Nuclear is Our Future Pro-nuclear activist group

Yes, Stewart, that’s how I react to smug defeatist self adulation. I do not apologize. Instead you ought to apologize for setting “Little Stewie’s Opinion” above the movement. Now, as far as your ill researched, unfounded tags “junk, crackpot, whatever”

Check out these funded, peer reviewed studies.

I guess DOE, NSF and Berkley are backing witch doctors these days? How can they be so foolish? Or is Peterson the only medicine man allowed in Stewartville?

I would say that these papers hold a bit more water, than your brief verbal “thought experiment” (as expressed in your dismissive post, above)…Perhaps if you added some calculations, some empirical evidence, and/or some numerical simulations, and wrote up your findings, submitted of course for peer review, perhaps then we could compare your dismissals seriously to these multiple similar proposals (below). Until you’ve jumped that hurdle, these must stand as infinitely more convincing than your blog post.

Do you not agree?
Or should everybody just listen to S.P., regardless?

http://www.physlink.com/News/121103PotassiumCore.cfm
Radioactive material may be primary heat source in Earth’s core Radioactive potassium, common enough on Earth, appears also to be a substantial source of heat in the Earth’s core, according to recent experiments by University of California, Berkeley, geophysicists. Radioactive potassium, uranium and thorium are thought to be the three main sources of heat in the Earth’s interior, aside from that generated by the formation of the planet. Together, the heat keeps the mantle actively churning and the core generating a protective magnetic field. But geophysicists have found much less potassium in the Earth’s crust and mantle than would be expected based on the composition of rocky meteors that supposedly formed the Earth. If, as some have proposed, the missing potassium resides in the Earth’s iron core, how did an element as light as potassium get there, especially since iron and potassium don’t mix? Kanani Lee, who recently earned her Ph.D. from UC Berkeley, and UC Berkeley professor of earth and planetary science Raymond Jeanloz have discovered a possible answer. They’ve shown that at the high pressures and temperatures in the Earth’s interior, potassium can form an alloy with iron never before observed. During the planet’s formation, this potassium-iron alloy could have sunk to the core, depleting potassium in the overlying mantle and crust and providing a radioactive potassium heat source in addition to that supplied by uranium and thorium in the core. Lee created the new alloy by squeezing iron and potassium between the tips of two diamonds to temperatures and pressures characteristic of 600-700 kilometers below the surface - 2,500 degrees Celsius and nearly 4 million pounds per square inch, or a quarter of a million times atmospheric pressure. “Our new findings indicate that the core may contain as much as 1,200 parts per million potassium -just over one tenth of one percent,” Lee said. “This amount may seem small, and is comparable to the concentration of radioactive potassium naturally present in bananas. Combined over the entire mass of the Earth’s core, however, it can be enough to provide one-fifth of the heat given off by the Earth.”
Lee and Jeanloz will report their findings on Dec. 10, at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, and in an article accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters. “With one experiment, Lee and Jeanloz demonstrated that potassium may be an important heat source for the geodynamo, provided a way out of some troublesome aspects of the core’s thermal evolution, and further demonstrated that modern computational mineral physics not only complements experimental work, but that it can provide guidance to fruitful experimental explorations,” said Mark Bukowinski, professor of earth and planetary science at UC Berkeley, who predicted the unusual alloy in the mid-1970s. Geophysicist Bruce Buffett of the University of Chicago cautions that more experiments need to be done to show that iron can actually pull potassium away from the silicate rocks that dominate in the Earth’s mantle. “They proved it would be possible to dissolve potassium into liquid iron,” Buffet said. “Modelers need heat, so this is one source, because the radiogenic isotope of potassium can produce heat and that can help power convection in the core and drive the magnetic field. They proved it could go in. What’s important is how much is pulled out of the silicate. There’s still work to be done ” If a significant amount of potassium does reside in the Earth’s core, this would clear up a lingering question - why the ratio of potassium to uranium in stony meteorites (chondrites), which presumably coalesced to form the Earth, is eight times greater than the observed ratio in the Earth’s crust. Though some geologists have asserted that the missing potassium resides in the core, there was no mechanism by which it could have reached the core. Other elements like oxygen and carbon form compounds or alloys with iron and presumably were dragged down by iron as it sank to the core. But at normal temperature and pressure, potassium does not associate with iron. Others have argued that the missing potassium boiled away during the early, molten stage of Earth’s evolution. The demonstration by Lee and Jeanloz that potassium can dissolve in iron to form an alloy provides an explanation for the missing potassium. “Early in Earth’s history, the interior temperature and pressure would not have been high enough to make this alloy,” Lee said. “But as more and more meteorites piled on, the pressure and temperature would have increased to the point where this alloy could form.” The existence of this high-pressure alloy was predicted by Bukowinski in the mid-1970s. Using quantum mechanical arguments, he suggested that high pressure would squeeze potassium’s lone outer electron into a lower shell, making the atom resemble iron and thus more likely to alloy with iron. More recent quantum mechanical calculations using improved techniques, conducted with Gerd Steinle-Neumann at the Universität Bayreuth’s Bayerisches Geoinstitüt, confirmed the new experimental measurements. “This really replicates and verifies the earlier calculations 26 years ago and provides a physical explanation for our experimental results,” Jeanloz said. The Earth is thought to have formed from the collision of many rocky asteroids, perhaps hundreds of kilometers in diameter, in the early solar system. As the proto-Earth gradually bulked up, continuing asteroid collisions and gravitational collapse kept the planet molten. Heavier elements – in particular iron - would have sunk to the core in 10 to 100 million years’ time, carrying with it other elements that bind to iron. Gradually, however, the Earth would have cooled off and become a dead rocky globe with a cold iron ball at the core if not for the continued release of heat by the decay of radioactive elements like potassium-40, uranium-238 and thorium-232, which have half-lives of 1.25 billion, 4 billion and 14 billion years, respectively. About one in every thousand potassium atoms is radioactive. The heat generated in the core turns the iron into a convecting dynamo that maintains a magnetic field strong enough to shield the planet from the solar wind. This heat leaks out into the mantle, causing convection in the rock that moves crustal plates and fuels volcanoes. Balancing the heat generated in the core with the known concentrations of radiogenic isotopes has been difficult, however, and the missing potassium has been a big part of the problem. One researcher proposed earlier this year that sulfur could help potassium associate with iron and provide a means by which potassium could reach the core. The experiment by Lee and Jeanloz shows that sulfur is not necessary. Lee combined pure iron and pure potassium in a diamond anvil cell and squeezed the small sample to 26 gigapascals of pressure while heating the sample with a laser above 2,500 Kelvin (4,
000 degrees Fahrenheit), which is above the melting points of both potassium and iron. She conducted this experiment six times in the high-intensity X-ray beams of two different accelerators - Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Advanced Light Source and the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory - to obtain X-ray diffraction images of the samples’ internal structure. The images confirmed that potassium and iron had mixed evenly to form an alloy, much as iron and carbon mix to form steel alloy. In the theoretical magma ocean of a proto-Earth, the pressure at a depth of 400-1,000 kilometers (270-670 miles) would be between 15 and 35 gigapascals and the temperature would be 2,200-3,000 Kelvin, Jeanloz said. “At these temperatures and pressures, the underlying physics changes and the electron density shifts, making potassium look more like iron,” Jeanloz said. “At high pressure, the periodic table looks totally different.” “The work by Lee and Jeanloz provides the first proof that potassium is indeed miscible in iron at high pressures and, perhaps as significantly, it further vindicates the computational physics that underlies the original prediction,” Bukowinski said. “If it can be further demonstrated that potassium would enter iron in significant amounts in the presence of silicate minerals, conditions representative of likely core formation processes, then potassium could provide the extra heat needed to explain why the Earth’s inner core hasn’t frozen to as large a size as the thermal history of the core suggests it should.” Jeanloz is excited by the fact that theoretical calculations are now not only explaining experimental findings at high pressure, but also predicting structures. “We need theorists to identify interesting problems, not only check our results after the experiment,” he said. “That’s happening now. In the past half a dozen years, theorists have been making predictions that experimentalists are willing to spend a few years to demonstrate.” The work was funded by the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy.

Nuclear georeactor origin of oceanic basalt 3Hey4He, evidence, and implications
Transdyne Corporation, 11044 Red Rock Drive, San Diego, CA 92131
Communicated by Hatten S. Yoder, Jr., Carnegie Institution of Washington, Nuclear georeactor numerical simulation results yield substantial 3He and 4He production and 3Hey4He ratios relative to air (RA) that encompass the entire 2-SD (2s) confidence level range of tabulated measured 3Hey4He ratios of basalts from along the global spreading ridge system. Georeactor-produced 3Hey4He ratios are related to the extent of actinide fuel consumption at time of production
and are high near the end of the georeactor lifetime. Georeactor numerical simulation results and the observed high 3Hey4He ratios
measured in Icelandic and Hawaiian oceanic basalts indicate that the demise of the georeactor is approaching. Within the present level of uncertainty, one cannot say precisely when georeactor demise will occur, whether in the next century, in a million years, or in a billion years from now.

helium u mantle u nuclear reactor u Earth core

Early in 1939, Hahn and Strassmann (1) published their discovery of nuclear fission. Later in the same year, Flu¨gge (2) speculated on the possibility that self-sustaining nuclear
fission chain reactions might have taken place under natural conditions within uranium ore deposits. Applying Fermi’s nuclear reactor theory (3), in 1956 Kuroda (4) demonstrated the
feasibility that thick seams of uranium ore might have undergone sustained nuclear fission 2,000 million years ago or earlier when the relative proportion of 235U was greater. In 1972, French
scientists (5) discovered the intact remains of a natural nuclear fission reactor that had operated 1,800 million years ago in a 0.5-m-thick seam of uranium ore at Oklo, in the Republic of Gabon. Later other reactor zones were discovered in the region (6). In 1992, Herndon (7), applying Fermi’s nuclear reactor theory, demonstrated the feasibility of planetary-scale nuclear fission reactors as energy sources for the giant outer planets, three of which radiate approximately twice as much energy as they each receive from the Sun. Beginning in 1993, Herndon (8–10) demonstrated the feasibility of a planetary-scale nuclear fission reactor at the center of the Earth as the principal energy source for the geomagnetic field and as a contributive energy source for other geodynamic processes, such as plate movement.
In 2001, Hollenbach and Herndon (11) published results of numerical simulations of a deep-Earth nuclear fission reactor, conducted at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, TN, which confirmed the previous considerations of Herndon
(8–10) and demonstrated that 3He and 4He would be produced by the georeactor.

Clarke et al. (12) discovered that 3He and 4He are venting from the Earth’s interior. The 3Hey4He ratio of helium released to the oceans at midoceanic ridges is about eight times greater than in the atmosphere (RyRA 5 8 6 1, where R is the measured value of 3Hey4He and RA is the same ratio measured in air 5 1.4 3 1026), and, therefore, cannot be ascribed to atmospheric contamination. Iceland plume 3Hey4He values have been found (13) as high as ‘37 RA. Natural radioactive decay of uranium and thorium will lead to 4He production; but for three decades geophysicists have been unaware of any mechanism deep within the Earth that can account for substantial 3He production. Lacking knowledge of a deep-source production mechanism, deep-Earth 3He has been assumed to be of primordial origin (12, 13), trapped within the mantle at the time that the Earth formed. In the belief that deep-Earth 3He is primordial, various implications
have been drawn concerning mantle structure and
dynamics (14, 15). But the ratio of primordial 3Hey4He is thought to be ‘1024, a value inferred from gas-rich meteorites (16), which is ‘1 order of magnitude greater than helium released from the mantle. In ascribing a primordial origin to the observed deep-Earth 3Hey4He, the assumption implicitly made is that the primordial component is diluted by a factor of ‘10 with 4He produced by the natural radioactive decay of U and Th in the
mantle andyor in the crust. The alternative suggestion (17), that the 3Hey4He arises instead from cosmic dust, subducted into the mantle, necessitates the assumption that the influx of interplanetary dust particles was considerably greater in ancient times than at present and also necessitates the assumption of a 10-fold
dilution by 4He. Based on nuclear reactor numerical simulation results, Hollenbach and Herndon (11) have suggested instead that the observed deep-source helium is in fact the product of and evidence for a deep-Earth nuclear fission reactor (8–10). Previous georeactor numerical simulations by Hollenbach and
Herndon (11) were conducted at a single power level with the SAS2 analysis sequence contained in the SCALE Code Package from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (18). Because these
codes were developed for use with government and commercial nuclear reactors, cumulative fission yields are reported over time. The 3Hey4He values published by Hollenbach and Herndon
(11) were likewise cumulative. But instantaneous values are more geophysically representative and more revealing. One purpose of the present article is to present instantaneous helium fission yields ratios through steps in time at multiple power
levels, thus facilitating comparison with 3Hey4He ratios measured in deep-source lavas. Another purpose of the present article is to show that the nuclear reactor fission yield helium isotope ratios are not necessarily constant, but rather appear to
be related to the extent of actinide fuel consumption at time of production. Still another purpose of the present article is to address the question of the georeactor lifetime and demise.

Methodology

The background as to why a large portion of the Earth’s reservoir of uranium i
s expected to exist in the core, precipitate, and ultimately collect at the center of the Earth has been set forth in refs. 8–11 and stems from the deep interior of the Earth having a state of oxidation similar to the Abee enstatite chondrite (10). The numerical simulations presented in this article were conducted at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory by using the same computer codes and input parameters as described in Hollenbach
and Herndon (11), the source to refer to for details. Calculations were made with the SAS2 analysis sequence contained in the SCALE Code Package from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (18) that has been developed over 30 years
and has been extensively validated against isotopic analyses of commercial reactor fuels (19–23). The SAS2 sequence invokes Abbreviations: RA, ratio relative to air; TW, Terra-watt.

*E-mail: mherndon@san.rr.com.
http://www.pnas.orgycgiydoiy10.1073ypnas.0437778100 PNAS u
March 18, 2003 u vol. 100 u no. 6 u 3047–3050
Previously, in the absence of knowledge of a deep-Earth
production mechanism for 3He, the assumed primordial origin of
3He was essentially taken as fact with little justification. In light
of the evidence presented for a deep-Earth nuclear reactor origin
of the 3Hey4He of oceanic basalts, the burden of proof now falls
on those who would still argue for a primordial or cosmic origin
to show in detail the specific geophysical circumstances whereby
their individually assumed separate helium reservoirs, differing
in space and time and differing by nearly an order of magnitude,
mix to yield the relatively narrow range of 3Hey4He values shown
in Table 1.
Conclusions previously drawn relating to the geophysical
implications of oceanic basalt helium data, for example, mantle
degassing, should now be reassessed. Such reassessment is
beyond the intent and scope of the present paper. Nevertheless,
the subject of high 3Hey4He values in certain measurements of
so-called plumes, specifically Icelandic and Hawaiian, deserves
comment.
For years efforts have been made to find unambiguously high
3Hey4He values in plume-derived oceanic basalts (25, 26). A
main motivation of those investigations, based on the assumed
primordial origin of the 3He, was to find helium least diluted by
4He. Those investigations should be continued and encouraged,
not for the original motivation, but because the high 3Hey4He
values may very well reflect the beginnings of the demise of the
georeactor and should be investigated.
One shortcoming of oceanic basalt helium isotopic measurements
is that the time of formation of the helium is unknown. But
from Fig. 1, one can see that helium time of formation is
important for assessing the time of demise of the georeactor.
Efforts should be made to address that shortcoming, such as
described below.
At the pressures that prevail within the Earth’s core, density
is a function almost exclusively of atomic number and atomic
mass. Only very light elements might be able to escape from the
core and find transport to the surface through some volcanic
system. Helium is one example. When an actinide nucleus
fissions, it typically splits into two heavy fragments. But once in
approximately every 104 binary fission events, the actinide
nucleus splits into three pieces, two heavy fragments and one
very light fragment. Tritium (3H), which decays into 3He, is a
light fragment from ternary fission. Other ternary fission products,
which should be sought and which might be found in
deep-source oceanic basalts, are shown in Table 3.
All of the isotopes shown in Table 3, with the exception of
10Be, are stable. Generally, light-element, ternary fission products,
if radioactive, have very short half-lives. A notable exception,
however, is 10Be, with a half-life of 1.5 3 106 years. Both
10Be and 9Be are produced by the georeactor with an initial ratio
10Bey9Be 5 6. Although a major technological challenge, serious
efforts should be made to find evidence of nuclear fission
produced beryllium in high 3Hey4He oceanic basalt samples and
then to devise a means for using 10Be to obtain helium time-offormation
data.
In Fig. 1, the 3-TW, 5-TW, and 6-TW nuclear reactors cease
to maintain criticality at 5.6, 4.4, and 4.0 gigayears, respectively.
That these times are very close to the present epoch in the
lifetime of the Earth may well be cause for concern. The
long-standing idea that the Earth will continue much as it has for
at least another 4.5 gigayears stems from the 1940 reasoning of
Birch, who could not have known of the implications (27)
resulting from the 1960’s discovery of nickel silicide and siliconcontaining
metal in enstatite chondrite meteorites. The data
presented in Fig. 1 show that terminal failure of the georeactor
is approaching, but that time frame is not well defined, considering
the uncertainties, and might be as short as 102 years or as
long as 109 years.
Conclusions
The helium observed for the past three decades in oceanic
basalts has been demonstrated to have been produced by a
nuclear reactor at the center of the Earth. The nuclear georeactor
numerical simulation results, even for the simple, preliminary
cases shown, yield a narrow range of 3Hey4He RAs that
encompass the entire 2-SD (2s) confidence level range of
tabulated (24) measured 3Hey4He ratios of basalts from along
the global spreading ridge system and lead to substantial 3He and
4He production.
Nuclear georeactor produced 3Hey4He ratios are not necessarily
constant, but rather appear to be related to the extent of
actinide fuel consumption at time of production. High 3Hey4He
ratios are produced near the end of the georeactor lifetime.
Nuclear georeactor numerical simulation results and the observed
high 3Hey4He ratios measured in Icelandic and Hawaiian
oceanic basalts indicate that the demise of the georeactor is
approaching, but the time is not yet precisely determined. As the
georeactor dies, the geomagnetic field that it presumably powers
after a time will begin to collapse. But unlike previous geomagnetic
collapses, that have restarted and re-energized the field, a time will
come when the actinide fuel of the georeactor is too diminished to
initiate self-sustaining neutron-induced chain reactions; the georeactorwill
die and sometime thereafter the geomagnetic fieldwill die
and will not restart. At some point in time after the georeactor dies,
there will be no geomagnetic field and life on Earth will never be
the same. The challenge now is to determine precisely the time of
georeactor demise. Within the present level of uncertainty, one
cannot say whether that time will come in the next century, in the
next millennium, in a million years, or in a billion years. But one
thing is certain: georeactor demise will occur.
High praise and deep appreciation are extended to the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory and particularly to Drs. D. J. Hill, D. F. Hollenbach,
and C. V. Parks for graciously assisting a small business conducting
unfunded, not-for-profit, but important, basic research.
1. Hahn, O. & Strassmann, F. (1939) Naturwissenschaften 27, 11.
2. Flu¨gge, F. (1939) Naturwissenschaften 27, 402.
3. Fermi, E. (1947) Science 105, 27–32.
4. Kuroda, P. K. (1956) J. Chem. Phys. 25, 781–782.
5. Neuilly, M., Bussac, J., Fre´jacques, C., Nief, G., Vendryes, G. & Yvon, J. (1972)
C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 275, 1847–1849.
6. Gauthier-Lafaye, F., Holliger, P. & Blanc, P. L. (1969) Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 60, 4831–4852.
7. Herndon, J. M. (1992) Naturwissenschaften 79, 7–14.
8. Herndon, J. M. (1993) J. Geomagn. Geoelectr. 45, 423–437.
9. Herndon, J. M. (1994) Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 445, 453–461.
10. Herndon, J. M. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93, 646–648.
11. Hollenbach, D. F. & Herndon, J. M. (2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98,
11085–11090.
12. Clarke, W. B., Beg, M. A. & Craig, H. (1969) Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 6, 213–220.
13. Hilton, D. R., Gro¨nvold, K., Macpherson, C. G. & Castillo, P. R. (1999) Earth
Planet. Sci. Lett. 173, 53–60.
14. O’Nions, P. K. (1987) J. Geol. Soc. London 144, 259–274.
15. McDougall, I. & Honda, M. (1998) in The Earth’s Mantle, ed. Jackson, I.
(Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, U.K.), pp. 159–190.
Table 3. Potential in-core nuclear fission signatures in
oceanic basalts
Isotopes Nuclear data Deep-earth data
3He, 4He Have Have
6Li, 7Li Have Need
9Be, 10Be Have Need
10B, 11B Need Need
20Ne, 21Ne, 22Ne Need Have
Herndon PNAS u March 18, 2003 u vol. 100 u no. 6 u 3049

the ORIGEN-S isotopic generation and depletion code to
calculate concentrations of actinides, fission products, and activation
products simultaneously generated through fission, neutron
absorption, and radioactive decay. The SAS2 sequence
performs the 1D transport analyses at selected time intervals,
calculating an energy f lux spectrum, updating the timedependent
weighted cross sections for the depletion analysis, and
calculating the neutron multiplication of the system.
With the exception of power levels, the values used as input to
the SAS2 are the same used by Hollenbach and Herndon (11)
and are as follows: initial volume of uranium 5 5.6807 3 1017
cm3; initial atom ratio 235Uy238U 5 0.3038; uranium density 5
36.84 gycm3; steady-state fission power 5 3.0 Terra-watts (TW)
(3.0 3 1019 ergsys), 5.0 TW, or 6.0 TW. Time steps of 2 3 106
years were used throughout. Reactor operation was assumed to
have commenced 4.5 3 109 years ago and ceased when the
effective neutron multiplication constant Keff , 1 (3). In each
case, fission products were removed on formation; all 3H is
assumed to have escaped the high neutron flux of the subcore
reactor region before decaying to 3He.
Results and Discussion
From the Oak Ridge National Laboratory numerical simulations,
values of the 3Hey4He ratio, relative to the same ratio in
air, RA, at each 2 3 106 year time step for each power level are
shown in Fig. 1. For comparison, the range of values of the same
ratio, measured in oceanic basalts, is shown in Table 1 at a 2s
confidence level. The entire range of values from oceanic basalts,
shown in Table 1, are produced by self-sustaining nuclear fission
chain reactions as demonstrated by the georeactor numerical
simulations results presented in Fig. 1. The agreement is extremely
strong evidence for a deep-Earth nuclear reactor and the
solution of the three-decade-long mantle helium controversy and
is unlike the alternative view, which rests on assumptions.
In Fig. 1, the upward trend over time of the ratio data for each
power level is principally the consequence of the gradual removal
of 238U, the major source of 4He, by way of its natural
decay and by its conversion to transuranic actinide fuels (a
process of neutron absorption and b-decay termed fuelbreeding).
For a particular power level, the highest 3Hey4He
values represent the most recent production, especially near the
end of the nuclear fission lifetime of the georeactor.
The limitation on the upper limits for 3Hey4He depends on the
georeactor being critical, i.e., able to sustain chain reactions (3),
as its actinide fuel approaches depletion. The main factors
affecting that circumstance are the amount and nature of
the initial actinide subcore and the operating history of the
georeactor.
For the present investigation, no special efforts were made to
extend the range of 3Hey4He values, for example by assuming
variable power levels over time or by including 232Th. One may
reasonably expect, therefore, that the high values for 3Hey4He,
shown in Fig. 1, may not be true upper limits. As with the range
of isotope ratios, the number of atoms of 3He and 4He produced
by the georeactor numerical simulations over the lifetime of its
criticality, as shown in Table 2, may likewise not be true upper
limits. The initial uranium content used for the nuclear reactor
numerical simulations is close to the maximum one might
reasonably expect. Thorium, however, was not included because
of uncertainties in its abundance in the core (11) and may
provide additional fissile material by transmuting to 233U by
neutron capture and double b-decay. But at the present time no
one knows georeactor power level history, and, hence, fuel
consumption in the past. Ultimately, one may hope to narrow the
uncertainty by improved understanding of oceanic basalt helium
data and a deeper knowledge of nuclear georeactor boundary
conditions and dynamics.
Fig. 1. Nuclear reactor numerical simulation results for three power levels
showing the 3Hey4He RAs produced during 2 3 106-year increments over the
lifetime of the georeactor. Each data point represents the ratio of the 3He and
4He fission yields for a single time step. The pronounced upward trend of the
data results from the continuing reduction of 238U, the principle source of 4He,
by decay and breeding.
Table 1. Statistics of 3Hey4He relative to air (RA) of basalts from
along the global spreading ridge system at a 2-SD (2s)
confidence level
Propagating lithospheric tears 11.75 6 5.13 RA
Manus Basin 10.67 6 3.36 RA
New rifts 10.01 6 4.67 RA
Continental rifts or narrow oceans 9.93 6 5.18 RA
South Atlantic seamounts 9.77 6 1.40 RA
Mid-Ocean Ridge Basalt 8.58 6 1.81 RA
EM Islands 7.89 6 3.63 RA
North Chile Rise 7.78 6 0.24 RA
Ridge abandoned islands 7.10 6 2.44 RA
South Chile Rise 6.88 6 1.72 RA
Central Atlantic Islands 6.65 6 1.28 RA
HIMU Islands 6.38 6 0.94 RA
Abandoned ridges 6.08 6 1.80 RA
Adapted from ref. 24.
Table 2. For each power level, over-lifetime-of-georeactor
production of 3He and 4He, in atoms, time of reactor demise,
and over-lifetime-of-georeactor ratios of 3Hey4He
3He atoms 4He atoms Demise in years 3Hey4He RA
3 TW 1.73 3 1036 2.59 3 1041 5.6 3 109 4.77 RA
5 TW 2.21 3 1036 2.26 3 1041 4.4 3 109 6.99 RA
6 TW 2.39 3 1036 2.14 3 1041 4.0 3 109 7.98 RA
3048 u http://www.pnas.orgycgiydoiy10.1073ypnas.0437778100 Herndon
http://athene.as.arizona.edu/~lclose/teaching/images/lect8.html
Lecture 8
History of the Earth
Chapter 3

The dynamic Earth (Introduction to Geophysics)
Most geophysical processes stem from the transfer of heat from the Earth’s core to its surface. 
 
Why is the Earth’s core hot?
1. The radio active decay of Uranium (U), Thorium (Th) and Potassium (K). Each radio active decay (the loss of some neutrons and protons) releases very little energy. However, all the countless events acting together release a large sustained amount of energy overtime. In the core of the Earth this energy is trapped and so the Earth’s core is heated up.
2. As the solid inner grows latent heat is released as the molten outer core freezes to solid rock.  Eventually the whole Earth will be solid and there will be no magnetic field.
3. Residual formation heat. Some of the kinetic energy (1/2mv2) of the impacting planetesimals would have been converted to heat. This residual formation heat helped melt the core initially.
4. Another early heat source was the heat produced as the heavy elements (like Iron (Fe) and Nickel (Ni)) “falling” into the core. This process also generated heat from friction.

The exchange of heat from the hot core to the cool surface is called convection (heat rises, cold sinks). In this manner the whole Earth has a series of big convective cells in its mantel. The result is a complex series of movements of the crust of the Earth as it “rides” on top of the convective cells below.
Plate Tectonics

 
In the 1950s and 60s geophysicists started to develop the concept of Plate Tectonics. Plate tectonics is the theory that describes the motion of the continental plates “riding” the tops of these massive convective cells in the Earth (like a conveyor belt). 
 
Here is a movie showing how the plates have moved the continents
Today these plates move by about 10 cm/yr
• when these plates stick, and then suddenly slip, an Earthquake occurs
• when the heavier ocean crust sinks below the lighter (granite) continental crust (at subjection zones) there will be Earthquakes and Volcanos -the ring of fire around the Pacific is built this way. The Continental crust will also be crumpled, and as a result it is typical to see mountain ranges along the edges of these faults (for example the rocky mountains and the Andes).
• Seamount Island Chains -like the Hawaiian Islands- are made when one hot spot in the Earths mantle leads to continuous eruptions in the same spot. But as the crust moves along the ocean floor a chain of new islands appear.Sometimes (but not often) two continental plates collide. In this case neither plate is heavier and so they both “crumple”. This is occurring today as the Indian plate collides with the Asian plate. The result of this collision is the Himalayas which are the highest mountains on Earth.Why is a hot core important for life on Earth?
1. the surface temperature is higher
2. active volcanism can out gas the atmosphere and oceans
3. volcanism is required to form land masses above the ocean
4. hot spots in the sea floor can be “safe” habitats for life
5. hot springs and even hot water deep in the Earth can harbor life
6. volcanoes play a role in the Earth’s carbon cycle

Basin and Range
Tucson is located in a unique part of the world. The area where we live is called “Basin & Range” geography. This denotes that in Eastern California, Arizona, and New Mexico the terrain is dominated by short (often parallel) mountain ranges with large dry basins between them. This is a highly unusual land form caused by a unique event in the Earth’s history.
• About 20 million years ago the continental plate of the Southwest became “attached” somehow to the pacific coast plate which was moving northwest at the time.
• Added to this was intense heat from magma close to the surface.
• The end result was the unique “Basin & Range disturbance” where the coast of California was pulled away from Arizona by some 38% of its original size.
• The hard cold rock on the top splintered into dozens of parallel ranges, while huge basins over 1 km deep were opened up between the rangeThe whole stretching event took a few million years. Then due to erosion the valleys filled in and the ranges wore down –further filling the valleys.
The reason Tucson exists today is because of the “fossil ground water” trapped in the huge 1 km deep valley basin exists below the city.

Radioactivity in Earth’s core up for a look
vast uranium field serves as natural reactor
Keay Davidson, Chronicle Science Writer
Monday, November 29, 2004

Researchers are preparing to prove the discoveries of San Diego geologist, J. Marvin Herndon, who has found a huge, natural nuclear reactor or “georeactor” — a vast deposit of uranium several miles wide — at Earth’s core, thousands of miles beneath our feet. Herndon and many others believe it explains otherwise puzzling phenomena of planetary science, such as fluctuations in the intensity of Earth’s magnetic field. “Herndon’s idea about (a reactor) located at the center of the Earth, has opened a new era in planetary physics,” said four Russian scientists at Moscow’s Institute for Nuclear Research and Kurchatov Institute in a Jan. 28 paper published online.
It might sound bizarre, the very idea of a “natural” nuclear reactor — a geological version of commercial nuclear power plants such as Pacific Gas and Electric Co.’s Diablo Canyon plant near San Luis Obispo. The reactor at the Earth’s core is just a much bigger and deeper version of an extinct natural nuclear reactor that scientists discovered in a uranium mine in Gabon, Africa, in 1972.
The Gabon reactor consists of geological deposits of uranium that, being radioactive, naturally emit subatomic particles called neutrons. These neutrons split the nuclei in adjacent uranium atoms, causing them to emit more neutrons and, thus, to split even more uranium atoms — in effect, it’s a slow-speed chain reaction. Research in the 1970s revealed that the Gabon reactor operated intermittently for a few million years about 2 billion years ago.
Scientists have long known the planet’s core is divided into a solid and liquid part composed largely of iron, the liquid circulation of which powers Earth’s magnetic field. They have not thought of the core as a repository for uranium, because uranium was not understood until 1945. Although the inevitability of uranium in the core was proposed in 1939 by scientist Walter Elsasser, on the basis that it is the heaviest naturally occurring element, so it would migrate to the core via gravity.
Herndon has demonstrated how a uranium georeactor in Earth’s core explains reality better than older scientific ideas, by providing more convincing ways to:
– Explain the ratios of helium isotopes emitted from volcanoes in Iceland and Hawaii. Those ratios are consistent with the ratios of helium isotopes emitted by a nuclear reactor.
– Explain why planets such as Jupiter emit far more heat than they absorb from the sun. Herndon thinks they, too, have natural nuclear reactors at their cores. (Because heat is continually generated by the decay of radioactive elements in Earth’s crust and mantle — the regions above the core — scientists are uncertain whether Earth emits more heat than it receives from the sun.)
– Explain variations in the intensity of Earth’s magnetic field, which fluctuates over time. Herndon has shown that in the core, the georeactor drives the motions of the liquid iron that creates the magnetic field. But the georeactor varies in activity levels over time. Those activity variations, he believes, might explain intensity variations in Earth’s magnetic field.
Now, Rob de Meijer and associates at the Nuclear Physics Institute in Groningen, the Netherlands, are planning to demonstrate Herndon’s proposals. They’re drawing blueprints for a large device that could detect ghostly particles called antineutrinos that have escaped from Earth’s core. When put into operation, it will capture antineutrinos that would fly through the roughly 4,000 miles of solid rock and emerge at the Earth’s surface.
The European scientists have proposed drilling a shaft more than 1,000 feet deep into the island of Curacao in the Caribbean. They hope to lower into the shaft devices called photomultipliers, which could detect particles from the hypothetical deep-Earth georeactor.
The estimated cost: $80 million. In an e-mail to The Chronicle, de Meijer said he is seeking funding from the Dutch government and industrial consortiums. He and his team plan to visit Curacao in January to take the geological samples needed to design the subterranean antineutrino “antenna,” as they call it.
Curacao is a good location for the antineutrino detector because “the island’s rocks have relatively few natural radionuclides that could mask the (antineutrino) signal from the Earth’s core,” the journal Physics World noted in September. The detector could be confused by antineutrinos emitted by commercial nuclear reactors, but Curacao is far enough from the southeastern United States that reactors in Florida won’t affect it.
“Dr. Herndon is a brilliant and original thinker. I agree with his proposal” said geoscientist David Deming of the University of Oklahoma.
“The problem with most scientists working today is that they have no knowledge of the history of science,” Deming adds. “As late as 1955, continental drift was regarded as the equivalent of alien abductions, Bigfoot and the Loch Ness m
onster. By 1970, continental drift was an accepted part of the new theory of plate tectonics.”
Richard Muller, a noted physicist and author at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley. Since the 1970s, Muller has done pioneering research in diverse fields, including cosmology and planetary sciences.
“Herndon’s discovery is a very positive contribution to deep Earth science. He raises issues that are worth exploring at some length. ” Muller adds. “I consider his work to be ‘out of the box’ thinking, and as such, it is valuable as a step forward in our understanding of reality.”
On a side note, in case you’re wondering: Unlike the planet-busting reactor of Superman lore, neither the Gabon reactor nor Herndon’s hypothetical deep-Earth reactors could explode like atomic bombs. A-bombs require highly concentrated amounts of fissionable materials that are explosively compressed together in a fraction of a second — far faster than the snail’s-pace processes that would be characteristic of the natural reactors.
Herndon received his bachelor’s degree in physics at UC San Diego in 1970. He studied nuclear chemistry and meteorites in graduate school at Texas A&M, where he received his doctoral degree for a thesis on meteorites. Operating as an independent scientist, over the years, he has published papers in prestigious journals, including the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. His main allies are non-Americans, like the de Meijer team. On Dec. 16, Herndon is scheduled to deliver the prestigious annual “Christmas Lecture” at the European Commission’s Institute for Transuranium Elements in Karlsruhe, Germany. It is felt that the huge antinuclear bias in American society is preventing other U.S. academics from getting on board, as they might lose tenure positions or funding by bucking the strong academic antinuke culture on this issue. Had his two sons — now physicians — planned to become scientists, he says, “I would have steered them away from it because you can’t make a living and do legitimate science; you have to ‘howl with the wolves’ or you don’t survive. This is a sad testament to our times. There’s something very wrong in American science.”
Herndon’s proposal
According to traditional theory, the core of Earth consists of iron. The SanDiego scientist J. Marvin Herndon has argued that a large deposit of uranium also exists in the core, where it powers a natural nuclear reactor or “georeactor.” Herndon believes the nuclear process is responsible for variations in the intensity of Earth’s magnetic field.
During the radioactive decays, the georeactor releases ghostly particles called antineutrinos, which fly through thousands of miles of solid rock to Earth’s surface. Scientists will test Herndon’s georeactor by using special instruments to detect the antineutrinos as they pass through the outer crust.
Sources: nuclearplanet.com; http://www.ansto.gov.au/edu/about/about_neutron.htm;
Other scientists have expanded Herndon’s proposal to include Thorium and Potassium.
nasa
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/29/MNGPIA17BL45.DTL

http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=000B2C71-BCF0-1C71-9EB7809EC588F2D7
Why is the earth’s core so hot? And how do scientists measure its temperature?

Jeff Atwell
Mount Vernon, Ohio

Quentin Williams, associate professor of earth sciences at the University of California at Santa Cruz offers this explanation:
There are three main sources of heat in the deep earth: (1) heat from when the planet formed and accreted, which has not yet been lost; (2) frictional heating, caused by denser core material sinking to the center of the planet; and (3) heat from the decay of radioactive elements.
It takes a rather long time for heat to move out of the earth. This occurs through both “convective” transport of heat within the earth’s liquid outer core and solid mantle and slower “conductive” transport of heat through nonconvecting boundary layers, such as the earth’s plates at the surface. As a result, much of the planet’s primordial heat, from when the earth first accreted and developed its core, has been retained.
The amount of heat that can arise through simple accretionary processes, bringing small bodies together to form the proto-earth, is large: on the order of 10,000 kelvins (about 18,000 degrees Farhenheit). The crucial issue is how much of that energy was deposited into the growing earth and how much was reradiated into space. Indeed, the currently accepted idea for how the moon was formed involves the impact or accretion of a Mars-size object with or by the proto-earth. When two objects of this size collide, large amounts of heat are generated, of which quite a lot is retained. This single episode could have largely melted the outermost several thousand kilometers of the planet.
Additionally, descent of the dense iron-rich material that makes up the core of the planet to the center would produce heating on the order of 2,000 kelvins (about 3,000 degrees F). The magnitude of the third main source of heat–radioactive heating–is large, but quantitatively uncertain. The precise abundances of radioactive elements (primarily potassium, uranium and thorium) are is poorly known in the deep earth.
In sum, there was no shortage of heat in the early earth, and the planet’s inability to cool off quickly results in the continued high temperatures of the Earth’s interior. In effect, not only do the earth’s plates act as a blanket on the interior, but not even convective heat transport in the solid mantle provides a particularly efficient mechanism for heat loss. The planet does lose some heat through the processes that drive plate tectonics, especially at mid-ocean ridges. For comparison, smaller bodies such as Mars and the Moon show little evidence for recent tectonic activity or volcanism.
We derive our primary estimate of the temperature of the deep earth from the melting behavior of iron at ultrahigh pressures. We know that the earth’s core depths from 2,886 kilometers to the center at 6,371 kilometers (1,794 to 3,960 miles), is predominantly iron, with some contaminants. How? The speed of sound through the core (as measured from the velocity at which seismic waves travel across it) and the density of the core are quite similar to those seen in of iron at high pressures and temperatures, as measured in the laboratory. Iron is the only element that closely matches the seismic properties of the earth’s core and is also sufficiently abundant present in sufficient abundance in the universe to make up the approximately 35 percent of the mass of the planet present in the core.
The earth’s core is divided into two separate regions: the liquid outer core and the solid inner core, with the transition between the two lying at a depth of 5,156 kilometers (3,204 miles). Therefore, If we can measure the melting temperature of iron at the extreme pressure of the boundary between the inner and outer cores, then this lab temperature should reasonably closely approximate the real temperature at this liquid-solid interface. Scientists in mineral physics laboratories use lasers and high-pressure devices called diamond-anvil cells to re-create these hellish pressures and temperatures as closely as possible.
Other articles in this field:

  
Measurement of Neutrino Oscillation with KamLAND: Evidence of Spectral Distortion - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 31 »
T Araki, K Eguchi, S Enomoto, K Furuno, K Ichimura … - Physical Review Letters, 2005 - APS
Measurement of Neutrino Oscillation with KamLAND: Evidence of Spectral Distortion.
T. Araki 1 , K. Eguchi 1 , S. Enomoto 1 , K. Furuno … 
Cited by 169 - Related Articles - Web Search
Neutrino geophysics at Baksan I: Possible detection of georeactor antineutrinos - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 8 »
GV Domogatsky, VI Kopeikin, LA Mikaelyan, VV Sinev - Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2005 - Springer
Page 1. Physics
of Atomic Nuclei, Vol. 68, No. 1, 2005, pp. 69–72. From
Yadernaya Fizika, Vol. 68, No. 1, 2005, pp. 70–73. Original … 
Cited by 10 - Related Articles - Web Search
Quest for a nuclear georeactor - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 9 »
RJ de Meijer, ER van der Graaf, KP Jungmann - Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 2004 - Elsevier
Quick Search: within All Full-text Sources Quick Search searches abstracts, titles,
keywords, and authors. Click here for more information. … 
Cited by 8 - Related Articles - Web Search
Background for Terrestrial Antineutrino Investigations: Scientific Basis of Knowledge on the … - group of 4 »
JM Herndon - Arxiv preprint hep-ph/0407148, 2004 - arxiv.org
Page 1. Background for Terrestrial Antineutrino Investigations: Scientific Basis
of Knowledge on the Composition of the Deep Interior of the Earth … 
Cited by 7 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Solar System Formation Deduced from Observations of Matter - group of 3 »
JM Herndon - Arxiv preprint astro-ph/0408151, 2004 - arxiv.org
Page 1. 1 Solar System Formation Deduced from Observations of Matter J. Marvin Herndon
Transdyne Corporation San Diego, California 92131 USA August 9, 2004 … 
Cited by 7 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Background for Terrestrial Antineutrino Investigations: Radionuclide Distribution, Georeactor … - group of 3 »
JM Herndon, DA Edgerley - Arxiv preprint hep-ph/0501216, 2005 - arxiv.org
Page 1. Background for Terrestrial Antineutrino Investigations: Radionuclide
Distribution, Georeactor Fission Events, and Boundary … 
Cited by 6 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Protoplanetary Earth Formation: Further Evidence and Geophysical Implications - group of 4 »
JM Herndon - Arxiv preprint astro-ph/0408539, 2004 - arxiv.org
Page 1. 1 Protoplanetary Earth Formation: Further Evidence and Geophysical Implications
J. Marvin Herndon Transdyne Corporation San Diego, California 92131 USA … 
Cited by 6 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Geo-Neutrinos: a short review - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 4 »
G Fiorentini, M Lissia, F Mantovani, R Vannucci - Nuclear Physics B (Proceedings Supplements), 2005 - Elsevier
Page 1. Geo-Neutrinos: a short review Gianni Fiorentini a , Marcello Lissia
b , Fabio Mantovani c and Riccardo Vannucci d a Dipartimento … 
Cited by 6 - Related Articles - Web Search
Imaging the Earth’s Interior: the Angular Distribution of Terrestrial Neutrinos - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 6 »
BD Fields, KA Hochmuth - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. Imaging the Earth’s Interior: the Angular Distribution of Terrestrial
Neutrinos BRIAN D. FIELDS Department of Astronomy … 
Cited by 6 - Related Articles - Web Search
Neutrino Geophysics at Baksan (Part II): Possible Studies of Antineutrino-and Radiogenic Heat … - group of 2 »
G Domogatsky, V Kopeikin, L Mikaelyan, V Sinev - Arxiv preprint hep-ph/0409069, 2004 - arxiv.org
Page 1. arXiv:hep-ph/0409069 v2 8 Sep 2004 Neutrino Geophysics at Baksan
(Part II): Possible Studies of Antineutrino- and Radiogenic … 
Cited by 3 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search

All Results

T Araki
B Berger
K Eguchi
S Enomoto
K Furuno
  

  
Inverse beta decay reaction in$^{232}$ Thand$^{233}$ U fission antineutrino flux - group of 4 »
G Domogatski, V Kopeikin, L Mikaelyan, V Sinev - Arxiv preprint hep-ph/0403155, 2004 - arxiv.org
Page 1. arXiv:hep-ph/0403155 v2 17 Mar 2004 Inverse beta decay reaction
in 232 Th and 233 U fission antineutrino flux G. Domogatski … 
Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Experimental Status of Geo-reactor Search with KamLAND Detector - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 3 »
J Maricic - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. Experimental Status of Geo-reactor Search with KamLAND Detector JELENA
MARICIC for KAMLAND COLLABORATION University of Hawaii … 
Related Articles - Web Search
Strategy for Applying Neutrino Geophysics to the Earth Sciences Including Planetary Habitability - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 4 »
NH Sleep - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. Strategy for Applying Neutrino Geophysics to the Earth Sciences
Including Planetary Habitability NORMAN H. SLEEP Department … 
Related Articles - Web Search
Neutrino geophysics at baksan: On searches for antineutrinos and radiogenic-heat sources in the … - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 3 »
GV Domogatsky, VI Kopeikin, LA Mikaelyan, VV Sinev - Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. ISSN 1063-7788, Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2006, Vol. 69, No. 1,
pp. 43–50. c Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2006. Original … 
Related Articles - Web Search - BL Direct
Far Field Monitoring of Rogue Nuclear Activity with an Array of Large Anti-neutrino Detectors - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 4 »
EH Guillian - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. Far Field Monitoring of Rogue Nuclear Activity with an Array of
Large Anti-neutrino Detectors EUGENE H. GUILLIAN Department … 
Related Articles - Web Search
A Geoneutrino Experiment at Homestake - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 6 »
N Tolich, YD Chan, CA Currat, BK Fujikawa, R … - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. A Geoneutrino Experiment at Homestake N. TOLICH, Y. -D. CHAN, CA CURRAT,
BK FUJIKAWA, R. HENNING, KT LESKO and AWP POON Institute … 
Related Articles - Web Search
Probing the Earth’s Interior with the LENA Detector - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 5 »
KA Hochmuth, FV Feilitzsch, TM Undagoitia, L … - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. Probing the Earth’s Interior with the LENA Detector KATHRIN A.
HOCHMUTH Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg … 
Related Articles - Web Search
Georeactor Variability and Integrity - group of 2 »
JM Herndon - Arxiv preprint physics/0510030, 2005 - arxiv.org
Page 1. Georeactor Variability and Integrity by J. Marvin Herndon Transdyne
Corporation San Diego, California 92131 USA October 3, 2005 … 
Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Frontiers in earth sciences: new ideas and interpretation
G Scalera, G Lavecchia - 2006 - earth-prints.org
Page 1. 451 ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, SUPPLEMENT TO VOL. 49, N. 1, 2006 10 The
Mediterranean as a slowly nascent ocean GIANCARLO SCALERA … 
Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Inverse-beta-decay reaction in the antineutrino flux from the fragments of 232 Thand 233 U fission - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 3 »
GV Domogatsky, VI Kopeikin, LA Mikaelyan, VV Sinev - Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2005 - Springer
Page 1. Physics of Atomic Nuclei, Vol. 68, No. 2, 2005, pp. 234–236.
Translatedfrom Yadernaya Fizika, Vol. 68, No. 2, 2005, pp. 259–261. … 
Related Articles - Web Search

Solar System Processes Underlying Planetary Formation, Geodynamics, and the Georeactor - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 9 »
JM Herndon - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - Springer
Page 1. Solar System Processes Underlying Planetary Formation, Geodynamics,
and the Georeactor J. MARVIN HERNDON Transdyne Corporation … 
Cited by 3 - Related Articles - Web Search
The KamLAND anti-neutrino oscillation experiment - Obtenir à l’UQAM - group of 4 »
J Maricic, JG Learned - Contemporary Physics, 2005 - Taylor & Francis
Page 1. The KamLAND anti-neutrino oscillation experiment JELENA MARICIC*
and JOHN G. LEARNED University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2505 … 
Cited by 3 - Related Articles - Web Search
Whole-Earth Decompression Dynamics - group of 5 »
JM Herndon - Arxiv preprint astro-ph/0507001, 2005 - arxiv.org
Page 1. Whole-Earth Decompression Dynamics J. Marvin Herndon Transdyne Corporation
San Diego, California 92131 USA June 30, 2005 Abstract … 
Cited by 3 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search - BL Direct
Some comments on Herndon’s nuclear georeactor - group of 3 »
W Seifritz - Kerntechnik, 2003 - nuclearplanet.com
Page 1. W. Seif
ritz Some comments on Herndon’s nuclear georeactor Dedicated to Dr.
Rudolf Weber who died too early by drowning in the Mediterranean Sea … 
Cited by 5 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search - BL Direct
Impact and Application: Quest for a Nuclear Georeactor
RJ de Meijer, ER van der Graaf, KP Jungmann - Nuclear Physics News, 2004 - Taylor & Francis
Page 1. 20 Nuclear Physics News, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2004 impact and applications
Quest for a Nuclear Georeactor Introduction In a time … 
Cited by 2 - Related Articles - Web Search
Mantle Decompression Thermal-Tsunami - group of 5 »
JM Herndon - Arxiv preprint physics/0602085, 2006 - arxiv.org
Page 1. http://arXiv.org/physics/0602085 Mantle Decompression Thermal-Tsunami
J. Marvin Herndon Transdyne Corporation San Diego, CA 92131 USA … 
Cited by 2 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Report of the APS Neutrino Study Reactor Working Group - group of 12 »
E Abouzaid, K Anderson, G Barenboim, B Berger, E … - 2004 - osti.gov
Page 1. Ъдгжи г и ШЫ Цйижвг Ыийн Ъигж Ягжв жгйд К гйоИ УК вжзгвИ К жв г бИ К жжИ … 
Cited by 2 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Thermonuclear Ignition of Dark Galaxies - group of 2 »
JM Herndon - Arxiv preprint astro-ph/0604307, 2006 - arxiv.org
Page 1. Thermonuclear Ignition of Dark Galaxies J. Marvin Herndon Transdyne
Corporation San Diego, CA 92131 USA April 13, 2006 Abstract … 
Cited by 1 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
Probing the Earth’s Interior with the Low Energy Neutrino Astronomy Detector - group of 3 »
KA Hochmuth, F Feilitzsch, BD Fields, T Marrodan, … - Arxiv preprint hep-ph/0509136, 2005 - arxiv.org
Page 1. arXiv:hep-ph/0509136 v1 13 Sep 2005 Probing the Earth’s Interior
with the Low Energy Neutrino Astronomy Detector Kathrin … 
Cited by 1 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search
A Search for an Electron Antineutrino Signal in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory - group of 3 »
JL Orrell - 2004 - johnorrell.net
Page 1. A Search for an Electron Antineutrino Signal in the Sudbury Neutrino
Observatory John Laurence Orrell A dissertation submitted … 
Cited by 1 - Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search - Library Search

Experimental Status of Geo-reactor Search with KamLAND Detector - Obtenir à l’UQAM
I Blog, C our FAQ, R Zone - Earth, Moon, and Planets, 2006 - ingentaconnect.com
Page 1. Experimental Status of Geo-reactor Search with KamLAND Detector JELENA
MARICIC for KAMLAND COLLABORATION University of Hawaii … 
Related Articles - Web Search
MEASUREMENT OF NEUTRINO OSCILLATION WITH KAMLAND - group of 2 »
JA Detwiler - 2005 - kamland.stanford.edu
Page 1. MEASUREMENT OF NEUTRINO OSCILLATION WITH KAMLAND a dissertation submitted
to the department of physics and the committee on graduate studies … 
Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search - Library Search
CCEEAA–CCNNRRSS DDAAPPNNIIAA–IINN22PP33
DD UU, G UU, T OO - gdrneutrino.in2p3.fr
Page 1. CCEEAA–CCNNRRSS DDAAPPNNIIAA–IINN22PP33 RR AA PP PP OO RR TT DD ”
AA CC TT II VV II TT EE DD UU GG DD RR NN EE UU TT RR II NN OO … 
Related Articles - View as HTML - Web Search

Stew, its not my proposal.

All I have any interest in, is the sterling opportunity to reach a bunch of non-scientists, concerned earth-loving individuals, those who are even as we speak creating a world-wide momentum, politico-religious in nature, with its own heroes, such as RFK jr, and its own networks , such as Hugg, in a well-nigh unstoppable swing against industry, against science, against large infrastructure projects—– a Luddite “New World”— one that is about to exclude the one technology which can save the human race— nuclear driven electrical generation.

This Luddism has at its heart, the mistaken notion that the use of the actinides is a dirty World War II killing technology, associated with Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dr. Strangelove, Edward Teller, Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Republicans, and of course, Rumsfeld & Bush.

This religious-based attitude sits in smug immunity to all your technical arguments. It is willing to selectively blind itself to financial & humanitarian realities , and arguments about possible futures. It believes, like its gurus Caldicott, Gunter, Marriotte, Leventhal, and others, that the technology itself is inherently UNNATURAL.

Any means used to pierce this impregnable cult hideaway, this true belief bunker, is both legal, necessary, ethical, and also factual, unless we absolutely lie, to the extent we have any facts at this time. (about the core, I mean).

If you wish to debate Herndon et. al. in a tech forum, be my guest, and I will maintain absolute decorum. I will not stop you.

However, you have stepped up as an advocate, and that brings its own set of responsibilities.

As an advocate, you cannot trash the honest efforts of others, more public relations savvy than yourself, who are making headway swaying some in the ranks of the adversary,(and in the general uncommitted public) by use of their own Gaia theories as a talking point.

In the PR universe, we have the February icing incident at Indian Point generating over 1270 major news feeds within 2 hours, and over 150 blog reactions in the next 24 hours. This demonstrates clearly that the media, now schooled to view “Nuclear” as a hotbutton purple buzzword, is allied with the forces of Luddism, not so much by choice, but because the Luddites, much more astute than you at shepherding public opinion, have made ALL THE RIGHT MOVES to capture that media, over long decades of carefully planned effort.

Do not imagine that, because you have good intentions, and some knowlege, that you can equal their efforts using merest technical truth. That would be both naive, smug, arrogant, and disrespectful to others working the other end of this battle.

The Truth (capital “T”) has been the truth, since the first femtosecond of recorded time. Has that helped nuclear power make any public acceptance headway? Short answer–No , it has not.

If I know there’s a likelihood of fission decay in the core,(even diffuse subcritical decay) and if I know heat results from it, and if I know large groups of our enemies are even now engaged in illogically worshipping the planet, as if it were a superbeing, Do not fight my efforts to use this concurrence to sway unread potential supporters to a more amenable attitude towards our technology, our jobs, our hopes, and our movement.

Debunk me after the first dozen AP100’s are up and running.
It just might be my effort that puts them there, Stew.

If you have some beef with Herndon, I believe his email is included in my post.

Oh, and by the way, since “Antinuclear quote of the day” is now the major dissemination point for antinuclear agitprop on the net, please explain why you keep posting it.

And…. please explain why “Pro-nuclear quote of the day” does not appear.

In other words, your actions have results you have not anticipated.
You might think a bit on this, before threatening to moderate my posts away. (I’m perfectly willing to discuss this in email).

And by the way, lesbians I know have discussed Brattleboro with me at length, and agree with what I reported in that post last year. So are you in the business of suppressing social truths also?

You might explain that if you care to, and have the time.

Harry