Originally Posted by one-shot
A pretty stupid analogy. Do you have a source so we can ridicule the author of that quote?
The analogy isn't that bad, and is very similar to the one quoted in the article itself.
Originally Posted by AntiTalent
Well, I think it was to underline the difficulty involved in deep water drilling - not really anything to do with the measurements or scale of it. I don't read that much, so if I had to guess I'd say I picked it up from
They are using a drill 30cm wide, from a floating platform 2,200m above the surface they are drilling in to.
Originally Posted by DrDarkTempler
But it is possible...
Alot of those plate that move due to convection and stuff, and the pressure from inside the core, if you release those pressure it is possible that earth can implode, crashed everything then explode once gravity is greater then the earth pressure just like the sunz
Not even vaguely possible.
Originally Posted by ShadowSkill
I was just saying.
And the implication that spending 1 billion elsewhere would be of greater benefit to humanity/society is baseless.
Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm
I would have thought it to be more expensive to do the undersea drilling than to pick a spot close to sea level and then be able to work on land. I mean...they are drilling 3000km. Why bother going through the hassle of water drilling to save 6km?
Or is it some how easier to drill underwater?
It's harder to drill under water.
However, because the crust is floating on the mantle it's much thinner on the sea floor than on the continents. They would have to drill several times further on land, at the very least.
Basically, the difficulties of drilling from a floating platform are less than having to drill five times as far.