Massive Ocean In the Earth's Mantle?

[Hockeycowboy]

Fascinating discovery! Well, I think it is.


There May Be a Second Massive Ocean Deep Beneath the Surface | Smart News | Smithsonian


Any thoughts? Comments? Ideas? Flippant remarks?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Fascinating discovery! Well, I think it is.


There May Be a Second Massive Ocean Deep Beneath the Surface | Smart News | Smithsonian


Any thoughts? Comments? Ideas? Flippant remarks?

It's pretty cool but it's the forth state of water.

It's not like the book of Genesis is right or anything and just flow out of the depths. ;0)

 

[Subduction Zone]

Fascinating discovery! Well, I think it is.


There May Be a Second Massive Ocean Deep Beneath the Surface | Smart News | Smithsonian


Any thoughts? Comments? Ideas? Flippant remarks?

This is rather old news. It is not liquid water, calling it an "ocean" is highly misleading to the uneducated. The concentration of water in the mantle is exceedingly low. But since the mantle is huge compared to the surface of the Earth a low concentration of water adds up to an "ocean". If you had a sample of "wet" mantle it would be as dry as dust to you.

Here is an example that almost everyone can wrap their head around. Dry wall is made of gypsum. Gypsum's chemical formula is CaSO4*2H2O. In other words there are two water molecules for every molecule of calcium sulfate. Yet it is called "dry". That chemical is far wetter than the ringwoodite that can be found as an accessory mineral in the mantle.

If you are thinking the Noah's Ark myth, think again.

 

[sayak83]

Fascinating discovery! Well, I think it is.


There May Be a Second Massive Ocean Deep Beneath the Surface | Smart News | Smithsonian


Any thoughts? Comments? Ideas? Flippant remarks?

As per expected. Many minerals would have some little amount of H and OH locked in them.

 

[Valjean]

A hydride and a hydrogen ion, both bound to other atoms, do not water make.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Fascinating discovery! Well, I think it is.


There May Be a Second Massive Ocean Deep Beneath the Surface | Smart News | Smithsonian


Any thoughts? Comments? Ideas? Flippant remarks?

INB4 "this proves Noah's Flood!"

 

[Jumi]

There's plenty of hydrated compounds, bet you there's a lot of stuff you didn't know had water trapped into it. Google water of crystallization if you're curious about the chemistry.

 

[shunyadragon]

This is rather old news. It is not liquid water, calling it an "ocean" is highly misleading to the uneducated. The concentration of water in the mantle is exceedingly low. But since the mantle is huge compared to the surface of the Earth a low concentration of water adds up to an "ocean". If you had a sample of "wet" mantle it would be as dry as dust to you.

Here is an example that almost everyone can wrap their head around. Dry wall is made of gypsum. Gypsum's chemical formula is CaSO4*2H2O. In other words there are two water molecules for every molecule of calcium sulfate. Yet it is called "dry". That chemical is far wetter than the ringwoodite that can be found as an accessory mineral in the mantle.

If you are thinking the Noah's Ark myth, think again.

Good answer!!!

The origin of the water is the subduction zones where large amounts of water are carried down in the ocean sediments in various forms carried down and cycled in the heat currents in the mantle. As noted in the article this water comes back to the surface in the volcanic rocks in continental spreading zones and volcanos.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Good answer!!!

The origin of the water is the subduction zones where large amounts of water are carried in the ocean sediments in various forms carried down and cycled in the heat currents in the mantle. As noted in the article this water comes back to the surface in the volcanic rocks in continental spreading zones and volcanos.

That could be one source. Some of it could also be original water when the Earth was formed. The current hypothesis is that most of the water came from Angrite meteorites. The isotopic amounts of hydrogen are correct, which is not the case with comets. This also came fairly late in the formation of the Earth which goes along with this discovery:

Meteorites Brought Water To Earth During the First Two Million Years - Astrobiology Magazine

 

[shunyadragon]

That could be one source. Some of it could also be original water when the Earth was formed. The current hypothesis is that most of the water came from Angrite meteorites. The isotopic amounts of hydrogen are correct, which is not the case with comets. This also came fairly late in the formation of the Earth which goes along with this discovery:

Meteorites Brought Water To Earth During the First Two Million Years - Astrobiology Magazine

First, and foremost this is NOT a new discovery!

Agreed, the dominant source of the water is believed to be meteorites in the early history of the earth, except the circulation in the mantle began early in earth's history and is how the water from the meteorites was carried downward into the mantle. It is believed the first continental crust formed before ~3.8 billion+ years ago some call Ur. I believe this process has continued since. The oceans began to form at this time or earlier, because the first known possible life has been found in mid ocean ridge rock environments at about this time.

 

[Audie]

Fascinating discovery! Well, I think it is.


There May Be a Second Massive Ocean Deep Beneath the Surface | Smart News | Smithsonian


Any thoughts? Comments? Ideas? Flippant remarks?

I wonder why you thought this particular item is fascinating?

And

I wonder if after seeing the comments
you still feel this is among the evidences
for Flood, or will scratch it off the
list?

For flippant, we suggest that the place
to find the excess waterfrom the flood
is not deep in the earth, but..Neptune!

One flood-believer I encountered said
that a wind wafted it toNeptune, where
it shines to this day as a warning beacon
against incoming rogue angels!

 

[Revoltingest]

This is rather old news. It is not liquid water, calling it an "ocean" is highly misleading to the uneducated. The concentration of water in the mantle is exceedingly low. But since the mantle is huge compared to the surface of the Earth a low concentration of water adds up to an "ocean". If you had a sample of "wet" mantle it would be as dry as dust to you.

Here is an example that almost everyone can wrap their head around. Dry wall is made of gypsum. Gypsum's chemical formula is CaSO4*2H2O. In other words there are two water molecules for every molecule of calcium sulfate. Yet it is called "dry". That chemical is far wetter than the ringwoodite that can be found as an accessory mineral in the mantle.

If you are thinking the Noah's Ark myth, think again.

Aye, the claimants are all wet.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I wonder why you thought this particular item is fascinating?

And

I wonder if after seeing the comments
you still feel this is among the evidences
for Flood, or will scratch it off the
list?

For flippant, we suggest that the place
to find the excess waterfrom the flood
is not deep in the earth, but..Neptune!

One flood-believer I encountered said
that a wind wafted it toNeptune, where
it shines to this day as a warning beacon
against incoming rogue angels!

Did this flood believer have an Alfred E. Newman avatar by any chance?

 

[Audie]

Did this flood believer have an Alfred E. Newman avatar by any chance?

That is the one

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is the one

Never heard of him

 

[Hockeycowboy]

INB4 "this proves Noah's Flood!"

Nope, this isn't evidence.

It's just amazing to me, something so huge as this could be, and so close, that scientists are just now discovering it.

But when you consider that only about 10% of the oceans have been explored so far, I guess it isn't so surprising.

We've got much to learn!

 

[shunyadragon]

Nope, this isn't evidence.

It's just amazing to me, something so huge as this could be, and so close, that scientists are just now discovering it.

Science is not just now discovering it. Be careful of the hype of layman's articles. There in reality is no ocean.

But when you consider that only about 10% of the oceans have been explored so far, I guess it isn't so surprising.

We've got much to learn!

Yes there is a lot to learn, but the presence of large amounts of rock containing is not new. It was well known at least fifty years ago studying volcanics and continental drift geology.

This was not found studying the oceans.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope, this isn't evidence.

It's just amazing to me, something so huge as this could be, and so close, that scientists are just now discovering it.

But when you consider that only about 10% of the oceans have been explored so far, I guess it isn't so surprising.

We've got much to learn!

Since the "water" is less than 1.5% of the rock's mass it is not unreasonable that they have not found it until lately. Don't read oly the hype of headlines, one must read the entire article to understand it. Headlines are designed to draw readers in, but they are quite often misleading, especially in matters of the sciences.

 

[shunyadragon]

Since the "water" is less than 1.5% of the rock's mass it is not unreasonable that they have not found it until lately. Don't read oly the hype of headlines, one must read the entire article to understand it. Headlines are designed to draw readers in, but they are quite often misleading, especially in matters of the sciences.

It was not discovered recently.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

This was not found studying the oceans.

Never said it was.

And yes, the vast amount is a new idea.