1

. Large rocks ejected from Earth had correspondingly large spheres of influence that expanded as other matter—aided by water vapor and aerobraking—gently merged around those “rock seeds.” This allowed the capture of even more matter, eventually forming “fluffy” comets and very low density asteroids. [Spheres of influence are explained on page 269.]

2

. “The Origin of Earth’s Radioactivity” chapter is not yet part of this book. Because of its highly technical nature, the material will be publicly released only when I can have a very high degree of confidence in the accuracy of all its details. The chapter’s summary (abstract) reads as follows:

SUMMARY:  Electrical activity produced earth’s radioactivity. As the flood began, stresses in the massive fluttering crust generated huge voltages through the piezoelectric effect. For weeks, this resulted in powerful surges of electrons within the crust and subterranean water, much like bolts of lightning. These electrical surges squeezed atomic nuclei temporarily together into very unstable, superheavy elements which quickly fissioned and decayed into subatomic particles and new radioisotopes. Each step in this process is demonstrable on a small scale. Calculations and other evidence show that these events happened on a global scale.

The standard explanation for earth’s radioactive material is that it evolved in stars and their exploded debris. Billions of years later, the earth formed from that debris. Few of the theorized steps can be demonstrated experimentally. Observations on earth and in space support the hydroplate explanation and refute the evolution explanation for earth’s radioactivity.

A draft of this chapter can be requested by anyone who

     a.  has a strong background in nuclear physics,

     b.  has read the entire hydroplate theory, and

     c.  will provide a private, written critique of the chapter.

Interested individuals should email their requests to:

feedback@creationscience.com.

3

. Irregular moons have high eccentricity and inclination and very low mass. Most astronomers recognize that irregular moons are captured asteroids, but admit that captures are too improbable. So, how did they occur?

Pages 300–318 explain how, for years after the flood, the radiometer effect and aerobraking, via the abundant water vapor in the solar system, produced those captures. At least 43 moons in the solar system are irregular; one of the largest is Saturn’s Enceladus, whose “strange behavior” is explained on page 306. Mars’ two moons, Phobos and Deimos, are probably captured asteroids.

4

. Some heat would have been conducted into the ceiling and floor of the subterranean chamber. However, the rate of heat loss from the chamber would have steadily diminished with time, because the deeper the heat penetrated into the rock, the more resistance (or insulation) the rock provided.

More specifically, the heat flux from a hot, constant-temperature fluid in contact with a cold, semi-infinite solid will diminish as the inverse square root of time. To see why, consult a basic textbook on heat transfer.

5

. A 1-megaton hydrogen bomb releases almost 5 × 10²² ergs of energy. Therefore, the release of 1.7 × 10³⁷ ergs is the equivalent of exploding 300 trillion hydrogen bombs! However, most of the energy in the subterranean water was generated continually over many weeks (not one big explosion) and was focused up through the rupture and expelled into space. Comets, asteroids, irregular moons, and meteoroids have great kinetic and potential energy.

6

. The Cassini mission to Saturn flew near enough to Saturn’s irregular moon, Hyperion, to measure its low density. (Hyperion, with a density of 0.544 gm/cm³, would float high in water if it were placed in a very large bathtub.) Hyperion also contains organic matter. What do you suppose was the origin of this organic matter? Earth would be a good guess. [See P. C. Thomas et al., “Hyperion’s Sponge-Like Appearance,” Nature, Vol. 448, 5 July 2007, pp. 50–53.]

The low densities of comets and asteroids are not surprising when one understands how they formed. Consider that:

“[Comet Tempel 1 is] the size of a mountain held together with the strength of the meringue in a lemon meringue pie.” Carey M. Lisse as quoted by Ron Cowen, “Deep Impact,” Science News, Vol. 168, 10 September 2005, p. 169.

“[The comet’s] structure is more fragile than that of a soufflé ....”   Jay Melosh as quoted by Ron Cowen, Ibid., p. 168.

7

. Earth’s polar moment of inertia is 8.068 × 10⁴⁴ gm cm². Of course, we do not know how much Earth’s spin slowed during this period of tidal pumping. However, if the Earth slowed from a period of 23 hours per day to today’s 24 hours per day, the energy lost from Earth’s rotational kinetic energy and gained as heat in the subterranean water would have been

8

. “Burning,” in this context, is defined as the rapid chemical reaction of oxygen with a fuel, releasing heat and light.

9

. Burning hydrogen (H) to produce water (H₂O) did not result in a net increase in energy, because the energy gained (57.8 kcal/mole) equaled the energy spent in dissociating the oxygen in the first place.

10

. E. U. Franck, “Experimental Studies of Compressed Fluids,” High Pressure Chemistry and Biochemistry, editors R. van Eldik and J. Jonas (Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1987), pp. 93–116.

E. U. Franck, “Fluids at High Pressures and Temperatures,” Pure & Applied Chemistry, Vol. 59, No. 1, 1987, pp. 25–34.

11

. “It was established that water participates in the conversion process on a chemical level: in particular, oxygen from water molecules is involved in the formation of carbon oxides. Even in the absence of added molecular oxygen, the process of naphthalene [C₁₀H₈] and bitumen in a certain temperature interval exhibited an exothermal character. Upon adding O₂ into SCW, the oxidation reaction may proceed in a burning regime with self-heating [spontaneous combustion] of the mixture. Under certain conditions, the self-heating process may lead to the thermal explosion effect accompanied by ejection of the substance from the reactor, which is explained by the high rate of hydrocarbon burning in SCW.”  A. A. Vostrikov et al., “The Effect of Thermal Explosion in a Supercritical Water,” Technical Physics Letters, Vol. 27, No. 10, 2001, p. 847.

12

. “Scientists analyzing the first samples returned from a comet announced startling news this week. They are finding not the unprocessed [noncrystalline] ‘stardust’ thought to have glommed together in the frigid fringes of the early solar system, but bits of [crystalline] rock forged in white-hot heat.”  Richard A. Kerr, “Minerals Point to a Hot Origin for Icy Comets,” Science, Vol. 311, 17 March 2006, p. 1536.

13

. “Because stars consume large amounts of [deuterium] and no process creates it in significant amounts, the amount of deuterium in the universe declines steadily.” Ron Cowen, “Too Much Deuterium?: A Chemical Mystery in the Milky Way,” Science News, Vol. 170, 9 September 2006, p. 172.

14

. Arthur N. Strahler, Physical Geology (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1981), p. 551.

15

. Before the flood, some men learned how to forge implements of bronze (about 88% copper and 12% tin) and iron. This noteworthy achievement (Genesis 4:22) involved more than just isolating copper, tin, and iron from rocks; it also involved combining them in solid solutions to achieve superior chemical, mechanical, and physical properties. Today, we have very large, already concentrated ore deposits of many other metals besides copper, tin, and iron.

16

. Robert Kerrich, “Nature’s Gold Factory,” Science, Vol. 284, 25 June 1999, pp. 2101–2102.

17

. A. C. Barnicoat et al., “Hydrothermal Gold Mineralization in the Witwatersrand Basin,” Nature, Vol. 386, 24 April 1997, pp. 820–824.

Robert R. Loucks and John A. Mavrogenes, “Gold Solubility in Supercritical Hydrothermal Brines Measured in Synthetic Fluid Inclusions,” Science, Vol. 284, 25 June 1999, pp. 2159–2163.

18

. “Salt deposits in deep oceanic areas are considered to be deposits from hot brine originating at great depths in the earth during tectonic movements.”  V. I. Sozansky, “Origin of Salt Deposits in Deep-Water Basins of Atlantic Ocean,” The American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, Vol. 57, March 1973, p. 589.

“Salt is not an evaporitic formation or a derivative from volcanic rock; it is a product of degasification of the earth’s interior. The salt precipitated from juvenile hot water which emerged along deep faults into a basin as a result of change in thermodynamic conditions. ... the water-salt composition of the ocean and atmosphere is the product of degassing of the earth’s interior.”  V. B. Porfir’ev, “Geology and Genesis of Salt Formations,” The American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, Vol. 58, December 1974, p. 2544.

19

. From a biblical perspective, harmful radioactive decay did not exist at the end of creation, because all God made was “very good” (Genesis 1:31).

20

. Larry Vardiman, Steven A. Austin, John R. Baumgardner, Steven W. Boyd, Eugene F. Chaffin, Donald B. DeYoung, D. Russell Humphreys, and Andrew A. Snelling, “Summary of Evidence for a Young Earth from the RATE Project,” Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, editors Larry Vardiman, Andrew A. Snelling, and Eugene F. Chaffin (El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation Research, 2005), pp. 735–772. [This was a highly publicized, $1,000,000⁺, 8-year research project. Because these researchers mistakenly say there is a heat problem, some people believe that the Earth required millions of years to cool.]

Two coauthors of the above study apparently were unaware of the hydroplate explanation for heat removal.

“I also pointed out that heat is not merely a problem for accelerated decay, but also for all Creation or Flood models I know of.”  D. Russell Humphreys, “Young Helium Diffusion Age of Zircons Supports Accelerated Nuclear Decay,” Ibid., p. 68.

“All creationist models of young earth history have serious problems with heat disposal.” Andrew A. Snelling, “Radiohalos in Granites,” Ibid., p. 184.