another interesting article

Help Support Gold Refining Forum:

micronationcreation

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 5, 2011
Messages
137
Location
N/A
http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/science-environment-14827624

If only one of these could land in your back garden :lol:
 

4metals

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
4,489
Location
northeast USA
It would be interesting to hear from a geologist how the gold from meteorites has melded into the geological formations we see associated with gold deposits.
 

shaftsinkerawc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
236
Location
Alaska
My experience shows the nuggets to be breaking up, not getting bigger. I don't accept the articles findings.
 

micronationcreation

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 5, 2011
Messages
137
Location
N/A
Yes, it doesn't sit right with me neither, theories balanced on theories.

There is quite a good documentary about the earths core if your into that sort of thing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0148vph/Horizon_20112012_The_Core/
 

shadybear

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
174
Location
Steubenville,Ohio
That doesnt seem right to me either.
if it were true than wouldnt you find platinum and other PM's
where you find gold, but this doesnt happen but in rare locations.
Wouldnt there be alot of PM's around known meteor sites or are they saying only old meteors
have PM's
 

Palladium

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
5,582
Location
USA
http://www.scribd.com/doc/22392456/Asteriods-Platinum

Platinum from the NEAs:

Fueled by fears of a planetary impact catastrophe, asteroids are being catalogued at an accelerating pace. Nearly half of the 816 known near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) were discovered during the last two years (Evans, et. al., 2000). Much work remains, however, as less than 16% of the estimated population of asteroids greater than one kilometer in size have been located. The identification of mineral products including high-grade platinum has caused excitement in the planetary science community, pointing toward a source of low-cost materials for industrial space development (Cox, 1964, O’Leary, 1988, Lewis, 1996 and Sagan, 1998). While asteroid mining is clearly not feasible today, there are indications that rapid growth in aerospace technology and infrastructure could make commercial mining possible in the 20-year time frame.

Geology of Asteroidal Platinum Resources:
The geological characteristics of NEAs are governed by the environment in which they formed. Most asteroids condensed just after the formation of the solar system, as reflected by their age (~4.7 Billion Years). The environment allowed larger bodies, especially planets, to differentiate gravitationally - pulling PGMs as well as iron and nickel to the core. There is a strong correlation to the thermal environment as well. Bodies forming at the edge of the solar system cooled more rapidly, slowing or stopping this differentiation process. Smaller bodies did not develop sufficient mass for gravity separation, and reflect the original distribution of elements from the supernova event. PGMs are quite abundant in these small bodies, called Chondrites after their agglomeritic nature, and hinting at the original distribution of elements in the solar nebulae. Note the similarity to the formation of Earth, especially the sequestering of heavy elements in the planetary core. While PGMs may have been abundant during stellar formation, they are highly depleted in Earth’s crust, and are found in only a few locations on its surface.

Meteorite samples are the primary source of detailed data for asteroid chemical composition, especially trace metals. Platinum, rhodium, iridium, rhenium, osmium, ruthenium, palladium, germanium and gold are found in significant concentrations (ranging from 1.1-30.7 grams per ton for each metal) across a variety of meteorite samples attributed to the LL Chondrites (see Table 3). Up to 63.8 grams per ton of platinum is found in the top two percent of iron meteorite samples (both the 90th and 98th percentile PGM concentrations are reported for the ‘best’ iron meteorites in Table 3). Strong statistical continuity exists for the Chondrites examined by the planetary science community, providing a basis for the expectation that certain large asteroids match the chemical abundance of the meteorite samples (it is hypothesized that these asteroids are the source of the meteorites). However, without a sample returned from an asteroid, the evidence remains circumstantial. Detailed asteroid reconnaissance by spacecraft is has dramatically improved geologic models, but has only been carried out recently for a handful of asteroids. Spectral analysis of data from telescopic observation can sometimes be used to infer general geological characteristics such as bulk composition for newer asteroid discoveries.

Snip.....
 

Geo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Messages
6,827
Location
Decatur,Ala.
thanks. 8) very interesting stuff. i love vulcanism and geology. well duh. :lol:
 

rasanders22

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
137
How else would all of the PM's on our planet have gotten here? Most metals are made from stars going super nova. I think to make gold you need tempuratures of around 600 million ferenhite (I think thats about 320 million C for the rest of the world).
 

shaftsinkerawc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
236
Location
Alaska
I don't know about making gold but it does get moved around in the earth by subduction and hydrothermal fluids as well as weathering and reconstitution in stream placers. The 2 different assays (F.G. Hawley vs American Smelting & Refining) on the Melrose Meteorite? don't even come close to agreeing with one another.
 

rasanders22

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
137
An interesting thought. I stated earlier that it take abour 600 million degrees to make gold in a star. Well in labratory conditions they have reached temps up around 2 billion degrees. If they could do that I wonder if they would be able to create gold in a lab. Im sure it would not be cost effective to do it, but just to say "We made gold out of nothing" would be pretty darn awsome.
 

Harold_V

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
8,369
If memory serves, it requires a nuclear reaction, which, in the case of stars going super nova, temperature is the result of said reaction. I don't think it's the temperature that matters, but the reaction. Certainly could be wrong, considering I know nothing about physics.

Harold
 

NoIdea

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
602
Location
New Zealand
rasanders22 said:
but just to say "We made gold out of nothing" would be pretty darn awsome.

First law of thermodynamics (paraphrased): Matter can neither be created nor destroyed, just altered.

Deano
 

Harold_V

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
8,369
rasanders22 said:
but just to say "We made gold out of nothing" would be pretty darn awsome.
Unfortunately, that's not how it works. Everything has its origin in hydrogen. Where the hell hydrogen came from, I do not know. Likely converting energy to mass, with the first nuclear reaction. Jastro explains there's three of them, each one forming new elements from other elements.

So then, from where did the energy come?

I'm not a God critter, but, in this case, ask God :!:

The *Big Bang* theory. The universe, ever expanding, and at an increasing rate, with all objects moving away from one another. Stars going supernova, creating black holes, from which it is reputed that nothing can escape. <very heavy sigh>

I have a headache.

Harold
 

Geo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Messages
6,827
Location
Decatur,Ala.
id like a side order of alchemy. anyone figure out how to turn lead into gold yet? :lol:
 

rasanders22

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
137
I did not mean "nothing" . I should have said making gold out of something that wasn't gold would be a pretty darn cool think to do.

As far as black holes and that area, don't beat yourself up. Our world's smartest physicists cant even exexplain why gravity works. sure we can measure it and accuratly predict how it will interact with objects, but the fundamental reason why is still unknown. The best theory out there is a particle called the highs boson particle carry the force of gravity. However we still have not been able to detect it.

The idea I am really interested is the idea of zero point energy. Steven Hawking proposed the idea that the vacuum of space is full of virtual paired particles that pop into our inverse then anhilate each other shortly afterwards. If they are kept from anhiliating each other then there is a force created. If you have 2 parallel plates inside a vacuum that are close to eachother, there will be a force pushing the plates apart (or together I forgot). Researchers have actually done this and have measured a force being created being created from this theory.

If you are interested in reading more about this, it is called Hawking radiation and is a product of his work into black holes. He came up with the idea that for every bit of matter a black hole takes it, it must radiate an equal amount out. This can only happen if hawking radiation at the event horizon exists. One particle falls back into the black hold, one escapes into space.

Crazy stuff I know. I would love to study physics but the pay isn't that great and I really suck at the math portion of physics.
 

macfixer01

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
1,019
Location
Michigan
rasanders22 said:
I did not mean "nothing" . I should have said making gold out of something that wasn't gold would be a pretty darn cool think to do.

As far as black holes and that area, don't beat yourself up. Our world's smartest physicists cant even exexplain why gravity works. sure we can measure it and accuratly predict how it will interact with objects, but the fundamental reason why is still unknown. The best theory out there is a particle called the highs boson particle carry the force of gravity. However we still have not been able to detect it.

The idea I am really interested is the idea of zero point energy. Steven Hawking proposed the idea that the vacuum of space is full of virtual paired particles that pop into our inverse then anhilate each other shortly afterwards. If they are kept from anhiliating each other then there is a force created. If you have 2 parallel plates inside a vacuum that are close to eachother, there will be a force pushing the plates apart (or together I forgot). Researchers have actually done this and have measured a force being created being created from this theory.

If you are interested in reading more about this, it is called Hawking radiation and is a product of his work into black holes. He came up with the idea that for every bit of matter a black hole takes it, it must radiate an equal amount out. This can only happen if hawking radiation at the event horizon exists. One particle falls back into the black hold, one escapes into space.

Crazy stuff I know. I would love to study physics but the pay isn't that great and I really suck at the math portion of physics.


Amen bro, I'm fascinated with physics too but was always daunted by the higher math required. I recall seeing a show on History or Discovery maybe, on Hawking's updated theory of black holes. The upshot I believe is that black holes go through phases when they're actively swallowing matter and when the emitted Hawking Radiation builds up enough that it pushes matter away from the event horizon and they go through a dormant or non-feeding phase. He also says that black holes basically evaporate by release of Hawking Radiation over time and will eventually disappear altogether. The two plates you mentioned both having mass and thus distorting space-time, would attract each other. In the universe at large, dark matter (if it even exists), may also be causing an overall repulsion effect. It gets curiouser and curiouser.

As far as the assays someone mentioned, it's been a few days since I read the article but I believe it said the gold appeared to be distributed non-uniformely within the meteorite? However with pieces being found 26 miles away though, one has to wonder if they definitely even came from the same meteorite? They did tests available to them back then, I believe it said they were microscopically similar. I wonder if any modern tests have ever been run to confirm they were all from the same meteorite? We're taught all the elements heavier than iron are only formed in the most massive stars. I always assumed when Earth was formed the primordial clouds of gas and dust it coalesced out of came from explosions of previously exploded massive stars, and that all the normal complement of elements came from that. That theory does ignore however why all the most dense metals didn't migrate directly to the core while the Earth was still molten though? We know the crust is always upwelling and being subducted again but that doesn't even near the core. It makes sense that most PM's must have come from meteorites over time to remain in the crust.

macfixer01
 
Top