Slashdot Mirror
New Evidence For Oceans of Water Deep In the Earth
techtech (2016646) writes Researchers from Northwestern University and the University of New Mexico report evidence for potentially oceans worth of water deep beneath the United States. Though not in the familiar liquid form—the ingredients for water are bound up in rock deep in the Earth's mantle—the discovery may represent the planet's largest water reservoir.
This research was published in Science.
Let's get down! Down deep!
This will be a new application for hydraulic fracturing to release the water from the rock.
Another irreplaceable resource to exploit an make a buck!
We will need much of this so-called "hydraulic liquid" (and maybe a few other chemicals) in order to release the water!
The chemistry is weak in this one... as well as the reading comprehension.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
Does it mean hygrogen & oxigen are separately bound up in rock?
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
At first I thought this might be impossible to build a well to get at this water as the well pump would require nuclear reactors to power it. Then again it might be hot enough down at these depths to get steam up the well, but what kind of material would line the drill hole to prevent its collapse? This water is not going to solve the need for water in California's Central Valley anytime soon.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
"This water is not in a form familiar to us—it is not liquid, ice or vapor. This fourth form is water trapped inside the molecular structure of the minerals in the mantle rock. The weight of 250 miles of solid rock creates such high pressure, along with temperatures above 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit, that a water molecule splits to form a hydroxyl radical (OH), which can be bound into a mineral's crystal structure."
It's still easier to get fresh water from the atmosphere. Since it falls down freely, we just have to harvest it. I mean, the deepest hole we've dug is what, five miles? Let's just wait for it to seep out, like the methane and oil do. Besides we are only using about one percent of the water we have on or above the surface. The "crisis" is in management, not supply.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I think the "other explanation" is that a story is told, and then people try to fit elements of that story to new discoveries that are made. So the waters of the "Great Flood" vanished? And we discover an ocean's worth of water under North America. How is it obvious that those two are linked? Couldn't it also be true that the stories in the bible are parables meant to teach a lesson and not meant as a literal history lesson?
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Seriously, this could be where a lot of Mar's water went. That is under Martian surface.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This looks like the original press release: http://news.unm.edu/news/new-evidence-for-oceans-of-water-deep-in-the-earth
Here's an explanation of what's going on.
The paper is already used as a reference on the Wikipedia page for Ringwoodite.
Here are the research pages of the various authors:
Brandon Schmandt, Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of New Mexico
Steven D. "Steve" Jacobsen, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Northwestern University
Thorsten W. Becker, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California
Zhenxian Liu, Geophysical Laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington
Kenneth G. "Ken" Dueker, Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Wyoming
"Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco
Mineral hydration? I guess even rocks love Brawndo. It's got electrolytes. That's what rocks crave!
"a hydroxyl radical (OH), which can be bound into a mineral's crystal structure."
Oceans of water? OH, no!
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
What isn't "contrivocerial" is that you are an idiot.
If you had an ounce of critical thinking skills (or had even bothered to read the article), you would realize that hydroxyl radicals pervasively bound up in mineral deposits that are hundreds of millions of years old in no way support the idea of an imaginary flood that allegedly occurred 6000 years ago before being written about by semi-ltierate Bronze Age goat herders.
Go thump your bible elsewhere, and retake 3rd grade spelling while you are at it.
No, first there was everything, then it changed.
Mostly random stuff.
I can't tell if you're joking, or insane and trying to fit world events into religious delusions.
either way I would like to subscribe to your newsletter
-- Sig under construction...
What's funny is how many people will think you're being serious and you're a crazy bible thumper... except it's clear you haven't read the bible.
What would be really sad is if you were a bible thumper and didn't know anything about your 'holy' book.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
For as much contrivocery as there is in the biblical history, only recently some of the evidence supporting it is starting to show up in science. First the discovery of the "Big Bang" and the Genisis creation story. In the beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded or something like that.
The entire earth was covered in a flood, poor Noah. Hmm, now we find the flood drained somewhere. Is the Great Flood of Noah fiction? I have my doubts. Some of the stories are beginning to be supported by recent discoveries. How did they possibly get it right so many years ago?
Maybe there is another explination we will find.
What was in those caverns beforehand? Did God kill the Morlocks after he killed the humans?
I stole this Sig
Actually, science supports the theory of a Great Flood: the end of the last glacial age. Sea levels rose more than a hundred meters, glaciers collapsed, colossal floods submerged plains and coasts. It changed the whole map of the earth.
It didn't all happen at once, of course, but neither was it without punctuation. Bursting glacial dams and mega-tsunamis are sudden and apocalyptic by anyone's standards; combined with the incessant rise of the tides it's easy to see where so many cultures got their legends of civilization-ending floods.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
It's said the English channel was cut by an ice dam burst, the rubble found when they dug the channel tunnel pretty much confirms it. However just because science has found evidence of massive floods does not add an ounce of weight to the bibical claims about Noah. It's like claiming the fact rock and roll started in the 50's proves Elvis is an alien. The moral of the Noah story and indeed most biblical stories is that blind obiedience to the dictates of power is a virtue.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I imagine if anything the Zanclean flood is more likely the root of the Noah story aside from the timeline mismatch.
I'm not saying it was aliens... but it was aliens.
This is not the funny you're looking for.
But then where did the water come from? It can't rain upwards!
It's never been a very good argument, though. The flood was divine intervention. God could just click his fingers and magic the water into existence, and get rid of it in the same manner.
For that matter he could have just clicked his fingers and made everyone drop dead, but God really loves to put on a big flashy show of things.
There you have it, folks, another tolerant Slashdot mind!
......can't wait to pollute this, too.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Hydroxide is not water.
It is if it is hydrogen hydroxide.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
There you have it, folks, another tolerant Slashdot mind!
You're absolutely right!
People, please, when you're writing in Slashdot, try to make an effort to respect the opinions of retards and trolls.
To be fair, it's highly likely that the story is based in historical fact to begin with. While the whole world may not have flooded, there was most likely a large enough flood to be worth telling stories about. This would explain why the story of the single family surviving the flood has appeared in several different religions.
So rock contains water?
... and water soaks paper.
Paper disproves Spock
Spock... um...
How does that go again?
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
The plot of the SF novels "Flood" and "Ark" by Stephen Baxter is that huge water reservoirs beneath the earth's crust get released to the surface, which raises the ocean levels until all land is under water.
Wait 'til they find out the ugly truth: rich old white men don't want to work.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I don't actually think this is about tolerance. Sure AC is a rude bastard, but he isn't entirely wrong. It is ... shall we say unwise... to jump upon every minor discovery as supporting a particular world view without considering it carefully first.
Personally, I don't buy a literal interpretation of Genesis, and I have found people who do tend to grasp desperately at anything that seems to support their argument, which often leaves them with egg on the face, as it were. Almost as if they don't really believe, but are trying desperately to convince themselves. It's a position that seems to me to be a bit antithetical to Christianity, and perhaps is ill-advised. I don't doubt that there are literalists who aren't quite like that, but it seems to be a trend of sorts. Perhaps because the television evangelists realised that a good conspiracy sells very well and have been pushing it for years to try and trap people in order to part them with their money.
I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
I thought everyone knew about Elvis!
I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
Those options aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, they often go hand in hand.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
That's all you've got? That it's worse in developing countries, so lay off the US? Wow. How utterly pathetic.
How is it different than gypsum, CaSO4-2H2O?
What! You mean a grumpy slashdotter can't just come up with a remarkably brilliant solution to solve the world's problems in just 30 seconds of thinking?
http://xkcd.com/793/
Do you think there's life down there?
So, the rock breaks up and water flows; a big enough break and it becomes a massive discharge into the atmosphere which then comes back down as one heck of a deluge. Interesting.
Why bring politics into this?
Yeah, like when the ice sheets melted at the end of the last glaciation - several hundred meters of sea level rise world-wide, and any human group near what had been the coast would have experienced something that looked a helluva lot like Noah's Flood. Probably several times.....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Curious if you have a citation for 'literally'. Not because I don't believe you, but because I'd really like to read the story.
... tl:dr - google Thomas Gold Deep Hot Biosphere.
Kind of nice to know momma earth is a good place to be.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
That's a familiar story. I had a 5 digit UID until I lost access to the email account I had used to set it up. But also I was then posting under a nick I no longer have a need for: mysticgoat or mysticgoat1993 or something like that. Now I'm retired and no longer have to preserve a professional persona. So even if I had access to my old account, I would not use it, since slashdot in its wisdom does not allow the username on an account to be changed. I understand the reasoning behind that, and do not disagree with it. Sucks to have been Mystic Goat.
Now I have a 7 digit UID. For a while I was often mistaken as a youngster, but due to my inherently churlish nature, I'm quickly seen as the curmudgeon I have always been.
Unless you're pushing a lawnmower, get off my lawn.
Will
Indeed, there have been several truly massive flods over the years. The Zanclean flood that is theorized to have flooded the Mediterranean sea 5.33 million years age (long before homo sapiens roamed) may have exhibited water rising at 10 meters per day. However, the Black Sea deluge, while much smaller, could have happened circa 5600 BC. It's entirely possible that this was the basis for many of the flood myths that are common in the region.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Flods. Truly massive flods.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Both are forms of dihydrogen monoxide. However each of these synonyms exist at a different level of obfuscation.
Will
Try finding a clean swimming place overseas. Try finding something to drink in the backwoods even in america. You have to be careful especially in america, you aren't as immune as the the third world is. The clean water let's you live longer but at a price that you had to adapt to. You system, will not protect you from the worms, the illnesses or the problems of ingested poisions available to the rest of the world. We survive on shit free ponds, with filtered and semifreash, they thrive on the blue stream,the brown to black infested water where uthey get a days worth of protein with every swallow. But we are loosening our rules. Soon after the tea party wins, you will get to have the same waters as our foreign cousins. Ain't we lucky.
That told me! Look above! My post is slowly disappearing, and Zynder's bizarre take on logic is becoming not-bizarre-at-all! You did it! I'm freeee...!
Absolute nonsense. Absolute utter nonsense. Science is a methodology, not a system of beliefs. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. And "literally" burning people at the stake for challenging the status quo?? Challenging the status quo is precisely what science does every day. Get a grip - you are embarrassing yourself.
For all in tents and porpoises, science is no better than any other religion.
I cannot speak for the dolphins, but yes, many if not all, of those who are living in tents seem to believe that science is but another religion.
For that matter, there are a lot of people living with advanced technologies that invoke "Science" as if it were a religious belief, when what they are really doing is citing some authority or other, rather than perfoming scientific experiments or scientific research. Science is not scholasticism, despite what you may have been taught in school.
Can you say "scholasticism"? . . . I thought you could.
Will
given the current state of pollution and human 'intelligence' is best to not spoil any backup resources until we advanced enough to keep what we have in a decent state.....
Over and over again, science has burned it's own at the stake literally
Really? Citation needed. Now religion on the other hand has toasted quite a few.
for challenging the status quo.
Hypothesize that the Earth is round in the face of religious dogma and get roasted. But then the Church says its the victim's fault for challenging their teaching. "If they wouldn't have spoken out, we wouldn't have had to light them on fire." That's the sociopath's game of blaming others.
Have gnu, will travel.
Evidence for both. This study leans toward outgassing.
You might want to differentiate between other developed nations and developing nations. Not doing so makes you sound rather nutty.
Listening to a book which has internal discrepancies is never a good idea. Even a stop clock is right twice a day. The bible is not factual, even if it might have some factual elements in it. By your logic The Da Vinci Code is factual, as Italy exists.
Only in the minds of people who don't understand the difference between a self-correcting methodology and a belief system which strives to be as least self-correcting as possible.
The fact you are using the fruits of science nearly every second of every day speaks volumes for your hypocrisy and ignorance.
By this logic I shit diamonds! Hey, there's a lot of carbon bound up in human waste. Carbon is an (nay, the) ingredient in diamond, therefore New Evidence For Oceans of Diamonds Deep In The Sewer.
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
Ever actually looked at the evidence for evolution through mutation and natural selection and things like that? It's truly massive. If you're talking about Darwinism as in the exact details, those are widely debated, and new ideas do come up.
Nor have I noticed scientists typically meeting honest questioning with vitriol. I have noticed scientists getting thoroughly annoyed at idiots who keep pestering them for no evidence-based reason, such as (say) somebody who refers to evolution as Darwinism, believes it's only conjecture and supposition, and who will make public statements without any serious attempt at learning whether such statements are well founded or not.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Another candidate is the filling of the Persian Gulf: it wouldn't have been as abrupt as the proposed Black Sea deluge (taking years rather than days), but during the last Ice Age, the Gulf would have been prime agricultural land, at least as good if not better than Mesopotamia. There's a decent chance that there was a civilization there, where the Black Sea would likely have been nomadic tribes.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
Isaac Newton was highly religious, even to the point of nutty u ==in his era. He invented modern science and calculus as a side project
Thanshin is much sharper, he posts smart-ass comments on the internet from his mom's basement.
Yes I do mean that and I'll tell you why. I'm tired of suffering for everyone else. This is a classic example of the good ol school group project. America is the nerd who gets the whole project dumped on them while the rest just fuck around and still get the good grade for doing nothing. We do what we do but it is never enough. You cut X by 30%? Well that's great but I think you can do better. How about instead of bitching at me for whatever amounts to peanuts in the grand scheme of things, you go bitch at India, China, and Africa? We're trying to make the world cleaner while they are just dumping their waste straight on the ground, in the river, or in the air. America, by itself, cannot clean up the shit of the rest of the world. There comes a time where you have to stop brow beating yourself and put the blame where it belongs. That blame doesn't lie with us any longer.
Also, ad hominems do nothing to support your position, whatever it is, and when your only retort to an argument is to use one, then many would say that is "utterly pathetic."
Oh and one more thing: In my opinion, "developing countries" is a bunch of weasel words. How long are they going to be developing? How long do they get that free pass? China, India, and Africa have been "developing" since the Dark Ages or before. There comes a time when you have to say enough is enough. Yelling at me to clean my already squeaky clean act up is about as effective as squeezing blood from a turnip.
His post does sound nutty, I'll agree with that. But how does differentiating between developed and developing nations change anything? If you're shitting right in the middle of the street, does it matter if it is happening in Atlanta or Johannesburg?
Literal or not, it's still interesting to bring up. There are a lot of insights that were ahead of their time - such as the avoidance of pork (a meat that's far worse than average in harboring parasites).
Oh, sure. A 5.3 million year old flood is much more likely to have survived by oral storytelling tradition.