Scientists Begin Another Attempt To Drill Through the Earth's Crust 171
schwit1 writes: An expedition to the Indian Ocean is about to begin an effort to drill a core down through the Earth's crust and into its mantle. Geologists have been trying to drill through the contact between the crust and the mantle, called the Moho, since the 1960s, with no success. Either the projects have gone way over budget and been shut down, have failed due to engineering problems, or were stopped by the geology itself. This last issue is maybe the most interesting: "Expeditions have come close before. Between 2002 and 2011, four holes at a site in the eastern Pacific managed to reach fine-grained, brittle rock that geologists believe to be cooled magma sitting just above the Moho. But the drill could not punch through those tenacious layers. And in 2013, drillers at the nearby Hess Deep found themselves similarly limited by tough deep-crustal rocks." This new project hopes to learn from these past problems to obtain the first rock samples from below the Earth's crust. (Here's an eccentric introduction to the Hess Deep rift.)
I remember (Score:1)
I remember the earlier attempt. The Doctor stopped it by going forward in time, or went to an alternate dimension or something. I can't remember, but I do remember it destroyed the world. With Nazis.
Re:I remember (Score:5, Informative)
>> Doctor stopped it...went to an alternate dimension or something
Yep: 3rd Doctor in "Inferno" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] - and just like Star Trek you knew it was an alternate dimension because character's facial hair was different.
Re: (Score:1)
And one of them had an eye patch. Yes, I am a nerd.
Re: (Score:2)
They had that groovy computer too.
Re: (Score:3)
Of course not. They were using KY. That means they're coming in the back door!
Anyhow, I sometimes wonder if scientists (of which I'm told I am one though I'd disagree) are hell bent on destroying life as we know it. Now, I have absolutely no idea what will happen if they manage to drill this hole. I admit this. However, do they? Let's just weaken the crust that keeps the warm gooey bits inside. Let's unleash an unholy gob of magma onto the crust 'cause we figure that pressing the unknown red button is a goo
Re:I remember (Score:5, Funny)
I remember a different attempt. I believe they missed the left turn at Albuquerque.
The National Enquirer (Score:4, Funny)
...will probably be all over this one. Eons ago they published a cover story about a super-deep oil well that had drilled into Hell and let the Devil escape...there was a picture of billowing black smoke over an oil well fire that had been retouched to make a satanic face.
Re: (Score:1)
Umm Pretty sure that was real.
Re:The National Enquirer (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
I'm pretty sure the "attorney" part contradicts the "[not] an evil being" part.
Re:The National Enquirer (Score:5, Funny)
That story was published by the Weekly World News [weeklyworldnews.com]. Compared to the WWN, the National Enquirer is serious journalism.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. Actually the Enquirer was pretty lurid in the old days too. As late as 1960, it used to publish graphic photography of accident victims that nobody else would touch; I remember one multipage feature of the bodies being recovered from a big airplane crash. Only newsstands that sold jerkoff magazines would carry the paper; they toned it down in the 60's to get it into supermarkets where they saw their future market going.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but those pictures were real, right? WWN wouldn't bother with anything like that, because they'd rather report about aliens, wolf-men, Satan coming out of an oil well, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
And Bat Boy. Never forget Bat Boy.
Re: (Score:2)
Who could forget that? It lives forever in an obscure wrinkle of my neocortex.
Re: (Score:2)
I once saw a TV interview of the WWN staff. They were all British ex-pats living in Florida. Most of them were retired before they came up with the idea of starting an American tabloid that was even more outrageous than British tabloids. They were a hilarious group of people, who seemed to thoroughly enjoy working together.
Re: (Score:2)
That story was published by the Weekly World News. Compared to the WWN, the National Enquirer is serious journalism.
Yeah. We used to refer to it as the "Wiggly World News".
The National Enquirer occasionally threw in a real story for authenticity. (Also: When they did things like add a paragraph to a WhiteHouse memo to gin up a story, they'd sometimes use a different font for their addition. B-) )
Re: (Score:2)
I'd not heard of the Weekly World News before today. So I had a look. I mean there were a variety of pretty believable stories about a cookie monster mugging kids in Times Square, Aliens and Obama added to Mt. Rushmore.
But then there was one about "NYC being the friendliest city on earth".
That's where they lost me.
Re:The National Enquirer (Score:4, Insightful)
Biblically the devil is not in Hell yet. He has been cast out of heaven but will not be imprisoned in hell until after the Second Coming of Christ. I know in popular culture they like to speak of him ruling in Hell and tormenting the lost souls but that doesn't follow the scripture.
Re:The National Enquirer (Score:5, Insightful)
Biblically the devil is not in Hell yet. He has been cast out of heaven but will not be imprisoned in hell until after the Second Coming of Christ. I know in popular culture they like to speak of him ruling in Hell and tormenting the lost souls but that doesn't follow the scripture.
Meh. It depends on what you mean by Hell [wikipedia.org]. Do you mean Hades [wikipedia.org] or Gehenna [wikipedia.org] or Sheol [wikipedia.org] or the Lake of Fire [wikipedia.org], or something else?
See, the problem with your assertion is that it depends on centuries of theologians who conflated a bunch of these things (which are all distinct concepts, often from different traditions with different attributes), made assumptions about how they relate to each other, and tried to figure out consistency in a bunch of inconsistent passages.
What you're really referring to is the passage in Revelation 20:10, which implies that the devil ("diabolos") won't be imprisoned in the "lake of fire" until after the coming of Christ. But what is your basis for declaring the "lake of fire" to be synonymous with the English word "Hell," instead of assuming that Hell could be equated with one of the other concepts already mentioned? And how do you know the "devil" isn't in any of the others? The Book of Job notes that Satan wanders about to all sorts of places and is even brought to talk to God. How do you know Satan doesn't wander into any of these other haunts?
Some people also note that the greatest feature of Hell is "eternal torment," and the Bible identifies the most significant feature of eternal torment to be separation from God. Since most Christians agree that the "devil" (whatever that is -- word problems there too... are we talking Satan, Lucifer, Beelzebub etc.? -- these guys were all different) has already been cast out of Heaven, he has already been separated from God and is thus already suffering the primary torment of "Hell," whether or not he is physically located in the "Lake of Fire."
And how do we determine that the "diabolos" (devil) who is cast into the Lake of Fire (if that is indeed "Hell") is the same as Satan or the fallen angel or Lucifer or whoever?
Basically, rather than saying what you did:
Biblically the devil is not in Hell yet
You should say:
Biblically the Diabolos has not been cast into the Lake of Fire yet. But centuries of debates and random equivalencies created by Church dogma have led to a common interpretation that this "diabolos" is the same as what were likely understood in Biblical times to be distinct entities such as Satan and Lucifer, and the "Lake of Fire" is now equated with various conceptions of "Hell" which had different terms and would have been viewed as distinct in Biblical times. Thus, according to the Biblical text combined with a crapload of random church dogma, the traditional popular culture image "doesn't follow the scripture."
Re: (Score:2)
Insightful and succint
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well....I figure that whether you believe the Bible or not, the whole tale of the Devil originates from it so I'm just going back to the source.
Re: (Score:2)
Your standard of "major butthurt" seems a rather low bar. And, dare I say it, a bit projective.
Re: (Score:2)
Well hell, if they mention the devil I figure they must believe a little bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are entitled to your opinion. Of course, we are entitled to ignore it.
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY
Re: (Score:1)
Hmmm...now we know where Donald Trump came from....don't suppose there's any chance of getting that particular toothpaste back in the tube...
Re: (Score:2)
You'd need a vacuum.
oh wait, we have one...
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure?
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/... [eveonline.com]
Egon, remember that time you tried to drill a hole (Score:5, Interesting)
Egon, remember that time you tried to drill a hole through your head?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me.
Bad Idea (Score:1)
This does not go well, I've seen the movie:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059065/
Re: (Score:2)
This is old news--that happened in 1965.
Where do you think our second moon came from?
(And curse you for getting here with the movie reference first!)
Hollywood did it! /SouthPark (Score:1)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Adamantine (Score:1)
But the drill could not punch through those tenacious layers. And in 2013, drillers at the nearby Hess Deep found themselves similarly limited by tough deep-crustal rocks.
That's the engine warning you not to dig into hell. They will damn us all.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they ran into bedrock, only admins can remove that.
http://minecraft.gamepedia.com... [gamepedia.com]
Western Science (Score:2)
At heart, these geologists are the kids who just had to unwrap a golf ball and ended up putting out an eye.
Movie Science (Score:2)
In space, no-one can hear you fail.
We'll never break through (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You laugh now, but when the Silurians come out of the well, you'll see...
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, but they are known to be benevolent [beforeitsnews.com]. Why would they wish to stop us?
Re: (Score:2)
For the love of Yahweh, NOOO! (Score:2)
These wicked, wicked "scientists". Is it not enough that they fill our children's heads in school with nonsense like "evolution"? Now they're drilling *straight down*?!?!
THAT'S WHERE HELL IS!!!
Fracking the Planet (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Does the mantle even exist? (Score:3)
Geology noob here, with a noob question. Has the mantle been definitively proven to exist? Browsing the summary, it looks to me like no one has ever seen or touched the earth's mantle, and that scientists are trying to drill through the crust and reach the mantle for the first time to do exactly that.
It would be interesting if they they drill through the earth's crust completely, and instead of the mantle they find something else. Maybe more crust? Or....
Re:Does the mantle even exist? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, seismic waves travel differently between what we define to be the crust and the mantle. So yes, there is something else down there that is not crust, we call it the mantle. You might try wikipedia, this is the teens, honey.
Re: (Score:1)
Cheese. It's cheese.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's the moon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We know there are different layers due to the way that seismic waves move through the planet ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] ).
Kinda like how light bends and reflects at the boundary of two dissimilar materials (eg water/air or glass/air) the waves from earthquakes show the boundaries in the layers below the crust.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be interesting if they they drill through the earth's crust completely, and instead of the mantle they find something else. Maybe more crust? Or....
My bet is on pie filling.
Re: (Score:2)
That could only improve things.
Re: (Score:3)
Also a geology noob but I thought that lava pools in the base of volcanoes were places where the mantle was poking through the crust. So in that sense we have seen the mantle. Or at any rate I didn't know its existence was in question.
Re: (Score:2)
"Has the mantle been definitively proven to exist?"
Yes. "The Moho" sounds tad cool, but what they are talking here is about the Mohorovicic discontinuity which is, you almost can suspect it, a (seismic) discontinuity researched by some Croatian by that name.
So there might be minor surprises about its exact nature or physical properties but, yes, we positively know the mantle is there just like you know the train is coming when you hear its whistle.
Re: (Score:2)
we positively know the mantle is there just like you know the train is coming when you hear its whistle
So, in other words, we can be tricked by a wooden train whistle?
Re: (Score:2)
Define "definitely." Define "proven."
The front of my hard hat and the back of my coveralls say "geologist", and the FGS (Fellow of the Geological Society) sort of leans in the direction that other geologists consider me a geologist too. For me, "proven" means that the evidence of it;s existence is sufficiently strong that to believe otherwise than in it's existence would require perversely illogical special pleading.
Others have mentioned the petrophysical c
Re: (Score:2)
If they succeed... (Score:2)
If they succeed, I hope the result is in no way similar to what happens when you squash a well fed tick.
Re: (Score:2)
nah.
it is however how Atlantis sank.
Re: (Score:2)
I know because I saw the movie. (Score:2)
Mantle to drill bit: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Too deep we delved there, and woke the nameless fear."
Re: (Score:2)
I wish them success (Score:2)
Because it's the only other answer than nuclear for our future. The longer we put off serious nuclear, the more we suffer, as we have seen. We need more power.
On the Earth, there are three stores of power. Stored sunlight in carbon, and stored supernovas in uranium and thorium that are in the crust itself. Those two we can get to now.
Of course the big enchilada is the stored heat from the formation of the solar system that is stored under the crust. Don't even have to build a machine to release the heat; do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, it's man made nukes or natural nukes.
Re: (Score:2)
Organic all natural nukes. The kind of nukes that you can feel good about.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, no, I had forgotten about that.
Are they sure the majority is from decay now? As opposed to both leftover heat and the the Moon constantly cranking on it? Decay was a theory quite a few years ago.
(They've changed science quite a few times in my lifetime.)
Re: (Score:2)
You could do that, or.... (Score:2)
just walk around Gros Morne National Park.
Isn't this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Never mind that interstellar space (or medium) consist of helium.
The interstellar medium is composed primarily by hydrogen followed by helium with trace amounts of carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen comparatively to hydrogen.[
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_medium [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The stupid, it hurts. That's pretty bad even by Hollywood standards.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, some people like Edward Teller, Oppenheimer and Hans Bethe, hardly unscientific dullards. Then they actually ran the numbers and judged the fear to be unfounded, which you can read about below:
https://www.metabunk.org/debun... [metabunk.org]
That's called science. I know you don't really understand science or the scientific method, as you don't seem to realize that man made climate change is real. So what can anyone
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have to give you credit.. You posted some shit that makes you look like an uneducated moron, but at least you had the balls to do it without posting as an AC
Re: (Score:2)
so you're trying to say that it's the scientists who research global warming, who belong with the flat earthers for denying science?
what ever it is you're smoking, I think you've had enough.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you've watched too much 60's scifi [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
You're right, a hole that small won't make the world blow up unless you drill it through the exact center of the Large Hadron Collider
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Note I'm not saying what I think will happen, or my opinion on the whole matter. I'm just stating you are an idiot because you can't think of a single catastrophic thing that could happen from this.
Re:Blow up the world! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This reminds me of people saying particle accelerators could create dangerous backholes, when much much higher energy particles slam our atmosphere all of the time.
That's not the issue. The issue is that accelerators smash things together from two opposing beams so that the average velocity is approximately zero.
High energy particles smash into the earth and create other high energy particles that have velocities that would still be just under the speed of light. It's possible that black holes from but just fly through the earth, never accumulating enough mass to slow down and just keep on going.
Re: (Score:2)
"does it matter if the filling in the balloon is molten rock?"
If you ever had a nerdy card it's your time to return it... But of course yes: viscosity makes all the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just stating you are an idiot because you can't think of a single catastrophic thing that could happen from this.
Oh, I know, right? For example, the drill's high pressure oil system could spring a leak and cover you with black icky stuff from head to foot. Or you could drop a pipe wrench on your big toe.
Re:Blow up the world! (Score:5, Insightful)
That you have no imagination doesn't make it impossible.
No, but knowing physics allows you to make informed guesses about things. I can imagine all sorts of wildly impossible things, like the earth being hollow and inhabited by lizard men. Just because I can imagine it, doesn't make it possible.
So what happens when you have a 10 cm hole in a balloon pressurized to 100,000 psi?
The earth isn't a balloon. The pressure in a balloon is caused by the skin. In the earth it's caused by the weight of stuff above.
Imagine what happens---actually you do need a good imagination. The molten rock starts gushing up the hole at 100,000psi pressure (or whatever). As it goes higher and higher, the the weight of the molten rock starts increasing the pressure at the bottom, since the 100,000 psi has to support the weight of the column of molten rock, any excess pressure of course pushes more melt out of the hole. This will continue until the pressure reaches equilibrium. At that point, molten rock will stop gushing up the hole.
Things might get a bit worse if there's a local excess of pressure due to convection currents, for example, but what you'll have there is a volcano with a very, very small chimney, and a pressure excess which isn't enough to push through the crust anyway. As the rock cools, it will plug the hole.
I'm just stating you are an idiot because you can't think of a single catastrophic thing that could happen from this.
Physics works. Just because I can imagine crazy outcomes like the earth popping like a balloon, an invasion of the lizard men released from their eternal prison or an unstoppable column of fire reaching half way to the moon, doesn't mean those imaginings are actually worth considering.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because I can imagine crazy outcomes like the earth popping like a balloon, an invasion of the lizard men released from their eternal prison or an unstoppable column of fire reaching half way to the moon, doesn't mean those imaginings are actually worth considering.
Just start writing fantasy, then they're worth considering.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to imagine a catalytic surprise here. Your point still has some validity, reality itself can't be Absolutely Certain on anything, and it probably wouldn't be the first experiment that overlooked dramatic-grade potentials (which, yes, can be entirely beyond predicting), but in practice we estimate risk-reward and make a decision. Th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless it is a left wing anti science nut, of which there are just as many.
Re: (Score:2)
Anybody can fly.
So long as it's on a roughly parabolic trajectory.
Re: (Score:2)
Just move fast enough that you continually miss the ground.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you just buy a ticket on a passenger jet.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you even know what "interferometry" means?
Re: (Score:2)
I thought that was how you released the Balrog?