• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

Scientists Discover a Secret Ocean Floor

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Sure. But the sideways movement is where all the energy budget goes.



At the end of the fast phase, they piled upward. The energy is stored as potential in the continents.

The energy did not go to heat.
As RD mentioned, it skidded to a stop creating a lot of heat. The energy could only have gone into mountains and heat. The sideways motion used almost no energy.
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
And sliding on an almost perfect lubricant.



Or the energy is stored, as Stripe said, as potential energy in the mountains.
Yes, some went into potential energy in the mountains. But I'm guessing more than half went into heat skidding to a stop. Again, I don't think this is bad for HTP, but it would be nice to have the numbers.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Yes, some went into potential energy in the mountains. But I'm guessing more than half went into heat skidding to a stop. Again, I don't think this is bad for HTP, but it would be nice to have the numbers.
Only negligible amounts went to heat, ie, (the net descent multiplied by mass) minus (the energy imparted to accelerate water plus negligible other forms).

If you drop a rock into a bucket of water, the energy goes to moving the water around, not heat. If you skip a rock off a river and onto the opposite bank, the transfer of energy to heat is essentially nothing.
 
Last edited:

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
As RD mentioned, it skidded to a stop creating a lot of heat. The energy could only have gone into mountains and heat. The sideways motion used almost no energy.
Prior to that the plates were pushing water into the sky. Most of the energy went to accelerating the fountains.
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Only negligible amounts went to heat, ie, (the net descent multiplied by mass) minus (the energy imparted to accelerate water plus negligible other forms).
Yes, this. It would be nice to have the numbers.
If you drop a rock into a bucket of water, the energy goes to moving the water around, not heat.
This is definitely not quite accurate. Let's say the bucket of water is full to the brim such that the rock you drop into the bucket causes the water to flow over the edge. This way we can quantify the potential energy you just created by increasing the height of the water. If we were to measure accurately enough, the energy used to stop the water from moving after it went down the sides of the bucket would be entirely heat. And I'm not talking about the entire interaction of the system but just the energy used to stop the water because increasing the surface area of the water exposed would allow for evaporation that would cool the system a great deal more than the heat used to stop the water from moving.

If you skip a rock off a river and onto the opposite bank, the transfer of energy to heat is essentially nothing.
But still, not completely nothing. We can quantify how much "essentially nothing" in terms of heat is generated by the rock stopping on the opposite bank. And we can do the same for the crust skidding to a stop.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
This is definitely not quite accurate. Let's say the bucket of water is full to the brim such that the rock you drop into the bucket causes the water to flow over the edge. This way we can quantify the potential energy you just created by increasing the height of the water. If we were to measure accurately enough, the energy used to stop the water from moving after it went down the sides of the bucket would be entirely heat. And I'm not talking about the entire interaction of the system but just the energy used to stop the water because increasing the surface area of the water exposed would allow for evaporation that would cool the system a great deal more than the heat used to stop the water from moving.


But still, not completely nothing. We can quantify how much "essentially nothing" in terms of heat is generated by the rock stopping on the opposite bank. And we can do the same for the crust skidding to a stop.
Let's be clear, all energy will eventually be counted as heat. The point with the illustrations is to show that the movement does not lead to the direct heating of the water, atmosphere or rock. It goes to other forms first.

Dropping the rock in the bucket moves the water like the hydroplate moved the water skyward. Yes, that energy to move the water skyward is going to convert to heat at some stage, but not in the atmosphere and certainly not in the rock, which is where critics of the HPT say it would go.
 
Last edited:

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
She describes the supposed problem 15 minutes in. The quantity matters because of the amount of calcite (carbonates) that need to form, a slightly exothermic process. Where those carbonates are sourced is different for her model than for Walt Brown's, but she doesn't make the adjustment.
OK. So how much of the carbonates were formed underground? 99%? So are you meaning to say that it's closer to 10 billion megatons TNT worth of energy released during the geologic column's formation, rather than 1 trillion?
That's also assuming it all happened at the surface.
I guess so, but even if 99.99% of the carbonates were formed before the Flood we're still talking about 100 million megatons of TNT worth of energy released as heat during the sedimentary rock formation, right?
Because it does not appreciate the assumptions of HPT. The carbonates were precipitated in a sealed, subterranean chamber, not from organisms, as the evolutionary model assumes. The heat went into the water sealed inside the planet and converted to kinetic when it escaped.
Right and so again, even if 99.9999% of the carbonates were formed below ground, it's still one million megaton TNT heat emitted above ground when the rocks hardened. I mean we keep saying megaton like it's some big number but remember the smaller bomb that blew up Hiroshima Japan in 1945 was only like 1/65th of a megaton and that killed like 70,000 people instantly.
The energy went to kinetic, not heat.

If you boil a pot of water and pour it on your hand, it'll hurt.

If you boil the water in a sealed container with a tiny nozzle and open the nozzle so that it sprays out (given the pressure), it will not burn you (as long as you're not right at the opening).

The energy went to kinetic.
But the energy of sedimentary rock formation didn't----it couldn't. What kinetically changed when the rock was hardening? It just released heat. Even if 99.999999% of the carbonates formed before the fountains broke, that's still 650,000 Hiroshima bombs worth of heat.
Because water would drain off the higher continents into the lower ocean basins quicker than 150 days, especially once the rain stopped after 40 days. Once that happened it's just a huge pile of water on land, that's going to drain off the land and into what are today the oceans. It's not going to take 150 days. But if God sustained walls around the edges of the continents (like He did when Moses passed through the sea) to hold the water on the higher elevated land, then it could take 150 days.

Are you thinking that perhaps the continental crust at that time was actually lower elevation than the ocean basins were? Because I hadn't thought of that. That's interesting. Like, the continents, which are less dense than oceanic crust, needed time to float to the top, and while it was rising due to buoyancy, of course the Flood water just sat in the depression like a continent shaped puddle. But once the continents achieved their modern height, the basaltic crust was now lower and so all the water went into the oceans.

idk. Interesting. Thanks for making me think.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
OK. So how much of the carbonates were formed underground? 99%?


So are you meaning to say that it's closer to 10 billion megatons TNT worth of energy released during the geologic column's formation, rather than 1 trillion?


I guess so, but even if 99.99% of the carbonates were formed before the Flood we're still talking about 100 million megatons of TNT worth of energy released as heat during the sedimentary rock formation, right?

Ok, and?

Right and so again, even if 99.9999% of the carbonates were formed below ground, it's still one million megaton TNT heat

The heat generated in the crust was either converted into the kinetic energy that powered the fountains, or was used up in endothermic reactions as mentioned above.

emitted above ground when the rocks hardened.

You mean below the water that was already very cold because it was launched high into the atmosphere, where water lensing would have dissipated that heat?

See the above videos.

I mean we keep saying megaton like it's some big number but remember the smaller bomb that blew up Hiroshima Japan in 1945 was only like 1/65th of a megaton and that killed like 70,000 people instantly.

Keep in mind that the Hiroshima bomb was specifically deteonated around 2000 ft above the ground in order to be more destructive. The yield was equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT.

But the energy of sedimentary rock formation didn't----it couldn't. What kinetically changed when the rock was hardening? It just released heat. Even if 99.999999% of the carbonates formed before the fountains broke, that's still 650,000 Hiroshima bombs worth of heat.

Spread across the entire surface of the globe, which was still mostly underwater...

I'm not seeing the problem...

Or maybe I'm misunderstanding your argument?

Because water would drain off the higher continents into the lower ocean basins quicker than 150 days, especially once the rain stopped after 40 days.

The Bible states that the waters continued to rise after the rains stopped.

Consider what happens when you put a sprinkler into a pool and turn on the water. The water sprays upwards until the sprinkler is covered by enough water for it to not be able to eject the water upwards through the water in the pool, but the water level still rises.

This is similar to what happened with the Fountains.

See the above videos.

Once that happened it's just a huge pile of water on land, that's going to drain off the land and into what are today the oceans. It's not going to take 150 days.

Supra.

But if God sustained walls around the edges of the continents (like He did when Moses passed through the sea) to hold the water on the higher elevated land, then it could take 150 days.

Appealing to miracles is generally a bad idea when scripture doesn't specifically state that there were miracles.

Are you thinking that perhaps the continental crust at that time was actually lower elevation than the ocean basins were? Because I hadn't thought of that. That's interesting. Like, the continents, which are less dense than oceanic crust, needed time to float to the top, and while it was rising due to buoyancy, of course the Flood water just sat in the depression like a continent shaped puddle. But once the continents achieved their modern height, the basaltic crust was now lower and so all the water went into the oceans.

Nope. Rock doesn't float on water.

 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
OK. So how much of the carbonates were formed underground? 99%?

Essentially all of it.

I guess so, but even if 99.99% of the carbonates were formed before the Flood we're still talking about 100 million megatons of TNT worth of energy released as heat during the sedimentary rock formation, right?

No. The heat from the precipitation of carbonites went into the water. That energy turned kinetic when the fountains of the great deep broke forth.

There was a cap on the heat-carrying capacity of the water before it ruptured its container. The heating came from tidal pumping and carbonate formation.

But the energy of sedimentary rock formation didn't----it couldn't. What kinetically changed when the rock was hardening? It just released heat. Even if 99.999999% of the carbonates formed before the fountains broke, that's still 650,000 Hiroshima bombs worth of heat.
The rock hardening was almost entirely a process of draining the water. The carbonates were all formed in the sealed chamber.

Because water would drain off the higher continents into the lower ocean basins quicker than 150 days, especially once the rain stopped after 40 days. Once that happened it's just a huge pile of water on land, that's going to drain off the land and into what are today the oceans. It's not going to take 150 days. But if God sustained walls around the edges of the continents (like He did when Moses passed through the sea) to hold the water on the higher elevated land, then it could take 150 days.
There was more going on than just water draining. There were vast isostatic changes — mountains rising as land around them subsided, seismic movement.

Are you thinking that perhaps the continental crust at that time was actually lower elevation than the ocean basins were? Because I hadn't thought of that. That's interesting. Like, the continents, which are less dense than oceanic crust, needed time to float to the top, and while it was rising due to buoyancy, of course the Flood water just sat in the depression like a continent shaped puddle. But once the continents achieved their modern height, the basaltic crust was now lower and so all the water went into the oceans.idk. Interesting. Thanks for making me think.
The continents were initially put at greater average altitude and are still sinking.
 

Gary K

New member
Yeah. The water inside the Earth now is negligible compared with the water that was there prior to the flood.

Where did the water go? Into great big holes in the planet, primarily the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian ocean basins.
Yeah, you're most likely right.
 
Top