Precipitation of limestone, not the solidification of lime mud into limestone.
>
>> I know you believe in a global flood which is an integral part of your
>> belief system.There are 51,000 x 10^18 grams of carbon in limestone
>> sedimentary rocks. (J.M. Hunt, "Distribution of Carbon in Crust of Earth,"
>> Bull. AAPG, Nov. 1972, p. 2273-2277. p.2274). Since CaCO3 has one carbon per
>> molecule we can divide by 12 to find the number of moles we find 4.25 x
>> 10^21 moles of calcium carbonate.
>>
>> Each mole of limestone gives off around 270 kilocalories of heat per
>> mole. To deposit the 4 x 10^21 moles of carbonate on the earth requires the
>> emission of 1.15 x 10^27 calories. The heat generated per square
>> centimeter is 1.15 x 10^27 calories/ 5.11x 10^18. There are 5.11 x 10^18
>> square centimeters over the continents. Thus each square centimeter of earth
>> must get rid of 224,939,698 calories during the time the limestone was
>> deposited (1 year). If it is all deposited during the flood, that means
>> that each square centimeter must radiate heat at a rate 7 times greater than
>> that which we receive from the sun. Everyone would cook.
>
>You mention that limestone gives off around 270 kcal of heat per mole.
>Where did you get that quantity? We compute the amount of heat per mole
>below (assuming we are talking of the hardening of limemud into
>limestone):
>
>> The solubility product of CaCO3 is 8.7 x 10^-9 at 25 C. We can
calculate the
>> Gibbs free energy for the equation
>>
>> CaCO3 <--> Ca^+2 + CO3 ^-2
>>
>> Ksp = 8.7 x10^-9
>>
>> delta G = -(8.314 J/K x mol)(298 K) ln 8.7 x 10^-9
>>
>> or 46 kJ
>>
>> and this can be converted to kcals by 4.186 kJ/kcal
>>
>> 46 kJ x kcal/4.186 kJ = 1.1 kcals (per mole)
>
>1.1 kcals is much less than 270 kcals per mole. At this rate the earth
>would give off 915 cals per sq centimeter. Or about .003% of the amount
>of heat given us by the sun.
>
>We could be wrong about the 1.1 kcals. Could you verify the 270 kcals
>and clarify what it is associated with??
We are not talking about solubility, we are talking about the formation of
CaCO3. My source is Konrad B. Krauskopf, Introduction to
Geochemistryinternational Series in the Earth and Planetary Sciences, (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1967), p. 658.
I would point out that there is a lot of dolomite in the Lower Paleozoic and
dolomite gives off 518 kcal/mole. I didn't hit you with that one. So
actually the number I calculated was conservative.
>
>By the way the quantity 1.15 x 10^27 (which you computed above) is in
>error. It should be 1.15 x 10^24.
the 270 is KILOcalories. That is 270,000 the solar constant is 2 calories /
cm^2. Thus the 10^27 stands.
>
>It is pretty much assumed by Flood catastrophists that the global waters
>warmed significantly during the disaster. Michael Oard proposes that
>the waters may have reached as high as 30 deg. C. High water temps is
>required for a post Flood ice age. Just for curiosity sake we computed
>how many kcals would be required to raise the temp of the worlds waters
>from 4 deg C. to 34 deg C.:
>
>>I think the oceans
>> contain about 1.37 x 10^21 kg water (See Austin & Wise in the Proceedings
of the
>> Second International Conference on Creationism, pp, 17-30). If I remember
>> correctly, it takes one calorie (4.184 joules) to raise one gram of water one
>> degree. This is the specific heat of water. If the ocean was 4 C at the
beginning
>> of the Flood, how many calories would it take to raise the temperature of the
>> ocean to 34 C?
>>
>> heat in calories = (1.37 x 10^24 g H20)(4.184 J/g)(cal/4.184 J)(34
C - 4 C)
>> = 4.11 x 10^25 calories
>
>4.11x10^25 is greater than 1.15x10^24. The oceans could absorb all the
>heat you calculated using 270 kcal/mole figure. But that heat would not
>remain in the oceans throughout the catastrophe. Heat would be released
>by the ocean as vapor and subsequently released in the upper atmosphere
>and radiated into space when the vapor condensed to add to the Flood
>rains. Therefore the temp of the oceans may not reach the proposed 34 C
>anyway.
Redo this with the 1.15 x 10^27 colories. It does not take a 1000 calories
to raise the water temperature 1 deg. You are mixing calories with kilocalories.
But I would want to commend you for bringing in others. If you all are
going to have a viable global flood theory then questions like this must be
answered. I applaud your looking at this.
I will answer the other post about eating a 3000 calorie meal tonight.
glenn
Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man
and
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm