New helium retention work suggests young earth and accelerated decay

quote:

---

. Layer trend? If accelerated decay occurred during the flood year/surrounding period then the first flows to solidify would demonstrate the most decay because the yet to solidify flows would still be in a 'reset' state by the same explanations that the mainstream system works. Of course in detail the models would produce some different effects but these are difficult to model and it is early days to try and distinguish on this basis. Obviously helium retention is one point of differentiation. So the layers measure time during the period of accelerated decay.

---

Does this make sense to anyone besides TB? Why would accelerated decay occur during the flood? What do you mean by resetting? Is resetting occurring during the mystical surges that carry billions of tons of sediment and preserve delicate animal tracks?

quote:

---

2. Discontinuity? The first flows of the flood would experience the least reseting and so would have similar 'ages' to the pre-flood flows.

---

What is the mechanism of this resetting?

quote:

---

3. Astronomy? We don't yet know exactly what constants may have evolved to cause accelerated decay although there are hypotheses. Some of these may not affect gross astronomical observations. In addition, for us, this also may work parallel with the dregs of the time dialation effects of the creationist cosmological model.

---

TB have you been taking incomprehensibility lessons from Brad?

quote:

---

4. Neutron bombardment? We believe life was affected by neutron bombardment casuing life expectancy to drop from 1000y to about 120y. But the water is a potential shield and a quantitative study of the effects on organic and trace nuclei in organisms would need to be done to fully answer this question.

---

What to do mean by we? Do you mean there really are others who have this goofy idea? People never lived 1000y. Did those people who lived 1000y kept growing new teeth or did they just eat gruel after their original ones wore away to nothing. Maybe you think people continuously replaced their teeth before neutron bombardment. What happened to their skin and tendons after their fibroblasts could longer reproduce because of telomere shortening? Do you think the neutron bombardment caused the presence of telomeres or maybe inactivated telomerase? You can’t put enough water in the atmosphere to be a potential shield, if that is what you mean without pressures of hundreds of atmospheres and temperatures of a few hundred degrees C and even then I don’t think you will get a potential shield. Or do you mean that things that were drowned in the flood were shielded from the neutrons? Or were the neutrons coming up out of the ground? Was Noah shielded by the boiling flood water? Just what are you talking about?

quote:

---

5. Earth melting? The RATE book offers some suggestions on disipation of heat. eg plumes of superheated water ejecting from the earth. Maybe these created comets? Who knows, these are just wild speculations.

---

Wild speculation is right. Plumes of superheated water ejected from the earth. Get real! This sounds a lot like Baumgardner’s steamed ark soup model of the flood. I think that one was pretty thoroughly trashed on the Baumgardner thread.There are multiple lines of evidence that falsify the worldwide flood and all you can come up with is wild speculation that amounts to complete nonsense to try to defend it.Randy

Oh now I understand. I wasn't clear about what you were resetting.Are you now saying that most of the large igneous provinces found around the globe
Page Not Found - About Trinity - Trinity College Dublinas well as many thousands of smaller lava flows in the geological record flowed out during the flood?Maybe you can tell us which of these LIPs flowed out during the flood.Central Atlantic Magmatic Province
North Atlantic
Deccan Traps
Columbia River Basalts
Hawaiian Islands
Kerguelen Plateau
Broken Ridge
Ontong Java Plateau
Pigafetta Basin Flood Basalts
Nauru Basin Flood Basalts
East Mariana Basin Flood Basalts
Manihiki PlateauThe Siberian traps
http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/...s/Permian/SiberianTraps.htmlwere formed about 250 million years ago by mainstream determination which would seem to put them during the flood by your estimation.What about the Deccan Traps?
http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/..._west_asia/india/deccan.htmlThey formed 65 million years ago. Do you think they were post-flood? A problem with placing them post-flood is that they are 6500 feet thick and have ancient temples carved in them. How long do you think 6500 foot think lava would take to flow out and cool.Your explanation raises more questions than it answers.Why is it that so many of the lava flows that you think occurred during the flood do not look like they flowed out under water? Did they always happen to flow out in areas that your magic flood surges had retreated away from?How many apparent years of accelerated decay do you think occurred during the flood? If we bracket the flood by the Siberian and Deccan traps we have approximately 200 million years of radioactive decay occurring during the flood years. Do you really think radioactive decay could be speeded up by a factor of 200 million without sterilizing the earth?Glenn Morton has also pointed out the severe problems that releasing sulfuric acid from all those volcanoes during the flood year would cause.http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/acid.htmHave you noticed that each time you try to explain away an insoluble problem for the worldwide flood you create more insoluble problems? This is because you are trying use science to explain a myth and it just won’t work.Randy

quote:

---

Neutron bombardment? We? If I write 'we' in this forum it usually means YECs obviously. Othertimes it means structural biologists, other tiems physicists and other times Apollo project fans. Genomics people are talking about multiple hundred year old lifespans soon, so shortly after creation there is nothing stopping it. The water shield was the flood waters that the ark was sitting on! I'm talking about neutron bombardment from below!

---

This deep-water shielding explanation conflicts with your surging-flood, high ground claims. How deep do you think the water that produced this shielding was? Remember it can’t be too deep during most of the flood because you need to keep animals alive on high ground to make tracks between those magic flood surges. Also it seems to me that you claim that there were never any really tall mountains before the flood so you don’t need to generate water that is too deep. Further, aren’t you using this mechanism to start the flood? At the start of the flood there was no deep water so no shielding. I find that YECs never mind trying to explain away one problem with an explanation that is in direct conflict with their attempts to explain away another problem.I don’t think the genomics people are really expecting to get lifetimes of multiple hundreds of years, at least not the realistic ones. They understand the problems that telomeres raise. Immortalizing cells is not really such a good idea as it will probably lead to cancers.
Randy

quote:

---

Not only that, but it is also true that continental crust, which would logically form the high ground, concentrates more radioactive elements than oceanic crust. Heck, granites should explode according to this story...

---

So those poor critters who are waiting around on the supposed "high ground" to run down and make some tracks between "flood surges" would really get fried by the neutrons and boiled by the heat.
Randy

quote:

---

Actually, moose, diffusivity experiments are done under vacuum. That's the way the experimental apparatus must operate. Presumably, what really matters is the partial pressure of helium. Even at great depths, this is still pretty low (but not zero).

---

I couldn't get the pdf file to open. I have done a little work on diffusion in some very different contexts but the same principles should apply. The driving force for diffusion is the difference in themodynamic activity, usually expressed as chemical potential of helium inside and outside the crytal. It seems to me that the chemical potential of helium outside the crystal will be essentially zero no matter what the pressure but I am not sure about the effect of pressure on thermodynamic activity in this case where behavior will be far from ideal. However, it also seems to me that the diffusion constant of helium inside the crystal may have a dependance on pressure. If helium diffuses by moving through "free volume" in the crystal and free volume is reduced when the crystal is under high pressure then the diffusion constant will presumably be reduced.One caviat when extrapolating diffusion rates using activation energies is that the extrapolation is only valid if there is no phase change in the diffusion media. If the crystal undergoes any polymorphism it could be annealed at high temperature and then you could get a different down curve than up curve in a temperature study, which I think was seen. Of course I could be wrong about all of this because I have only studied diffusion in very different systems and that was some time ago.
Randy

quote:

---

Originally posted by edge:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randy:
...The driving force for diffusion is the difference in themodynamic activity, usually expressed as chemical potential of helium inside and outside the crytal. It seems to me that the chemical potential of helium outside the crystal will be essentially zero ...

---

​

Why would you think this?

​

---

LIke I said I could be wrong. I was considering diffusion from crystal to the atmosphere. As think about it you have crystals that are in contact with other solid material that the He is diffusing into so they may have an appreciable concentration of He. Ultimately it is going somewhere and diffusion rates will be determined by the chemical potential and diffusion constant in each material it diffuses through. I have only ever worked with diffusion through membranes where things like partition coefficients also come into play and I don't know if there is anything equivalent in this situation. I think the main point I was trying to make is that diffusion constant may be pressure dependant if the crystal structure is affect by the pressures involved and it not necessarily legitmate to extrapolate over huge temperature ranges using activation energies because of the possiblity of physical changes in the crytal which could effect diffusion. I don't know if that really makes any sense with the crystals being discussed here but it seems that way to me.
Randy

Hey TB, welcome back! We've missed you. I see you are still YEC after all these years.Randy