Talk:Thomas Gold

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thomas Gold article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Help with this template Please rate this article, and then leave comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify its strengths and weaknesses.

Contents

[edit] Russian theory

In the Wiki Petroleum page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum there is a discussion of the Russian theory of the origins of oil with a link to http://www.gasresources.net/ where this alternative theory is discussed with references to original articles in Russia. But this site also contains the page http://www.gasresources.net/toc_Plagiarism.htm which is a discussion about plagiarism by Professor Gold.

The Russians claim, in the page linked by Wiki's petroleum page, that Gold has plagiarized Russian work, the very work that Wiki extolls Gold for contributing

[edit] Not tectonic forces

I think it should be noted that Gold did NOT propose that the origins of hydrocarbons were "tectonic forces", as stated in the "Origins of Hydrocarbons" section of this Wiki article, but rather that they are actually primordial (cf: Gold, Thomas; "The Deep Hot Biosphere", Ch.1,2,4,6,7; 1999, Copernicus.) Common astronomical knowledge confirms that every other body in our solar system likely formed from an admixture of hydrocarbons and solids (ex: Jupiter, Saturn, Pluto, etc.), his question being, why not Earth?

[edit] Profound insights

"his profound insights" could be less POV. Whether an insight is profound depends not only on the outcome but an individual's perception. Gold also proposed the 'Steady State Universe' which was not profound and has been disproven.208.114.132.151 18:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paper reviewers

In "Dark Life" by Michael Ray Taylor it is mentioned that Norman Pace, Carl Woese, and one other scientist had approved the PNAS "The Deep Hot Biosphere" article. Just mentioning it in case it becomes relevant to the article. (SEWilco 06:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC))

[edit] pre breakfast talk for the Red Queen

It is generally agreed that the sun is cooler than it should be; it is said to be in a cool phase of a cycle. Furthermore, while some of its energy generation is tempered by nuclear fission that resists gravetic compression, the sun is a nuclear power force. However, the reactions are of a reversable nature. Fission from hydrogen to iron releases energy (fusion of heavier elements to iron also release energy. The obvious conclusion is that the great energy concentraion in a star would cause iron to break into lighter elements and hydrogen.

So where then does iron come from: The opposite conditions. As temperatures of deep space fall toward zero Kelvin, matter becomes unstable and elements lighter than iron trend toward becoming iron. Therefore, the stars and the enveloping space are an engine which switch material, turning it to hydrogen in the star and catching iron, gathering hydrogen in space and converting it to iron. This is why the surface of the sun is hydrogen while meteors and planets are essentially iron, either almost pure or embedded with grains of iron.

That's two impossibles. The Red Queen needs three before breakfast.

The earth and other planets gathered cold as iron from outer space has similar processes within them. Under deep pressure and great heat deep within, it converts iron to hydrogen and other light elements. As gravity compacts the earth, these are forced up and out. Clearly petrocarbons are lighter than the solid earth and it makes no sense that they sink into the earth. As unreasonable as that is, the notion that pools of hydrocarbons could exist for a billion years just staggers the immagination. (Not much staggers my immagination.) But, this in any case is my third impossible: the source of natural gas, oil, coal and (for that matter) water.

BW —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.163.188 (talk) 20:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)