This is about the global flood myth but I'm not interested in discussing it. I only want to know if the math is right. In other words does this make sense? If anyone has the time, have at it please. (ehem *cough* Jeff 
)
First - the global flood supposedly (Scripturally) covered the planet, and Mount Everest is 8, 848meters tall. The diameter of the Earth at the equator, on the other hand, is 12, 756.8 km. All we have to do is calculate the volume of water to fill a sphere with a radius of the Earth plus Mount Everest; then we subtract the volume of a sphere with a radius of the Earth. Now, I know this wont yield a perfect result,
because the Earth isnt a perfect sphere, but it will serve to give a general idea
about the amounts involved.
So, here are the calculations:
First, Everest:
V = 4/3×pi×r3 = 4/3×pi×6387.248 km3 = 1.09151×1012 km3
Now, the Earth at sea level:
V = 4/3×pi×r3 = 4/3×pi×6378.4 km3 = 1.08698×1012 km3
The difference between these two figures is the amount of water needed to just
cover the Earth: 4.525×109 Or, to put into a more sensible number,
4, 525, 000, 000, 000 cubic kilometres. This is one helluva lot of water.
For those who think it might come from the polar ice caps, please dont forget
that water is more dense than ice, and thus that the volume of ice present in
those ice caps would have to be more than the volume of water necessary.
Some interesting physical effects of all that water, too. How much weight do you
think that is? Well, water at STP weighs in at 1 gram/cubic centimetre (by
definition), so:
4.525×109 km3 of water, ×109 (cubic meters in a cubic kilometer), ×106 (cubic centimetres in a cubic meter), ×1 g/cm3 (denisty of water), ×10-3 (kilograms), (turn the crank) equals 4.525×1021 kg
Ever wonder what the effects of that much weight would be? Well, many times in
the near past (i.e., the Pleistocene), continental ice sheets covered many of
the northern states and most all of Canada. For the sake of argument, lets say
the area covered by the Wisconsinian advance (the latest and greatest) was
10, 000, 000, 000 (ten million) km2, by an average thickness of 1 km of ice
(a good estimate... it was thicker in some areas [the zones of accumulation]
and much thinner elsewhere [at the ablating edges]).
Now, 1.00×107 km2 times 1 km thickness equals 1.00×107 km3 of ice.
Now, remember earlier that we noted that it would take 4.525×109 km3 of
water for the Flood? Well, looking at the Wisconsinian glaciation, all that ice
(which is frozen water, remember?) would be precisely 0.222% [...do the math]
(thats zero decimal two hundred twenty two thousandths) percent of the water
needed for the flood.
Well, the Wisconsinian glacial stade ended about 25, 000 YBP (years before present),
as compared for the approximately supposedly 4, 000 YBP flood event.
Due to these late Pleistocene glaciations (some 21, 000 years preceding the supposed
flood), the mass of the ice has actually depressed the crust of the Earth. That
crust, now that the ice is gone, is slowly rising (called glacial rebound); and
this rebound can be measured, in places (like northern Wisconsin), in centimetres-
per-year. Sea level was also lowered some tens of meters due to the very finite
amount of water in the Earths hydrosphere being locked up in glacial ice sheets
(geologists call this glacioeustacy).
Now, glacial rebound can only be measured, obviously, in glaciated terranes, i.e.,
the Sahara is not rebounding as it was not glaciated during the Pleistocene. This
lack of rebound is noted by laser ranged interferometery and satellite geodesy [so
there], as well as by geomorphology. Glacial striae on bedrock, eskers, tills,
moraines, rouche moutenees, drumlins, kame and kettle topography, fjords, deranged
fluvial drainage and erratic blocks all betray a glaciers passage. Needless to say,
these geomorphological expressions are not found everywhere on Earth (for instance,
like the Sahara). Therefore, although extensive, the glaciers were a local (not
global) is scale. Yet, at only 0.222% the size of the supposed flood, they have had
a PROFOUND and EASILY recognisable and measurable effects on the lands.
Yet, the supposed flood of Noah, supposedly global in extent, supposedly much more
recent, and supposedly orders of magnitude larger in scale; has exactly zero
measurable effects and zero evidence for its occurrence.
Golly, Wally. I wonder why that may be...?
Further, Mount Everest extends through 2/3 of the Earths atmosphere. Since two
forms of matter cant occupy the same space, we have an additional problem with the
atmosphere. Its current boundary marks the point at which gasses of the atmosphere
can escape the Earths gravitational field. Even allowing for partial dissolving of
the atmosphere into our huge ocean, wed lose the vast majority of our atmosphere
as it is raised some 5.155 km higher by the rising flood waters; and it boils off
into space.
Yet, we still have a quite thick and nicely breathable atmosphere. In fact, ice
cores from Antarctica (as well as deep-sea sediment cores) which can be
geochemically tested for paleoatmospheric constituents and relative gas ratios; and
these records extend well back into the Pleistocene, far more than the supposed
4, 000 YBP flood event. Strange that this major loss of atmosphere, atmospheric
fractionation (lighter gasses - oxygen, nitrogen, fluorine, neon, etc. - would
have boiled off first in the flood-water rising scenario, enriching what remained
with heavier gasses - argon, krypton, xenon, radon, etc.), and massive
extinctions from such global upheavals are totally unevidenced in these cores.
Even further, let us take a realistic and dispassionate look at the other claims
relating to global flooding and other such biblical nonsense.
Particularly, in order to flood the Earth to the Genesis requisite depth of 10
cubits (~15 or 5 m.) above the summit of Mt. Ararat (16, 900 or 5, 151 m AMSL), it
would obviously require a water depth of 16, 915 (5, 155.7 m), or over three miles
above mean sea level. In order to accomplish this little task, it would require
the previously noted additional 4.525×109 km3 of water to flood the Earth to this
depth. The Earths present hydrosphere (the sum total of all waters in, on and
above the Earth) totals only 1.37×109 km3. Where would this additional
4.525×109 km3 of water come from? It cannot come from water vapour (i.e., clouds)
because the atmospheric pressure would be 840 times greater than standard pressure
of the atmosphere today. Further, the latent heat released when the vapour
condenses into liquid water would be enough to raise the temperature of the
Earths atmosphere to approximately 3, 570 C (6, 460 F).
Someone, who shall properly remain anonymous, suggested that all the water needed
to flood the Earth existed as liquid water surrounding the globe (i.e., a "vapour
canopy"). This, of course, is staggeringly stupid. What is keeping that much water
from falling to the Earth? There is a little property called gravity that would
cause it to fall.
Lets look into that from a physical standpoint. To flood the Earth, we have
already seen that it would require 4.525×109 km3 of water with a mass of
4.525×1021 kg. When this amount of water is floating about the Earths
surface, it stored an enormous amount of potential energy, which is converted to
kinetic energy when it falls, which, in turn, is converted to heat upon impact
with the Earth. The amount of heat released is immense:
Potential energy: E=MgH, where M = mass of water, g = gravitational constant and, H = height of water above surface.
Now, going with the Genesis version of the Noachian Deluge as lasting 40 days and
nights, the amount of mass falling to Earth each day is 4.525×1021 kg/40 24-hr.
periods. This equals 1.10675×1020 kilograms daily. Using H as 10 miles (16, 000
meters), the energy released each day is 1.73584×1025 joules. The amount of energy
the Earth would have to radiate per m2/sec is energy divided by surface area of the
Earth times number of seconds in one day. That is:
e = 1.735384×1025/(4×3.14159×((63862)×86, 400)) e = 391, 935.0958 j/m2/s
Currently, the Earth radiates energy at the rate of approximately 215 joules/m2/sec
and the average temperature is 280 K. Using the Stefan-Boltzman 4th-Power Law to
calculate the increase in temperature:
E (increase)/E (normal) = T (increase)/T4 (normal) E (normal) = 215 E (increase) = 391, 935.0958 T (normal) = 280. Turn the crank, and T (increase) equals 1, 800 K.
The temperature would thusly rise 1, 800 K, or 1, 526.84 C (thats 2, 780.33 F...
lead melts at 880 F...). It would be highly unlikely that anything short of fused
quartz would survive such an onslaught. Also, the water level would have to rise
at an average rate of 5.5 inches/min; and in 13 minutes would be in excess of six
feet deep.
Finally, at 1800 K water would not exist as liquid.
It is quite clear that a Biblical Flood is and was quite impossible. Only fools
and those shackled by dogma would insist otherwise.
)First - the global flood supposedly (Scripturally) covered the planet, and Mount Everest is 8, 848meters tall. The diameter of the Earth at the equator, on the other hand, is 12, 756.8 km. All we have to do is calculate the volume of water to fill a sphere with a radius of the Earth plus Mount Everest; then we subtract the volume of a sphere with a radius of the Earth. Now, I know this wont yield a perfect result,
because the Earth isnt a perfect sphere, but it will serve to give a general idea
about the amounts involved.
So, here are the calculations:
First, Everest:
V = 4/3×pi×r3 = 4/3×pi×6387.248 km3 = 1.09151×1012 km3
Now, the Earth at sea level:
V = 4/3×pi×r3 = 4/3×pi×6378.4 km3 = 1.08698×1012 km3
The difference between these two figures is the amount of water needed to just
cover the Earth: 4.525×109 Or, to put into a more sensible number,
4, 525, 000, 000, 000 cubic kilometres. This is one helluva lot of water.
For those who think it might come from the polar ice caps, please dont forget
that water is more dense than ice, and thus that the volume of ice present in
those ice caps would have to be more than the volume of water necessary.
Some interesting physical effects of all that water, too. How much weight do you
think that is? Well, water at STP weighs in at 1 gram/cubic centimetre (by
definition), so:
4.525×109 km3 of water, ×109 (cubic meters in a cubic kilometer), ×106 (cubic centimetres in a cubic meter), ×1 g/cm3 (denisty of water), ×10-3 (kilograms), (turn the crank) equals 4.525×1021 kg
Ever wonder what the effects of that much weight would be? Well, many times in
the near past (i.e., the Pleistocene), continental ice sheets covered many of
the northern states and most all of Canada. For the sake of argument, lets say
the area covered by the Wisconsinian advance (the latest and greatest) was
10, 000, 000, 000 (ten million) km2, by an average thickness of 1 km of ice
(a good estimate... it was thicker in some areas [the zones of accumulation]
and much thinner elsewhere [at the ablating edges]).
Now, 1.00×107 km2 times 1 km thickness equals 1.00×107 km3 of ice.
Now, remember earlier that we noted that it would take 4.525×109 km3 of
water for the Flood? Well, looking at the Wisconsinian glaciation, all that ice
(which is frozen water, remember?) would be precisely 0.222% [...do the math]
(thats zero decimal two hundred twenty two thousandths) percent of the water
needed for the flood.
Well, the Wisconsinian glacial stade ended about 25, 000 YBP (years before present),
as compared for the approximately supposedly 4, 000 YBP flood event.
Due to these late Pleistocene glaciations (some 21, 000 years preceding the supposed
flood), the mass of the ice has actually depressed the crust of the Earth. That
crust, now that the ice is gone, is slowly rising (called glacial rebound); and
this rebound can be measured, in places (like northern Wisconsin), in centimetres-
per-year. Sea level was also lowered some tens of meters due to the very finite
amount of water in the Earths hydrosphere being locked up in glacial ice sheets
(geologists call this glacioeustacy).
Now, glacial rebound can only be measured, obviously, in glaciated terranes, i.e.,
the Sahara is not rebounding as it was not glaciated during the Pleistocene. This
lack of rebound is noted by laser ranged interferometery and satellite geodesy [so
there], as well as by geomorphology. Glacial striae on bedrock, eskers, tills,
moraines, rouche moutenees, drumlins, kame and kettle topography, fjords, deranged
fluvial drainage and erratic blocks all betray a glaciers passage. Needless to say,
these geomorphological expressions are not found everywhere on Earth (for instance,
like the Sahara). Therefore, although extensive, the glaciers were a local (not
global) is scale. Yet, at only 0.222% the size of the supposed flood, they have had
a PROFOUND and EASILY recognisable and measurable effects on the lands.
Yet, the supposed flood of Noah, supposedly global in extent, supposedly much more
recent, and supposedly orders of magnitude larger in scale; has exactly zero
measurable effects and zero evidence for its occurrence.
Golly, Wally. I wonder why that may be...?
Further, Mount Everest extends through 2/3 of the Earths atmosphere. Since two
forms of matter cant occupy the same space, we have an additional problem with the
atmosphere. Its current boundary marks the point at which gasses of the atmosphere
can escape the Earths gravitational field. Even allowing for partial dissolving of
the atmosphere into our huge ocean, wed lose the vast majority of our atmosphere
as it is raised some 5.155 km higher by the rising flood waters; and it boils off
into space.
Yet, we still have a quite thick and nicely breathable atmosphere. In fact, ice
cores from Antarctica (as well as deep-sea sediment cores) which can be
geochemically tested for paleoatmospheric constituents and relative gas ratios; and
these records extend well back into the Pleistocene, far more than the supposed
4, 000 YBP flood event. Strange that this major loss of atmosphere, atmospheric
fractionation (lighter gasses - oxygen, nitrogen, fluorine, neon, etc. - would
have boiled off first in the flood-water rising scenario, enriching what remained
with heavier gasses - argon, krypton, xenon, radon, etc.), and massive
extinctions from such global upheavals are totally unevidenced in these cores.
Even further, let us take a realistic and dispassionate look at the other claims
relating to global flooding and other such biblical nonsense.
Particularly, in order to flood the Earth to the Genesis requisite depth of 10
cubits (~15 or 5 m.) above the summit of Mt. Ararat (16, 900 or 5, 151 m AMSL), it
would obviously require a water depth of 16, 915 (5, 155.7 m), or over three miles
above mean sea level. In order to accomplish this little task, it would require
the previously noted additional 4.525×109 km3 of water to flood the Earth to this
depth. The Earths present hydrosphere (the sum total of all waters in, on and
above the Earth) totals only 1.37×109 km3. Where would this additional
4.525×109 km3 of water come from? It cannot come from water vapour (i.e., clouds)
because the atmospheric pressure would be 840 times greater than standard pressure
of the atmosphere today. Further, the latent heat released when the vapour
condenses into liquid water would be enough to raise the temperature of the
Earths atmosphere to approximately 3, 570 C (6, 460 F).
Someone, who shall properly remain anonymous, suggested that all the water needed
to flood the Earth existed as liquid water surrounding the globe (i.e., a "vapour
canopy"). This, of course, is staggeringly stupid. What is keeping that much water
from falling to the Earth? There is a little property called gravity that would
cause it to fall.
Lets look into that from a physical standpoint. To flood the Earth, we have
already seen that it would require 4.525×109 km3 of water with a mass of
4.525×1021 kg. When this amount of water is floating about the Earths
surface, it stored an enormous amount of potential energy, which is converted to
kinetic energy when it falls, which, in turn, is converted to heat upon impact
with the Earth. The amount of heat released is immense:
Potential energy: E=MgH, where M = mass of water, g = gravitational constant and, H = height of water above surface.
Now, going with the Genesis version of the Noachian Deluge as lasting 40 days and
nights, the amount of mass falling to Earth each day is 4.525×1021 kg/40 24-hr.
periods. This equals 1.10675×1020 kilograms daily. Using H as 10 miles (16, 000
meters), the energy released each day is 1.73584×1025 joules. The amount of energy
the Earth would have to radiate per m2/sec is energy divided by surface area of the
Earth times number of seconds in one day. That is:
e = 1.735384×1025/(4×3.14159×((63862)×86, 400)) e = 391, 935.0958 j/m2/s
Currently, the Earth radiates energy at the rate of approximately 215 joules/m2/sec
and the average temperature is 280 K. Using the Stefan-Boltzman 4th-Power Law to
calculate the increase in temperature:
E (increase)/E (normal) = T (increase)/T4 (normal) E (normal) = 215 E (increase) = 391, 935.0958 T (normal) = 280. Turn the crank, and T (increase) equals 1, 800 K.
The temperature would thusly rise 1, 800 K, or 1, 526.84 C (thats 2, 780.33 F...
lead melts at 880 F...). It would be highly unlikely that anything short of fused
quartz would survive such an onslaught. Also, the water level would have to rise
at an average rate of 5.5 inches/min; and in 13 minutes would be in excess of six
feet deep.
Finally, at 1800 K water would not exist as liquid.
It is quite clear that a Biblical Flood is and was quite impossible. Only fools
and those shackled by dogma would insist otherwise.
