Exploring the Nuclear Heart of the Earth

In summary, the Nuclear Heart of the Earth is a hypothesis that suggests the most dense elements, uranium in particular, will end up at the center of the Earth. It is a plausible theory with implications that could threaten the way we view our own Earth and planetary formation. However, there are some flaws in the theory, and it is not currently physically true. There is potential for solid radioactive elements to accumulate over time if it were to happen on a catastrophic time scale, but the theory as a whole is still interesting.
  • #1
Andre
4,311
74
The Nuclear Heart of the Earth
Think of the early Earth as having been like a spherical steel hearth. A hot ball of liquid elements freshly formed out of the primordial disc surrounding our sun. The densest metals sinking down by force of gravity while lighter materials "floated" outwards. Uranium is very dense. At about 19 grams per cubic centimeter, it is 1.6 times more dense than lead at the Earth's surface. But deep within our planet density depends only on atomic number and atomic mass. Uranium, having the greatest atomic number and atomic mass, would be the most dense substance in our planet and will ultimately end up at the center of the Earth. The implications of this relatively new georeactor hypothesis are far reaching indeed. Not only does it threaten to change the way we view our own Earth and planetary formation in general but the very origin of the stars might need to be rewritten

or the scientific version: Nuclear georector origine of oceanic basalt 3He/4He, evidence and implications

There are a few far fetched hypotheses and perhaps some flaws, I would say, but other than that, some good explanations for existing evidence. What would happen when the nuclear heart would stop or did it stop already perhaps even millions of years ago? Any thoughts?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
It seems more plausible than most such speculative theories, so much so that perhaps it is not original to the researcher.

Will its physics fit? No immediate errors come to mind, although his physics may be oversimplified.

I sent the link to my boss who's into Gaia (living planet) theory.
 
  • #3
Well
But deep within our planet density depends only on atomic number and atomic mass
I don't think this is physically true, is it ?
Could be that density only depends on the atomic number ?
Shouldn't it also depend on how the atoms repeal from each other (and therefore depends on the distance between each two atoms) ?
 
  • #4
And what would happen when such a high concentration of uranium is located in one place? Is such a system even nuclearly stable?

Do we have a way of testing this hypothesis?
 
  • #5
Gravitational effects become smaller as we approach the Earth's core. As we get close to the center, diffusion would dominate significantly over gravity. There will be no concentration of dense elements near the zero G center.

Njorl
 
  • #6
I tend to agree, Njorl, about the diffusion dominating. But there is more. What would have happened when the Earth started cooling perhaps billions of years ago and the solid inner core started solidifying? Would some molecules have solidified easier and started clustering into the first beginnings of the solid inner core ? Could that have been the fissable heavy elements? Could that have been the start of the natural georeactor?
 
  • #7
Originally posted by Andre
I tend to agree, Njorl, about the diffusion dominating. But there is more. What would have happened when the Earth started cooling perhaps billions of years ago and the solid inner core started solidifying? Would some molecules have solidified easier and started clustering into the first beginnings of the solid inner core ? Could that have been the fissable heavy elements? Could that have been the start of the natural georeactor?

If anything, non-radioactive atoms would have preferentially solidified. The radioactive elements, while denser, would change their atomic structures, causing their molecular bonds to break. So, for some proto-solid, while the non-radioactive elements form solids less easily, they are more durable, and so can accumulate over time.

I am not familiar with extreme temperature and pressure mechanics. If solidification occurred on a catastrophic time scale- ie, a huge mass solidified in a very short time, things would be different than I portray them. If the volume-surface ratio was always large, the radioactive elements would be protected from diffusing into the liquid core when they decayed to an atomic structure that was not compatible with nearby solids. This rapid solidification is not unknown in nature, but I don't have any reason to expect it to have happened in the core.

Njorl
 
  • #8
Very very interesting idea, I think it would get everyone thinking again if soemthing we seemed so sure about turned out diffrently
 

1. What is the nuclear heart of the Earth?

The nuclear heart of the Earth refers to the core of our planet, which is composed of a solid inner core and a liquid outer core. It is primarily made up of iron and nickel, and is the source of Earth's magnetic field.

2. How is the nuclear heart of the Earth studied?

Scientists study the nuclear heart of the Earth using a variety of techniques, such as seismic waves, magnetic field measurements, and computer simulations. They also study rocks brought up from deep within the Earth's interior through volcanic eruptions or drilling.

3. What is the temperature and pressure like in the nuclear heart of the Earth?

The temperature in the nuclear heart of the Earth can reach up to 5,400 degrees Celsius, which is hotter than the surface of the sun. The pressure can reach up to 3.6 million times the pressure at the Earth's surface.

4. What is the significance of studying the nuclear heart of the Earth?

Studying the nuclear heart of the Earth can help us understand the Earth's formation and evolution, as well as the processes that drive plate tectonics and the movement of continents. It can also provide insights into the composition of other planets and help us predict natural disasters such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.

5. Are there any potential dangers associated with studying the nuclear heart of the Earth?

There are some potential hazards associated with studying the nuclear heart of the Earth, such as exposure to high temperatures and pressures. However, scientists take necessary precautions and use advanced technology to safely study this area of the Earth's interior.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
6
Views
542
Writing: Input Wanted Great Lakes Earth Map
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
6
Views
2K
Writing: Read Only Great Lakes Earth
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
135
Views
8K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top