The Expansion Tectonics of Europa

That's not what I said. Stop trying to twist and distort my words into meaning something different.

Are you suggesting that the Proton-Proton chain, and the CNO cycle do not represent Nucleosynthesis?

If your going to argue, at least have the decency to do so honestly.

There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that the sun, or the earth have the conditions neccessary to produce Iron by fusion.

I should point out that I did not originally explicitly state that I was referring to the production of Iron by fusion, and fusion alone, however I would expect that anyone with competent reading comprehension skills, and a basic understanding of cosmology would have been able to infer that for themselves by my explicit comparison of the conditions of interior of the Earth and sun to an O-type star - thus either OIM is defficient in one of the aforementioned areas, or he is simply being dishonest (again) and applying quotes out of context (again).

 

And I answered it, although apparently you lack the reading comprehension to understand what I said.

First off, this question represents a strawman argument - it's not based in any argument that i've made, at not time have I stated or implied that I don't think that the sun participates in nucleosynthesis. In fact, quite the opposite is implied in my references to the Proton-Proton chain (a form of nucleosynthesis) and the CNO-cycle (another form of nucleosynthesis).

So apparently, you either lack the basic reading comprehension skills, or you lack the basic understanding of stellar nucleosythesis to understand that the answer implied in my response is:

"Yes, the sun engages in Nucleosynthesis, but not the nucleosynthesis of Iron, which is what is actually being discussed."

Wrong.

There is evidence to support the hypothesis that it doesn't.
According to Stan Woosley and Thomas Janka, in a paper accepted for publication in Nature in 2005, the silicon burning process - the process which directly gives rise to Iron, lasts for 18 days, requires temperatures of 3.3 billion kelvins, and densities of 4.8x10^7 g/cm^3, which requires masses in excess of 8 solar masses.

To put this in perspective (not that this has ever helped before) the sun has a density of 0.015x10^7 g/cm^3, and a temperature of 0.0157 Billion Kelvins at its core.

The Earth has a core density of 0.00000128x10^7 g/cm^3, and a temperature of 0.0000007 Billion Kelvins.

So neither the sun, nor the earth, has the conditions neccessary to initiate the fusion of lighter elements to Iron.

 

You're suggesting that EMST is wrong then?

"Up to now about two thirds of the original number of hydrogen nuclei have been transformed, in two phases (4 000-200 and 200-0 m.y. ago), into crust and mantle bulk matter, while the rest remains to be transformed." - EMST (from one of your own sources)

"They then fuse with other 2H nuclei to produce 4He and other larger nuclei. For every 4 nucleons that combine to form a helium nucleus, 2 protons are recycled (Fishbane et.al. I993). Fusioning will reduce to zero as 2H units and electrons are exhausted. " -EMST (from one of your own sources)

I thought you said you understood EMST?

Yeesh, and you have the nerve to accuse me of using a strawman argument?

BZZZZT.

Wrong again.

You didn't say "I am convinced that EMST is the truth, except where it talks about fusion."

You stated "I am convinced EMST is the truth."
Period.
No Qualifiers.

If you accept EMST as the truth, without any qualifiers, then you accept the (wrong) hypothesis that fusion occurs in the core of the earth.

 

Once again, you're lying.

The implication is clear.
You accept EMST as an unquestionable truth.
You consider that EMST is responsible for what you consider the illusion of plate tectonics.
If you accept EMST as an unquestionable truth, then you also accept its hypotheses as an unquestionable truth - including the Hypothesis, from your own source, that the Iron is produced by Fusion.

The implication here is quite clear.
Stellar nucleosynthesis is powered by fusion (until the star goes asplodey).
Here you are clearly comparing the process under discussion within the earth, to that within the sun.

Therefore, it is quite clearly implied that we are discussing fusion, not fission.

Once again, one is forced to ask the question.

Are you suggesting that EMST is incorrect in it's hypothesis that fusion occurs within the earth.

 

Bzzzt.

Uranium, and other transuranic elements decay to Lead-208 which is stable.

The decay of Transuranic elements does not produce Iron directly.

In fact, my recollection is that Iron doesn't even register in the list of daughter elements produced by fission.