Re: Shrinking Earth
- From: gresham <Gresham3@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 19:58:02 -0600
in article VA.00000b04.1ec7d030@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Aidan
Karley at doIlookDAFTenoughTOpost@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on
12/7/05 7:00 AM:
> In article <BFBB69CD.11D72%Gresham3@xxxxxxx>, Gresham wrote:
>> How did you come up with that?? K40 > Argon 40 , little mass change, and a
>> half-life of 1.3 billion (American) yr, it's already 75% gone and not too
>> common to begin with.
>>
> K is *much* more common than Uranium.
> Cosmic abundance of K is ~120000 per 10^12 H atoms. Corresponding
> figure for U is < 4. So, unless the energy yield from U is more than ~30,000
> time that from K, the heat contribution from K is going to be greater than
> that from U.
>
a) Core Vs Crust Vs Terrestrial Vs Cosmic -- I have no idea, but I do
know that the concentration of K in igneous rocks varies with silica being
more abundant in acidic rocks. Hence I'm surprised to find it in the core.
b) K40 is only about 0.01 percent of natural K (K40+K39)
c) K40 has a branched decay scheme --90% 1.3 mev beta to Ca 40 and 10%
1.46 gamma to Argon 40. And that is it. Going down the list of U238 and
U235 decay products I find too many to list here. Many over 5 mev.
gresham
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Shrinking Earth
- From: Aidan Karley
- Re: Shrinking Earth
- References:
- Re: Shrinking Earth
- From: don findlay
- Re: Shrinking Earth
- From: Al Zenner
- Re: Shrinking Earth
- From: gresham
- Re: Shrinking Earth
- From: Aidan Karley
- Re: Shrinking Earth
- Prev by Date: Re: Asia Tsunami
- Next by Date: Re: Shrinking Earth
- Previous by thread: Re: Shrinking Earth
- Next by thread: Re: Shrinking Earth
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|