ORIGIN OF EARTH'S RADIOACTIVITY
In the last 2 to 3 years I occasionally reported information on Earth's radioactivity in my forum thread at https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13. Now I'll try to glean the best of that info and organize it here to see what I might be able to make of it. First, some info from Charles Chandler.
SOLAR SYSTEM IS UNDER 400 MILLION YEARS OLD
Light Curves, by Charles Chandler. See http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=18943
The present article estimates the Sun to be only 381 million years old. (See Figure 5.) How could radiometric dates be older than the very existence of the Earth? The answer is that they neglect differences in the radioactive decay rates depending on temperature.10,11 The standard model assumes that the Sun has maintained the same temperature for its entire life,12 and that the Earth's crust that solidified 4.1 billion years ago has been at 300 K the whole time. But it's more likely that the crust cooled slowly, and thus the radioactive decay rate would have run faster, thereby falsely reporting a greater age. And what we're seeing here is the possibility that the Sun was also producing a lot more heat. Thus life evolved in a much shorter period of time, and in an environment that was much warmer. It should also be noted that the hotter Sun was producing more high frequency (ionizing) radiation, which would have increased the mutation rate. ... So the tentative conclusions that can be drawn from the present analysis are that the Sun and the Earth are a lot younger than in the standard model, that life evolved much more rapidly, in a much warmer environment, and with a lot more ionizing radiation from the Sun. Whether or not the radiometric dates would fall in line with these numbers, once recalibrated with faster radioactive decay at the higher temperatures, remains to be determined.
I think Charles was on the right track, but the Earth may be way younger than that. On the other hand, it may just be that the Earth's surface is way younger, having been reworked by major impacts and flooding in recent millennia.
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13&start=375#p3653
Next is from a Creationist article.
Argon diffusion data support RATE’s 6,000-year helium age of the earth. https://creation.com/argon-diffusion-age August 2011
Here I present a new analysis of old (1986) argon retention data from the same borehole that provided helium retention data for the Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE) research initiative.1 The deepest part (4.56 km) of the borehole was hot enough to cause more than a 20% loss of radioactivity-generated argon-40 from feldspar in the granitic basement rock, conventionally dated to be 1.5 Ga {i.e. giganna or billions of years} old. Data and equations from the 1986 article show that at the present temperature (313°C) at that depth, it would take only 5,100 (+3,800/-2,100) years for the feldspar to lose that much argon. This supports the 6,000 (±2,000) year helium diffusion age that RATE found for zircons in the same borehole.
DID SLIDING CONTINENTS CAUSE IONIZATION THAT CAUSED FUSION OF RADIOACTIVE ELEMENTS?
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13&start=180#p2109
(PANGAEA’S RUPTURE, Side note:
Walter Brown's model might help explain the rupture of Pangaea in Mike Fisher's model at http://NewGeology.us, i.e. how the mid-Atlantic Ridge formed. And Walter's model may explain Earth radioactivity. See http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Radioactivity2.html )
RADIOACTIVITY MAP
Radioactivity occurs almost exclusively in Earth's continental granite crust, not in the ocean floors. It's because granite contains a lot of quartz which is piezoelectric and easily produces electric currents which also contribute to production of radioactive elements.
I found a world map of radioactivity at https://rapidnotes.wordpress.com/2018/01/16/agm2015-a-map-of-our-radioactive-planet/ to see if it's evenly spread over the continents, or is more concentrated where the (continental) sliding occurred, i.e. in the Americas, Australia, India and Antarctica.
It shows more radioactivity in North America and Eurasia and a little less on the other continents and very little on the ocean floors. I guess the small dark circles may indicate man-made radioactivity. The Himalayas and Alps seem to have the most natural radioactivity.
CONTINENTAL SLIDING DID NOT INCREASE RADIOACTIVITY. The Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans seem to radiate about the same low amount of ANCS, so the continents sliding over the Moho during the Pangaea breakup event don't seem to have increased the amount of radioactivity on the new ocean floors (the Atlantic and Indian Ocean floors were new).
GIANT METEORITE IMPACTS FORMED SUPERCONTINENT
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13&p=7539#p7532
https://www.sciencealert.com/the-continents-were-created-on-early-earth-by-giant-meteorite-impacts
”Studying the composition of oxygen isotopes in these zircon crystals revealed a 'top-down' process starting with the melting of rocks near the surface and progressing deeper, consistent with the geological effect of giant meteorite impacts," explained geologist Tim Johnson of Curtin University in Australia.
The research team carefully analyzed isotopes of oxygen; specifically, the ratios of oxygen-18 and oxygen-16, which have 10 and 8 neutrons, respectively. These ratios are used in paleogeology to determine the formation temperature of the rock in which the isotopes are found.
The first stage is the formation of a large proportion of zircons consistent with partial melting of the crust. This partial melting, the researchers show, was likely the result of bombardment by meteorites, which heated the planetary crust on impact.
The oldest cluster of these zircons, according to the team's interpretation ... was the result of a single giant impact that led to the formation of the craton.
The second stage was a period of reworking and stabilization of the crustal nucleus, ... followed by the third stage – a period of melting and granite formation.
CONTINENTAL CRUST HAS TWO LAYERS, THE UPPER CRUST IS MORE RADIOACTIVE
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13&start=690#p7573
See https://www.nature.com/articles/208479b0
Thorium, uranium, and potassium show a strong concentration towards the surface of the Earth and are enriched in the continental crust. The abundance of thorium, uranium and potassium can be estimated by two independent methods; a physical method based on heat-flow data, and a geochemical method based on geological premises. These estimates differ by a factor of two (Table 1). The estimates for the heat-flow data are from Clark and Ringwood1, and are based on a 37-km-thick two-layer crust. The upper layer is 16 km thick, resting on a layer 21 km thick. Calculations of the concentrations of thorium, uranium and potassium within each layer for different heat flows are given in Table 2. It is noteworthy that the concentrations of the radioactive elements in the 16-km layer in regions with high heat flow are comparable with the geochemical estimates made on the basis of the new abundance data by Clark et al.2. The concentrations calculated for the lower layer are similar to those in basalts. This could indicate that this layer has a basaltic composition. However, metamorphic processes, including generation of granite magma, and the cycling of elements within the crust could also account for the low concentrations of radioactive elements in the deep crust3–5. These processes would result in a more mafic average composition of the lower crust as compared with the higher crust3–8. There is also some indication5 that high-grade metamorphic rocks, especially those of granulite facies, have lower concentrations of thorium and uranium than magmatic rocks of comparable chemical composition, so that the upward concentration of thorium and uranium in the crust could be more marked than that of potassium.
The above article seems to suggest that the lower crust is less radioactive because of the higher heat, which makes metamorphic rock. But that wouldn’t explain the lower radioactivity in the ocean basalt crust. And the above doesn’t seem to explain the origin of the radioactive elements in the upper continental crust.
STRUCTURE OF EARTH. https://geologyscience.com/geology/structure-of-earth/
AGM2015: Antineutrino Global Map 2015 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep13945/figures/1
This map shows global radiation almost entirely from natural uranium and thorium decay.
Flux units are antineutrinos/cm^2/second (ANCS) at the Earth’s surface. Map includes antineutrinos of all energies.
.The map shows that the oceans radiate the least ~10^8.1 ANCS.
.The Arctic Ocean and ocean waters near continents radiate ~10^8.33 ANCS.
.Antarctica and continental margins radiate ~10^8.51 ANCS.
.Australia, Africa, South America and Greenland radiate ~10^8.63 ANCS.
.Much of interior Eurasia and North America radiate ~10^8.7 ANCS.
.Much of the Himalayas, the Alps and eastern U.S. radiate ~10^8.8 ANCS.
CONTINENTS ARE MORE RADIOACTIVE. So the oceans radiate ~125 million ANCS and the continents radiate ~400 million ANCS, ~3 times more than the oceans.
DOUBLED CRUST IS MOST RADIOACTIVE. Where the India plate slid partly under the Asia plate and raised up the Himalayas, the additional layer of crust appears to have increased the amount of ANCS radiation. Since the Alps also have increased ANCS radiation, perhaps they were raised up by part of the Africa plate sliding partly under the Europe plate.
MOST RADIOACTIVITY IS IN GRANITE, SHALE, PHOSPHATE & COAL. Natural Radioactivity in the Geologic Environment
See https://cemp.dri.edu/cemp/workshop2009/presentations/Hurley-Radioactivity_Geologic_Environ.pdf
Relative Original Occurrence of Radioactive Elements in Rocks:
_Common sources: Granite; Shale; Bedded Phosphate; Coal (One type of granitic rock in which radioactive minerals are particularly common is the very coarse-grained variety known as pegmatite.)
_Occasional sources: Andesite; Conglomerate; Sandstone; Slate>Gneiss; Metaconglomerate
_Rare sources: Basalt; Limestone; Bedded Gypsum/Salt; Quartzite; Marble
These facts may mean that the limestone, some gypsum, some salt, quartzite & marble formed mostly from seawater, the basalt was the original surface before the Pangaea-forming asteroid arrived, and much of the salt was injected volcanically from the basalt magma under Pangaea, mostly during the Great Flood. Shale & phosphate must have formed mainly from continental granite. Coal formed from plants which may have had fairly high levels of radioactive elements, due to growing on continental soil which is the source of shale. As for pegmatite, I don’t know the significance of that as yet.
CONCLUSION:
MOST OF EARTH'S RADIOACTIVITY IS FROM EARLIER, BIGGER HIGH-ANCS ASTEROID THAT FORMED SUPERCONTINENT PANGAEA
Mike Fischer and Charles Chandler figured that the supercontinent Pangaea formed from a large asteroid, part of which also possibly formed the Moon. The asteroid must have made a fairly soft landing and became semimolten, flattening out like a pancake about 35 km or 20 miles thick. Earth's former crust apparently had lower radioactivity, but the asteroid that became Pangaea had 3 times as much concentration.
TEST FOR MOON'S ORIGIN. If the Moon radiates about the same amount of ANCS as Earth's continents, I think it's a good bet that it was part of the asteroid that formed Pangaea.
ALTERNATIVE CONCLUSION:
NOVAS & COMETS CAUSED RADIOACTIVITY & PERMAFROST
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13&start=600#p6078
[WERE NOVAS THE SOURCE OF RADIOACTIVITY IN EARTH'S CRUST?]
The Recency of the Surface [de Grazia book]
Jean Perrin, as noted by Baranov [11], has gone farther than Cook to argue that radioactive decay is not spontaneous, but is caused by ultrahard radiation coming in from exoterrestrial sources. That is why "natural" radioactivity is concentrated within the crust of the Earth. We have stressed that exoterrestrial bombardments of the Earth by particles from nova explosions and other sources of hard radiation have been repeatedly experienced by the crustal rocks of the Earth. The present state of the Earth must be receiving a small fraction of its historical radiation.
LAST WORD
If a Saturn nova, close to the Earth, caused Pangaea to have higher levels of radioactivity than the surrounding ocean floors, it must have occurred before the Great Flood ended (before Pangaea broke up) and Saturn must have been positioned above the center of Pangaea. (Tidal pull from Saturn may have caused Pangaea to rise above the ocean levels, if Pangaea didn’t form from an asteroid impact.) Alternatively, a similar nova may have given high levels of radioactivity to a large asteroid that became Pangaea upon crash-landing on the Earth.