there is a large amount of uranium at the core" Google Search, "Natural Fission Reactor" Additionally... as of 2004 people have started to look for anti-neutrinos from the Earth... sometimes they're called geo-neutrinos... One reason why people suspect fission reactors in the mantle/core is due to the Helium-3 (fission by-product) which is found to come from the Earths volcanoes.

bigjesse1985 (September 7, 2008 at 9:07 pm)

hmmmm... christian much? how are fold mountains formed? i.e. the andes? the himalayas? also, the ANCIENT religions (suxh as the sumerians/babylonians) did not believe that the universe revolved around the earth, but that the earth revolved around the sun, as is common knowledge today. christians introduced the idea of the universe revolving around the sun.

Diamonddavej (September 7, 2008 at 8:43 pm)

Neal, I forgot to emphasize the effects of pressure, at high pressures (like a pressure cooker) hot water doesn't boil below ~200 deg C. 1. Superheated, highly compressed steam bubbles form in cooling lava. 2. When the steam bubbles cool <200 deg C, steam condenses into hot water, the hot water dissolves silica from the lava & forms liquid silica gel (I theorize that supercritical fluids are involved, I'll check). 3. By 95-80 deg C, silica gel gradually hardens into chalcedony and quartz.

bembleton (September 7, 2008 at 8:36 pm)

Yes it is logical to duduce that the inner core contains the densest of materials, what I am saying though is that the amount of material denser than iron and nickel should be to my knowledge in very short supply and not nearly enough set of a nuclear chain reaction.

nealadamsdotcom (September 7, 2008 at 8:29 pm)

bembleton, It is far more logical that the outer core is a dense plasma and the inner core the densest of materials. The plasma deposits its iron into the mantle along with it's silicates.

bembleton (September 7, 2008 at 8:21 pm)

From what I can tell as a non-scientist is that the uranium core as a model displays properties that we know our core does display but no more so than the iron-nickel core and there is no evidence to suggest that there is a large amount of uranium at the core where as iron and nickel are the most stable elements to be produced by fission and fussion therefore it is logical to deduce that it is a more common in the universe than uranium several times over so is more likely to be at our core.