The permian end catastrophe – an evidence for a broader phenomenon

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X35821

Keywords:

Permian extinction, Geo-physical-chemistry, Nuclear energy

Abstract

It is well known that about 250 million years ago a huge catastrophe took place in our planet, with effects so big that about 90 % of the species disappeared in the process including sea animals. This event is called “the Permian extinction”. Other effects are also apparently connected to this event. This kind of event would require an extremely huge amount of energy. Since there are no evidences for an asteroid impact, the energy source should be searched inside the planet. Most important, it should show an energy source capable of producing such huge phenomenon. The aim of this paper is to propose a model to explain this extinction event and to show that there are evidences that this is a phenomenon that apparently happened several times not only in our planet but also in other Solar System bodies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Sergio Meth, Universidade Federal do Pampa, Bagé, RS

Graduado em Engenharia Química pela Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (1984) e com doutorado em Química Orgânica e Ciência dos Materiais pela Universidade Bar Ilan (2004) em Israel. Fez pos-doutorado no Scripps Research Institute em San Diego (2004) na área de Síntese Orgânica e Polímeros e no Loker Hydrocarbon Research Institute na Universidade do Sul da Califórnia (USC) em Los Angeles na area de Materiais e Catalise (2005-2009). Tambem trabalhou no Loker Institute como pesquisador (2010). Atualmente é Professor Adjunto de Engenharia Química na Universidade Federal do Pampa - UNIPAMPA. Tem experiência na área de Química e Engenharia Quimica, com ênfase em Processos Industriais, Síntese Orgânica e Catálise, atuando principalmente nos seguintes temas: Catálise Heterogênea, Síntese e Análise Orgânica, Tratamento de Resíduos, Química Analítica, Energia, Nanotecnologia, Polímeros e Ciência dos Materiais.

References

Salgado-Labouriau, M. L. História ecológica da Terra. 2. ed. Edgard Blucher: São Paulo, 1994.

Cloud, P. et al. Adventures in Earth history. W. H. Freeman: San Francisco, 1970.

Press, F.; Siever, R., Grotzinger, J.; Jordan, T. H. Para entender a Terra. 4. ed. Artmed: Porto Alegre, 2007.

Popp, J. H. Geologia geral. 6. ed. LTC: Rio de Janeiro, 2012.

Teixeira, W.; Fairchield, T. R.; Toledo, M. C. M.; Taioli, F. Decifrando a Terra. 2. ed. Companhia Editora Nacional: São Paulo, 2009.

GON III, S. A guide to the orders of trilobites. Disponível em: <http://www.trilobites.info> . Acesso em: nov. 2018.

Coney, L. et al. Palaeoworld, 2007, 16, 67-104.

Bond, D.; Wignall, P. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 2018, 20, EGU2018-8134.

Greenwood, N. N.; Earnshaw, A. Chemistry of the elements. 1. ed. Pergamon: Oxford, 1984.

Downloads

Published

2018-11-30

How to Cite

Meth, S. (2018). The permian end catastrophe – an evidence for a broader phenomenon. Ciência E Natura, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X35821

Issue

2018: PREPRINTS

Section

Geo-Sciences

License

To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. 

Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.