(November 24, 2014 at 3:38 pm)Surgenator Wrote:We have another problem if the decay rates were as different as he wants says they were:(November 24, 2014 at 1:30 am)Creatard Wrote: 2) you have to assume constant decay rates. We have only been able to observe their rates for the past 100-150 years. Before that we can reasonably guess the affects of the earth's magnetic field and other factors would have on decay, but that is all they will ever be: an educated guess.Nucleur reactors depend on these decay rates to be constant. You need to know the state of your reactor if you want to run it.
We know when a particle decays it releases energy and heat.
For what occurs "normally" on Earth, and at the rates we expect from observation, this release is mostly slow enough to be dissipated and absorbed fairly easily.
If, however, the decay rates we expect to have happened over 10s of millions, 100s of millions, or even billions of years were compressed into only approximately 10,000 years, the amount of heat and radioactivity released would have been enormous and for all intents, instant.