Getting closer to Ice-Nine...
"...The boffins detected ice VII..."
Oh noes...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Cradle
Water covers most of the Earth’s surface and flows deep beneath it as well. But how deep it travels is unknown. A team of scientists have found evidence that the liquid may exist at depths 400 miles below the crust, and maybe even penetrating within the Earth’s lower mantle. A paper published in Science describes the discovery …
This post has been deleted by its author
Shirley - water and depth should be measured in fathoms?
200 miles = 176k fathoms
There is a Google calculator that converts miles to fathoms. It doesn't do barleycorns, rods, poles, links, chains, furlongs, and perches though.
Would that be the standard perch or the Irish perch?
One barleycorn = 0.001 690 perch ... or 0.001 328 Irish perch
Source: The imaginatively named onlineconversion.com ...
It's worth reading Twenty Thousand Leagues Under The Sea to learn not only that it's about the distance travelled, but also that it's a decent book. Unsurprisingly, they do spend a lot of time talking about fish, and various sequences are nicely tense.
There is a Google calculator that converts miles to fathoms. It doesn't do barleycorns, rods, poles, links, chains, furlongs, and perches though.
Kids these days.
$ units
Currency exchange rates from www.timegenie.com on 2017-02-21
2926 units, 109 prefixes, 88 nonlinear units
You have: 200 miles
You want: fathoms
* 176000
/ 5.6818182e-06
You have: 200 miles
You want: barleycorns
* 38016066
/ 2.6304668e-08
You have: 200 miles
You want: rods
* 64000
/ 1.5625e-05
You have: 200 miles
You want: poles
* 64000.111
/ 1.5624973e-05
You have: 200 miles
You want: links
* 1600000
/ 6.25e-07
You have: 200 miles
You want: chains
* 16000
/ 6.25e-05
You have: 200 miles
You want: furlongs
* 1600
/ 0.000625
You have: 200 miles
You want: perches
* 64000
/ 1.5625e-05
(Hey, Reg, are we ever going to get a fix for the styling of preformatted paragraphs?)
Fathom = Water + Raquel Welch
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061653/
"Complaints about "miles" should be in another language"
Seeing as the pretentious prats doing the complaining about miles[0] primarily seem to prefer to have everything translated into Metric, I propose the only language allowed to be used when complaining about such things here on ElReg be French. Make for an easy wet-ware bozo filter.
"so they can't be understood."
Or easily understood, if not summarily ignored as "noise".
[0] And other units, mostly invented by the English.
Probably because 90% of El Reg's readers are from either the UK or the US where we measure distances in miles on maps, road network signage, mileage instrumentation in vehicles, and insurance for the same.
Personally if somebody told me the distance to the next town in kilometers i'd be mentally converting it into miles, and i'm sure i'm not the only one.
Earth has 800,000 cubic miles of Uranium and 1.2 million cubic miles of Thorium, both fission material. In addition all metallic elements undergo fission per the Bridgeman effect. Fission produces heat and elemental atoms, which are forced into elemental atoms. Groundwater does NOT seep down, it is created below and forced UP.
"Becoming A TOTAL Earth Science Skeptic" at FauxScienceSlayer(.)com
Elitists lie about everything
So everything we know is wrong, and you are our one true path to enlightenment? Thanks for the offer, but I think I'll pass.
Reminds me of an anecdote:"I was at a party and heard some people laughing about the stupid drunk, so I jumped up on the table and looked around to spot who it was ... and everyone but me was drunk!"
This post has been deleted by its author
@FauxScienceSlayer
elemental atoms, which are forced into elemental atoms
Don't forget the molten rock condensate!!!
https://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/3290041
Virtually ALL of Earth's groundwater is fission produced, either from Hydrogen and Oxygen daughter atoms, forced into molecules under high heat and pressure, or condensed from molten rock.
"Give it a couple of hours and the Creationists will be all over this, proclaiming it as evidence for God's fountains of the deep causing the flooding of the Earth in 40 days and 40 nights. Hallelujah!"
There's geological evidence of the historical existence of a global flood, as can be witnessed in specific sedimentary layers; that's simple geological fact.
As to what caused such a flooding event, that's obviously open to speculation and various theories.
It would not be an unreasonable theory to propose that the various discoveries in recent years pointing to the presence of large amounts of water deep in the crust or mantle could potentially move upwards in the event of a very significant tectonic or Yellowstone caldera-type of event.
Other theories too, but to poo-poo it 100% out of hand like you have, you're not being scientific, more likely instead that you possess some kind of fundamental belief or opinion.
Possibly stretching the possibilities of science, but it would be nice to know the isotopic signature of the water to see if it is possibly oceanic water dragged down into the Mantle as hydrated minerals in subducting oceanic slabs. It looks increasingly likely that slabs go deep into the Mantle, possibly as far as the Core Mantle boundary before they finally disappear, so they should be taking water with them.
"My thought was subduction, too. I imagine the authors did. Unfortunately, I can't find a preprint."
I have access to the paper, although it's far from my field. The authors do mention plate subduction as a source of water in the upper mantle, down to about 410km depth, but say we don't really know much about anything past that. This work seems to be one of only a few trying to figure out how much water is down there at all, while figuring out where it actually came from is presumably a step beyond that which hasn't really been addressed yet. I assume there are theories about it, but this paper suggests there's very little physical evidence so far.
"while figuring out where it actually came"
Well, if it wasn't here already, as part of the material from which the Earth was formed, then it came from somewhere else. However, if there was no water here already and it did come from somewhere else, then where did it come from, and why was the water there and not here? Furthermore, if there was no water here, and it was all over there, it implies a big difference between here and there, which in turn implies a great distance between here and there, and this would mean there had to be a mechanism for transporting it from there to here. Even furthermore, if the water was transported from there to here, what proportion of the water that was there ended up here? Unless there was a clear reason that the water that was there preferentially ended up here then the water that was there would have been distributed everywhere, so we should expect proportionately as much water from there as ended up here to end up everywhere else.
Last year, I think it was, an article was published in (New Scientist?), in which it was shown using computer modelling, that under huge pressure deep down beneath the earth’s crust, elements/compounds such as silica could be transformed into water.
Finding water in diamonds supports this hypothesis.
"Although the diamonds show water probably exists deep below..."
Erm, no, they don't. What they show is that water probably existed AT THE TIME THE DIAMONDS WERE FORMED. So unless you can prove those diamonds were created in the last few hundred years (or less), we still don't know the CURRENT water status "deep below".