Coming soon ...
Posted on 05/30/2002 7:40:53 AM PDT by Gladwin
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:34 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Two House Republicans are citing landmark education reform legislation in pressing for the adoption of a school science curriculum in their home state of Ohio that includes the teaching of an alternative to evolution.
In what both sides of the debate say is the first attempt of its kind, Reps. John A. Boehner and Steve Chabot have urged the Ohio Board of Education to consider the language in a conference report that accompanied the major education law enacted earlier this year.....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Buddha showed a path to self enlightentment; he did not espouse himself as the means.
Have you always been so afraid of ideas?
Simple: Somebody bright enough to look at a truck or an airplane and tell that it was designed and didn't just happen ought to be bright enough to look at a dog or a cat and make the same determination.
The point is, ANY religion is a vast improvement over evolutionism. I recommend Christianity myself, but you could be a Budhist, you could worship Odin and Thor, you could be a rastifarian or even a voodooer and you'd still be miles ahead of the evos. You could make up a new religion by taking the single stupidest doctrine in each of the existing religions and even that would be better than evolution. Evolution is the only belief system which requires its accolytes and what not to forego belief in modern mathematics and probability theory; there's really nothing else much like it.
It appears to me that they are completely unrelated subjects.
Others have made the same point time and again in the previous posts.
May I suggest that you get some professional help to enable you to distinguish between them?
Your postings already meet with My approval. Or should I go grandiose and say Our approval. So just keep going the way you're going.
I don't know if it's professional help that is needed more than simply sitting down and thinking about the fact that religion deals with the spiritual, science with the physical and why he thinks this is not so.
True. But, in keeping with the forum rules, I couldn't directly suggest he go ESAD, now could I? ;^)
Here are some calculations for you. These are the givens
oxidation of Pyrite is 10-9 moles (pyrite)/m2sec
From ---RATE OF PYRITE OXIDATION IN AIR
Note that this is in the air with a relative humidity of 96 to 99% at 25 degrees Celsius. The paper also notes that the rate is faster in most cases than the aqueous case. This is very understandable since it is dissolved oxygen that reacts in liquid.
The molecular weight of Pyrite is 119.975 g/mole (calculated)
There are 31622400 seconds in a 366 day year.(calculated)
The density of Pyrite is 5.02 g/cm3 From Sulfides page 6
Now there are 5,020,000 grams of Pyrite in a 1 meter cube. In 10,000 years how much of that cube would have been degraded assuming that the surface area available for oxidation did not diminish due to the degradation and assuming that the oxidation would not protect the remainder of the material. Multiplying the rate of oxidation by the number of seconds per year gives us 0.0316224 moles/m2year
Multiplying that result by 10,000 years gives us 316.224 moles/m2
A 1 meter cube has 6 m2 of surface area and we will assume the cube is entirely exposed to the oxidizing compound. Therefore 1897.344 moles of pyrite in the experimental cube are degraded in 10,000 years. Multiplying the molecular weight of Pyrite by the above number gives us 227633.8464 grams of Pyrite degraded. Since we started out with 5,020,000 grams, we now have lost 4.53% of this amount in 10,000 years. We have 95.47% of the original material left. Needless to say the process in solution on the beaches and streams is at most of the same order in the result. During this degradation, the process that got the minerals to the locations to where the degradation was occuring, continued. The minerals were covered in 10,000 years by new material and were buried away from the oxygen, exactly as the fossils which are dug up daily.
95% after 10,000 years.
What does a 1-meter cube of pyrite weigh? What process forms 1-meter cubes of pyrite?
Why don't you ask gore3000 to help you compute the probability of a 1-meter cube of pyrite forming?
Pyrite samples in museums degrade in short periods of time. (Well, they're probably on the small side.) As one of your links puts it: "Pyrite is known to oxidize in humid air. For example, the deterioration of museum samples due to the above reaction is known as pyrite disease among curators and is very common. It is likely that a similar process is in operation in mine waste piles."
Lets take that 1-meter cube and make 1000 milliliter cubes out of it. They have in total the same number of molecules as the 1-meter cube. Imagine further that you had painted the outside surface of the original cube red all over, before you cut it up into 1000 little cubes. When you had done with the cutting up, you would once again be looking at a pile of yellow fool's gold, with only flecks of red here and there. You would have created one hell of a lot of new surface area.
Now, some of that new surface area is shielded from exposure by the other cubes. Furthermore, you take that pile of cubes to the beach and let it slosh around in the sand. The sand will cover some of the surface, and the pyrite itself will cover some surface by overlying another face of pyrite. Still, you've got a bit more surface area than your own proposed model allows.
Tell me it's going to take 10,000 years to lose five percent.
To be clear--I'm talking to someone stuck in permanent AndrewC mode--I mean "not constant across size scales." As you make the sides of a cube bigger, surface area increases as the square of the side. Volume increases as the cube of the side.
That is precisely what I demonstrated. Now it's your turn calculate your own numbers for the scenario you have described.
To answer your personal attack, I will refer to your constant inability to read and understand English. A one meter cube of pyrite weighs 5,020,000 grams as I pointed out in my example. Now there are 5,020,000 grams of Pyrite in a 1 meter cube.
As to how a 1 meter cube of pyrite is formed, I will answer as you would.... The same way a very small cube of pyrite forms except over a longer period.
Actually, I need to make up my mind if the cubes total a liter (1000 millilers as I said in one place) or a cubic meter, which is some God-Know-What thing 39.4 inches by 39.4 inches by 39.4 inches which is what you described and what I intended.
So, it's your story that the size of the chunks makes no difference?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.