Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
Lloyd
Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Lloyd » Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:00 pm

* Well, I'm still working on comparing fresh bones with fossil bones.
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjec ... ilhow.html
* The fossil has the same shape as the original object, but is chemically more like a rock! Some of the original hydroxy-apatite (a major bone consitiuent) remains, although it is saturated with silica (rock).
* There are six ways that organisms can turn into fossils, including:
-1* unaltered preservation (like insects or plant parts trapped in amber, a hardened form of tree sap)
-2* permineralization=petrification (in which rock-like minerals seep in slowly and replace the original organic tissues with silica, calcite or pyrite, forming a rock-like fossil - can preserve hard and soft parts - most bone and wood fossils are permineralized)
-3* replacement (An organism's hard parts dissolve and are replaced by other minerals, like calcite, silica, pyrite, or iron)
-4* carbonization=coalification (in which only the carbon remains in the specimen - other elements, like hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen are removed)
-5* recrystalization (hard parts either revert to more stable minerals or small crystals turn into larger crystals)
-6* authigenic preservation (molds and casts of organisms that have been destroyed or dissolved).

* This, however, is another possible means of fossilization in a short time.
http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v10i6n.htm*
After some experimentation, the researchers found a way to overcome a dead bird's buoyancy. When a carcass was dropped onto moist sediments that contained clay, the material soaked into the bird's feathers and bound the body to the mud in just a few minutes. Later, when water was added to the tank, the stuck-in-the-mud carcass remained submerged. 5
* Taking their work even further, Krauss and his team added enough sediment to the tanks to bury the submerged carcasses. Then, they placed weights on the mud to increase the pressure, as a naturally buried body would experience if accumulating lake sediments gradually covered it. The team left the bodies in place for 3 years.
* When the researchers unearthed their samples, they found that the patterns and extent of preservation of the faux-fossil birds were remarkably similar to those seen in actual fossils millions of years old. This resemblance suggests that the remains of ancient birds might have begun their process of fossilization in just such a way, Krauss notes. The team's findings may enable scientists to better interpret fossils and deduce the environments in which they formed, he adds. 6
* You’ve probably read creationist claims of hats or fence posts that fossilized in just a few years. Creationists generally claim that the proper conditions, not long periods of time, are all that are needed for fossilization. That’s what Briggs’ experiment showed. Briggs doesn’t know exactly what the proper conditions are, but some eggs mineralized, and some didn’t, despite being buried for the same amount of time. Furthermore, the durations of the tests were very short, geologically speaking. It took just weeks or months for the process to begin. If they had more patience, they would have seen more mineralization (in those situations where the conditions were favorable).
* This is just kind of interesting.
http://www.desertusa.com/mag06/may/shells.html
* Some clamshell fossils contain up to a hundred fish fossils inside.

Lloyd
Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Lloyd » Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:33 pm

* In my recent message I said I found that for fresh bones the Total bone composition is: 45% O, 15% H, 15% Ca, 13% C, 9% P
* In the last message I quoted a statement on fossil bone contents as either: calcite [crystallized calcium carbonate CaCO3], silica [SiO2], pyrite [iron disulfide FeS2], or iron.
* Here's a side-by-side comparison [1st column is fresh bone contents]:
O Ca C H P ........ bones
O Ca C Si S Fe .... fossils
* This shows that calcium sometimes remains as calcium;
P+H or O+O may combine by transmutation to form S, part of pyrite;
O+C may likewise combine to form Si, part of silica;
Si+4Li or 2Si-2H may form Fe, part of pyrite.
* So the existing contents of fresh bone can supply the elements found in fossil bones.

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by GaryN » Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:04 pm

BB posted:
If heavy elements come from electric transmutation, should they be found in various stages together--like the Si, Cu, Ag, and Au you have been talking about?
There were ancient copper mines all over the USA, and I remember reading that in some of the big veins there was embeded silver. Haven't had chance to research further, but here is a start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_Royale
In prehistoric times, large quantities of copper were mined on Isle Royale and the nearby Keweenaw Peninsula. The region is scarred by ancient mine pits and trenches up to 20 feet deep. Carbon-14 testing of wood remains found in sockets of copper artifacts indicates that they are at least 5700 years old. In Prehistoric Copper Mining in the Lake Superior Region, published in 1961, Drier and Du Temple estimated that over 1.5 billion pounds of copper had been mined from the region. However, David Johnson contends that their estimate was based on exaggerated assumptions.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

moses
Posts: 1111
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide
Contact:

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by moses » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:09 pm


I was thinking the same thing. The various TPODs that talk
about Olympus Mons implies that it should be full of metals
if lightning is powering transmutation. In fact, any major
plasma blister, where the surface is pulled up should have
major metal deposits. Most of the plasma blisters shown in
the TPODs are remote.

I suspect that's why parts of New Mexico have so much metal,
volcanoes, lava fields, etc... Thunderbird came walking in
these parts not too long ago.

Diamonds:

Popigai Crater, Siberia
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/ ... crater.htm

From this article:
Glass spherules from the Popigai event have been found everywhere on Earth, especially on the bottom of the Indian Ocean. Small glassified spheres are one hallmark of plasma discharges and have been compared with those discovered on Mars. Just like their distribution on Earth, the "blueberries" on Mars cover thousands of square kilometers and exist in the trillions.

Iron:
China's Mysterious Iron Pipes
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... apipes.htm
allan

From this article:
In our contemplation of Martian geology, based on the information gleaned from the Mars Exploration Rover B, iron oxide and silicon dioxide have been discovered intimately bound up together in almost every sample taken.

Ripples and "dunes" of hematite extend for hundreds of kilometers in conjunction with silicon dioxide "pavement" or "cobbles" - flat, etched slabs of white stone with regular polygonal cracks in the structure. The iron oxide ripples lie on top of the stone blocks


So evidence of lots of electricity and transmutation on Mars. The hollow iron
objects still make me feel that stars are solid hollow iron objects too. The
iron, and other elements, are formed on the surface of the star and, instead
of falling to the core of the star, are held at the surface and thus increase
the mass of the star, but still it is hollow. And then one wonders about the
formation of planets. If they are formed in an electrical 'pinch' then it has
to be likely that they will be hollow.

But there must be a lot of corollaries from transmutation wrt planets and stars.
Mo

Lloyd
Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Lloyd » Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:44 am

* Allyn said:
Isotope Aluminum(26Al) decays to Magnesium(26Mg) which is stable.
Isotope Silicon(32Si) can decay into Phosphorus(32P), which can decay into Sulfur(32S) which is stable.
Potassium has three isotopes, Potassium(40K) can decay into Calcium(40Ca) which is stable, or into Argon(40Ar) which is stable.

Calcium has the most isotopes of the group.
- Calcium(41Ca) decays into Potassium(41K) which is stable.
- Calcium(45Ca) decays into Scandium(45Sc) which is stable.
- Calcium(46Ca) decays into Titanium(46Ti) which is stable.
- Calcium(47Ca) decays into Scandium(47Sc) which decays into Titanium(47Ti) which is stable.
- Calcium(48Ca) decays into Titanium(48Ti) which is stable.
* Allyn, I don't think the decay routes of these radioactive isotopes that you mention will be helpful, until someone explains how the isotopes are formed in the first place. It seems more helpful to compare the chemical contents of fresh bones and fossil bones in order to see what elements have been transmuted. That's what I've tried to do. And it seems that radioactive isotopes aren't needed, as I showed last time. Do you have reason to suspect otherwise?

* Brigit said:
If heavy elements come from electric transmutation, should they be found in various stages together--like the Si, Cu, Ag, and Au you have been talking about?
* I guess all elements may have come originally from transmutation. Silicon isn't in the same chemical group as copper, silver and gold. There's no "normal" transmutation route from copper to silver to gold or vice versa, because there's no common isotope of any element or combination of such isotopes that would provide the proper numbers of protons and neutrons to make those 3 metals. But, if they are commonly found together in nature, it does suggest that there's a transmutation process that puts them together. To get 47Ag107 from 29Cu63 or 29Cu65 would require adding 18Ar36 or 18Ar38 or 18Ar40 or some combination of elements equivalent to 18Ar. 29Cu63 + 18Ar36 = 47Ag99, which [99] is 8 neutrons short.
* So there may be a transmutation process which allows:
29Cu63 + 18Ar36 + 8(0n1) = 47Ag107. ------------ (0n1) means neutron; neutrons are numbered on the right, protons on left and right.
29Cu65 + 18Ar36 + 8(0n1) = 47Ag109.
47Ag107 + 32Ge74 + 16(0n1) = 79Au197.
47Ag109 + 32Ge74 + 14(0n1) = 79Au197.
* 18Ar36 could be transmuted from 9 helium atoms: 9(2He4) = 18Ar36. Helium is a normal radioactive decay component, called alpha decay, so it may be possible for a reverse reaction, where the helium atoms are combined instead of released. Resonance may somehow have an influence on juxtaposing elements of a common chemical group like that. Copper, silver and gold are common to one group and helium and argon are of another group.
* Any further discussion of this should go to the Transmutation thread, unless it relates to fossilization.

* Mo said:
any major plasma blister, where the surface is pulled up should have major metal deposits
Would you like to discuss that on the Transmutation thread etc?

allynh
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by allynh » Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:57 pm

Lloyd wrote: Allyn, I don't think the decay routes of these radioactive isotopes that you mention will be helpful, until someone explains how the isotopes are formed in the first place. It seems more helpful to compare the chemical contents of fresh bones and fossil bones in order to see what elements have been transmuted. That's what I've tried to do. And it seems that radioactive isotopes aren't needed, as I showed last time. Do you have reason to suspect otherwise?
Oh, shoot. My mistake, I thought I made it clear.

- This was about the soft bugs, without bones, so there would be only organic compounds in the "soft tissue" to transmute.
allynh wrote: If we could take something like that "non-mineralized fossils that are left behind as carbon films" apart layer by layer, and map not just the chemical structure but the isotopes as well as the decay products, and follow the decay chain, the answer would be obvious that transmutation had occurred. We might not know the exact mechanism of how, yet, but the "fingerprint" of transmutation should be clear as a bell, just like with the Gold/Silver/Quartz.
Silicon and Aluminum are only one proton apart, the same with Calcium and Potassium.

- If there is Aluminum present in the fossil we need to know what isotope it is, the same for the Calcium, because neither should have been present in "soft tissue".

The transmutation that is occurring takes the various organic compounds that contain a bunch of different light elements each, all wrapped in electron shells, that acts like individual atoms. That means you can have whole organic compounds compressed/fused into a number of larger atoms that are unstable and rapidly break down into their decay products.

Any excess neutrons would pop out and either cause more transmutation by neutron capture or decay into protons and electrons, i.e. Hydrogen, so the isotope results are important.

The other thing that neutron decay would do is create spalling in the surrounding rock crystals. This would mimic uranium decay used to date rock samples, so they would have to look for spalling in the surrounding rock as they take the fossil apart layer by layer.

The mix of atoms and their isotopes in the fossil, and where they were found, would show if transmutation occurred. Then we could figure out how transmutation occurred.

User avatar
Brigit Bara
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Brigit Bara » Tue Apr 28, 2009 9:36 pm

This is just complete doodling, and feel free to ignore it if there is nothing redeemable in it :) --
* In my recent message I said I found that for fresh bones the Total bone composition is: 45% O, 15% H, 15% Ca, 13% C, 9% P
* In the last message I quoted a statement on fossil bone contents as either: calcite [crystallized calcium carbonate CaCO3], silica [SiO2], pyrite [iron disulfide FeS2], or iron.
* Here's a side-by-side comparison [1st column is fresh bone contents]:
O Ca C H P ........ bones
O Ca C Si S Fe .... fossils
* This shows that calcium sometimes remains as calcium;
P+H or O+O may combine by transmutation to form S, part of pyrite;
O+C may likewise combine to form Si, part of silica;
Si+4Li or 2Si-2H may form Fe, part of pyrite.
* So the existing contents of fresh bone can supply the elements found in fossil bones.
~Lloyd
Bingo!

O +C = Si etc!
I will try to get the composition of wood and see if it shakes out. Who wants to do coprolites?

I was thinking that perhaps Oxygen is the main player in transmutation. Look at the elements we need to get fossils--mostly Si: C and O. For Sulfur, O and O. For my soft tissue fossils that are calcium Phosphate, I need a tiny bit of P: N + O. What I think I see is that any element in the top 3 rows plus one Oxygen, bumps it down to the next element in its group, and they are also the elements related to life and to fossils.

For Fe, how about Si + O + 4H, can you do that Lloyd?

Now to play around with Oxygen a little, I took Si and added a Sulfur (or really 2 Oxygens), and got Zinc. The good result is that "Zinc is found chiefly in the mineral zinc sulfide, also known as sphalerite or zincblende." If things are found together, that could be fun. tholden has a Z-pinch and heavy elements thread around here somewhere.

I agree that Cu is wierd. That whole group needs an odd number. How about Si + O + N? I just think maybe Oxygen is very key to electrical transmutation. You can take this all apart or just say, "Forget it Brigit, that dog won't hunt," if you want to! Just say, "Read my lips: no new physics." :) But if O is an important agent to transmutation, perhaps that would give us less metal on Mars and the moon, because they do not have the atmosphere and the water to provide it.

Whatsmore, Oxygen seems to be a "switch hitter," sometimes transmuting, and other times reacting chemically. So we get our SiO2 etc.

It seems like keeping the bulk of the Oxygen in the transmutation process also will keep living things from shrinking too much. ?!?
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
Brigit Bara
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Brigit Bara » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:11 pm

I really like the idea of testing fossils, etc, for more isotopes.

It seems like more tests could be done on even the most common fossil. We have talked about magnetism on this thread. Perhaps the iron in blood could be enough to give a little bit of magnetism.


PS. I thought I heard Soupdragon was sick. Hope he is feeling better.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
Brigit Bara
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Brigit Bara » Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:15 pm

Alright, I think I will let you all do the equations. But just so you know, I favor 8, Oxygen.

I have been off on a Medusa tangent, and I will say that I have run into concretions are everywhere. Several more terms that I am on the lookout for in fossil descriptions are:

nodules

Oolite (egg stone) is a sedimentary rock formed from ooids, spherical grains composed of concentric layers. Strictly, oolites consist of ooids of diameter 0.25–2 mm

pisolites--rocks composed of ooids larger than 2 mm

I will get the composition of wood later. ~BB
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

Lloyd
Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Lloyd » Wed Apr 29, 2009 5:23 pm

* Allyn said re bugs on April 27:
Any "slumping" would liquify, sweep up and entomb the bugs, before it basically turns solid again. There is no way that any of the sources of silicon that they mention on page 18 could get through to replace the soft tissue. There is no method to transport ion rich material through all that compacted material--it would act like a filter--to "replace" the tissue, hard or soft.
page 18: Carbonization is a very prevalent method of preservation in the Burgess Shale. These are non-mineralized fossils that are left behind as carbon films. They are not replaced nor preserved as molds (Gaines et al, 2005a) (Gaines et al, 2005b). According to Gould (1989), “The soft parts are not preserved as carbon. By a chemical process not yet understood, the original carbon was replaced by silicates of alumina and calcium, forming a dark reflective layer.”
* Allyn provided a link on silicates and in the list at that link I found the following, which seem to be silicates of alumina and calcium:
Grossular - Ca3Al2(SiO4)3, Hydrogrossular - Ca3Al2Si2O8(SiO4)1-m(OH)4m, Lawsonite - CaAl2(Si2O7)(OH)2·H2O, Epidote - Ca2(Al,Fe)3O(SiO4)(Si2O7)(OH), Zoisite - Ca2Al3O(SiO4)(Si2O7)(OH), Clinozoisite - Ca2Al3O(SiO4)(Si2O7)(OH), Tanzanite - Ca2Al3O(SiO4)(Si2O7)(OH), Hornblende - (Ca,Na)2-3(Mg,Fe,Al)5Si6(Al,Si)2O22(OH)2, Montmorillonite - (Na,Ca)0.33(Al,Mg)2(Si4O10)(OH)2·nH2O, Margarite - CaAl2(Al2Si2O10)(OH)2, Chabazite - CaAl2Si4O12•6H2O, Heulandite - CaAl2Si7O18•6H2O
* I think the ones with a comma between two elements mean the mineral may contain either one of the two, so, if one of the two is calcium or aluminum, it would be the right kind of silicate.
* On the transmutation thread at http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... ?f=3&t=209 I see that Aluminum=Silicon-Hydrogen and Calcium=Silicon+Carbon seem to be the most probable transmutation routes for Bug tissues to fossilize into silicates of alumina and calcium.
* The bugs don't initially contain silicon, but the common organic atoms of carbon and oxygen likely transmute into silicon, then some of the silicon further transmutes to aluminum and calcium.
6C12+8O16=14Si28; 14Si28-1H1=13Al.27; 14Si28+6C12=20Ca40.

* Brigit said yesterday:
- I was thinking that perhaps Oxygen is the main player in transmutation. Look at the elements we need to get fossils--mostly Si: C and O. For Sulfur, O and O. For my soft tissue fossils that are calcium Phosphate, I need a tiny bit of P: N + O. What I think I see is that any element in the top 3 rows plus one Oxygen, bumps it down to the next element in its group, and they are also the elements related to life and to fossils.
- For Fe, how about Si + O + 4H, can you do that Lloyd?
- Now to play around with Oxygen a little, I took Si and added a Sulfur (or really 2 Oxygens), and got Zinc. The good result is that "Zinc is found chiefly in the mineral zinc sulfide, also known as sphalerite or zincblende." If things are found together, that could be fun. tholden has a Z-pinch and heavy elements thread around here somewhere.
- I agree that Cu is wierd. That whole group needs an odd number. How about Si + O + N? I just think maybe Oxygen is very key to electrical transmutation. You can take this all apart or just say, "Forget it Brigit, that dog won't hunt," if you want to! Just say, "Read my lips: no new physics." :) But if O is an important agent to transmutation, perhaps that would give us less metal on Mars and the moon, because they do not have the atmosphere and the water to provide it.
- Whatsmore, Oxygen seems to be a "switch hitter," sometimes transmuting, and other times reacting chemically. So we get our SiO2 etc.
* This link, http://www.rexresearch.com/kervran/kervran.htm, which was sited on the transmutation thread, shows some of the info that Kervran compiled on normal transmutation that goes on now in present Earth conditions. It doesn't include radioactive transmutation that also occurs presently. And there may be other kinds of transmutation that occur more commonly under catastrophic conditions. Transmutation via neutron capture may be one such type, which I alluded to lately here.
* So, if you had all types of transmutation options at your disposal, you'd be able to transmute any element into any other element. You could get iron from silicon, oxygen and hydrogen, as you suggested, but you could also get it from any other combination and or fissioning.
4H = 4(1H1) = "4H4"; 14Si28 + 8O16 + "4H4" = 26Fe48.
* So your formula isn't quite complete, because 26Fe48 doesn't exist. What exist most commonly are 26Fe54 and 26Fe56. So the formula needs 6 or 8 neutrons added.
14Si28 + 8O16 + 4(1H1) + 6n = 26Fe54, or ... + 8n = 26Fe56 [n means neutron].
Si+S=Zn? Si=C+O; S=O+O; C+O+O+O=Zn? 6C12 + 8O16 + 8O16 + 8O16 = 30Zn64 or 30Zn66? No, you need to add 4n or 6n to get 64 or 66amu for Zinc.
Si+O+N=Cu? Si=C+O; C+O+O+N=Cu? 6C12 + 8O16 + 8O16 + 7N14 = 29Cu63 or 29Cu65? No, you need to add 5n or 7n to get 63 or 65 amu for Copper.
* So remember to add the number on the left and the right of each element. The number on the left is the atomic number, the number of protons [or electrons]; the number on the right is the atomic mass units, or amu, the number of protons and neutrons [or nucleons].

*Brigit said today:
We have talked about magnetism on this thread. Perhaps the iron in blood could be enough to give a little bit of magnetism.
* Yes, as I understand physiology, the blood is slightly charged, which makes each blood cell repel each other, so they're like little magnets with one pole inside and the other outside, so the outsides repel each other. If you push on one magnet in a tube or channel, all the other magnets in front of it will move easily. This makes it easier for the heart to pump blood throughout the body. There's very little friction, because the cells seldom touch each other.

Lloyd
Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Lloyd » Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:20 pm

* Brigit, I think you may be oversimplifying by supposing that oxygen is necessary for transmutation, but there may be something to your idea just the same. Oxygen seems to be one of the most stable elements, like helium, silicon, iron, palladium and uranium, which form the main platonic solids, if I remember right. See a recent post of mine here on Robert Moon's theory.
* Going through the list of possible transmutations, it seems that helium may form by having 4 hydrogen atoms combine and two of the protons and electrons form neutrons. Then 4 helium atoms can form oxygen. Li, Be, F and Mg would involve some other process, but everything else could transmute as below. The elements after calcium are shown as combinations of elements that derive from oxygen.
He_2:4
....................Li_3:7
....................Be_4:9
....................B__5:11 = C-H, (O-He)-H, Li+He
....................C__6:12 = O-He
N__7:14 = C+O/2 [C+O=N2, which can ionize into 2N]
O__8:16 = 4He
....................F__9:19 = C+Li
....................Ne_10:20 = F+H
Na_11:23 = O+Li
....................Mg_12:24 = Ca-O
Al_13:27 = O+B
Si_14:28 = O+C
S__16:32 = O+O
Cl_17:35 = O+F
Ar_18:40 = Co-F, Cr-C, V-B
K__19:39 = O+Na
Ca_20:40 = O+Mg
Sc_21:45 = Na+2B
T__22:48 = Cl+B
V__23:51 = Cl+2Li
Cr_24:52 = V+H, Sc+Li, T+He
Mn_25:55 = Cl+2Be, T+Li, V+He
Fe_26:56 = Sc+B, Si+4Li, Cl+3Li, Cr+He
Fe'26:54 = 2Si-2H
Co_27:59 = T+B, Cr+Li, Sc+2Li, Mn+H3
Ni_28:58 = Ca+2Be
Ni'28:62 = Mn+Li
Cu_29:63 = V+C, Sc+2Be, Fe+Li, Co+He
Cu'29:65 = V+2Li
Zn_30:64 = Cr+C
Zn'30:66 = T+2Be, Mn+B, Cu+H, Co+Li, Cr+2Li, Ni+He
Ga_31:69 = V+2Be, Mn+2Li, Cu+He
Ge_32:72 = Cu+Li, V+3Li
Br_35:79 = Ge+Li, Cu+2Li

moses
Posts: 1111
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide
Contact:

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by moses » Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:23 pm

allynh wrote:The mix of atoms and their isotopes in the fossil, and where they were found, would show if transmutation occurred. Then we could figure out how transmutation occurred.
Do you think it wise that we find out how transmutation occurred ?
If we can transmutate metals to any metal we desire then that would
quickly result in the end of the world - easy uranium.
Mo

allynh
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by allynh » Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:43 pm

moses wrote: Do you think it wise that we find out how transmutation occurred ?
If we can transmutate metals to any metal we desire then that would
quickly result in the end of the world - easy uranium.
I refer you to my post in the Telluric Currents thread.

User avatar
Brigit Bara
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Brigit Bara » Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:39 pm

Thanks for considering my Oxygen post! Fe'26:54 = 2Si-2H is much better. I will try to remember the atomic weights :?

I think you may be relying on Lithium too much. Could that be? I see Australia exports quite a few tons, but it is not very abundant in earth's crust. Likewise with Boron, which you tend to use a lot. Oxygen is the ozone, in the atmosphere, in the water, and in most of the rocks. That's four convenient locations for all your transmutation needs!

Perhaps it is just not heavy enough? I was looking at the difference in atomic numbers between rows 5 and 6 (most of them) and the difference is 32-- 4 Oxygens have been added.

What happens to people who stay up late staring at periodic tables? and sea floors? :shock:
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
Brigit Bara
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Mummified Dinosaurs / electric fossilization...?

Unread post by Brigit Bara » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:33 am

Okay, trees are composed of--

Cellulose, Hemicelluloses, and Lignin, which boils down to 49% carbon, 6% hydrogen, and 0.2% nitrogen, the rest being O, @ 45%
Mineral Elements--very small amounts of calcium, potassium, and magnesium; varies per species and conditions.

It looks like almost the whole content of the tree could be efficiently used if Si=C+O. I wonder if to get SiO2 there is some additional O needed, or shrinkage of the petrified wood. It looks like this means you could also have wood that was transmuted to pyrite?
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests