Georeactors. - Page 2

Neverfly · #31 (**permalink**) 09-January-2008, 10:43 AM

Interesting read though...

I had never heard of this theory before.

Some of these old threads that fade away are a bit of cliff hangers. I wonder what (if anything) has become of this theory in the last three years?

01101001 · #32 (**permalink**) 09-January-2008, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neverfly

Some of these old threads that fade away are a bit of cliff hangers. I wonder what (if anything) has become of this theory in the last three years?

The poster, the interviewer, did his own fade away by getting banned -- and liked it so much that he asked for many more.

Wikipedia: Georeactor has a decent summary.

Quote:

The georeactor is a proposal by Dr. J. Marvin Herndon that a nuclear fission reactor may exist and operate at the Earth's core and serves as the energy source for the geomagnetic field. Dr. Herndon had earlier proposed the existence of fission reactors at the centers of large gaseous planets such as Jupiter.

A more accepted theory that explains how the magnetic field may be generated is the Dynamo theory.
[...]
Dr. Herndon's theory is not accepted by most geologists. However, Rob de Meijer and associates at the Nuclear Physics Institute in Groningen, the Netherlands, have proposed an experiment to measure the antineutrino flux from the Earth's core which they believe will validate Herndon's hypothesis. At present they are seeking funding for the project, which involves development of an underground laboratory in Curaçao.

Halcyon Dayz · #33 (**permalink**) 11-January-2008, 07:33 AM

Curaçao, eh?

What's wrong with an old salt-mine? Plenty of those around here.

Wrong climate?

William · #34 (**permalink**) 12-January-2008, 03:14 AM

Has anyone else looked into this issue? It is interesting that Uranus does not radiate.

Quote:

But in the late 1960's astronomers found that Jupiter radiates about twice as much energy into space as it receives from the sun. Later, Saturn and Neptune were also found to radiate prodigious amounts of internally generated energy. ...

I wonder what are the competing hypotheses to explain the radiation.

William · #35 (**permalink**) 12-January-2008, 03:33 AM

Uranus' was expected to have a magnetic field that was aligned with its axis. Uranus' rotational period is 17 hours and its axis of rotation points towards the sun. (i.e. Uranus' rotational axis it tilted about 90 degrees.)

What Voyager found was not expected and I would assume is a puzzle. Uranus' magnetic field is almost perpendicular to the planetary orbital plane, roughly 90 degrees off of Uranus' rotational axis.

http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/personn...s/ura_mag.html

As this article notes Uranus has a magnetic field that is 50 times stronger than the earth's magnetic field.

AndreasJ · #36 (**permalink**) 12-January-2008, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by William

I wonder what are the competing hypotheses to explain the radiation.

The textbook answer would be ongoing gravitational compactification and stratification.

Warren Platts · #37 (**permalink**) 18-January-2008, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Herndon

But in the late 1960's astronomers found that Jupiter radiates about twice as much energy into space as it receives from the sun. . . . For twenty years planetary scientists, believing that they had considered and eliminated all possible planetary-scale energy sources, pronounced that the extra energy being radiated was from the original gravitational collapse some 4.5 billion years ago. When I started thinking about the problem around 1990, that explanation did not make sense to me. Jupiter is 98% hydrogen and helium; both of these gases are extremely efficient heat transfer media. Then I realized that each of the Gas Giants had all of the necessary ingredients for a planetary-scale nuclear reactor, an energy source that had not been previously considered.

Quote:

Originally Posted by William

I wonder what are the competing hypotheses to explain the radiation.

The problem with Jupiter is not explaining why it radiates as much energy as it does. The problem is explaining why it doesn't radiate more energy than it does. That is, there isn't an unexplained heat source; rather, there is an unexplained cooling source.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode