Происхождение нефти газа: от теории происхождения к технологиям поисков > Экзотические теории происхождения, нетрадиционные методы и технологии поисков и разведки нефти и газа
Эфиродинамическая гипотеза происхождения нефти Ацюковского
Suresh Bansal (India):
Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich please fin my paper ,published in PSI , London ,U K.
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html
Зинатов Хайдар Галимович:
--- Цитата: Suresh Bansal (India) от Августа 21, 2015, 03:33:40 pm ---Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich please fin my paper ,published in PSI , London ,U K.
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Suresh Bansal, I have read your article published in http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html.
Answer, all Your proposition I did not raise no objection. However, you diplomatically leave a "door" for supporters of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen" :) on Earth. And I'm not against Your opinion, because most of the accumulations of minerals have different Genesis. But, apparently, industrial or commercially significant deposits of gas, oil and bitumen non-biogenic education, and primary underlying the formation and feeding of volatile hydrocarbons.
But about the formation of biogenic kerogen, I unfortunately, nothing new can't tell You, except that are in different directories.
Success in Your business!
Suresh Bansal (India):
--- Цитата: Зинатов Хайдар Галимович от Августа 21, 2015, 05:01:05 pm ---
--- Цитата: Suresh Bansal (India) от Августа 21, 2015, 03:33:40 pm ---Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich please fin my paper ,published in PSI , London ,U K.
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Suresh Bansal, I have read your article published in http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html.
Answer, all Your proposition I did not raise no objection. However, you diplomatically leave a "door" for supporters of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen" :) on Earth. And I'm not against Your opinion, because most of the accumulations of minerals have different Genesis. But, apparently, industrial or commercially significant deposits of gas, oil and bitumen non-biogenic education, and primary underlying the formation and feeding of volatile hydrocarbons.
But about the formation of biogenic kerogen, I unfortunately, nothing new can't tell You, except that are in different directories.
Success in Your business!
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich, I afraid to state here that I have closed all the doors for bogenic origin of hydrocarbons by saying that sedimentary rocks that has been formed WITHOUT any INVOLVEMENT of ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS are DRY only and we are NOT getting single drop of oil there . I have disproved the fossil fuel theory by saying that productive sedimentary source rocks essentially has been formed with the involvement of abiotic hydrocarbons flux .
I am totally against the biogenic theory . perhaps big communication gap . please reread my article .
Зинатов Хайдар Галимович:
--- Цитата: Suresh Bansal (India) от Августа 22, 2015, 09:00:08 am ---
--- Цитата: Зинатов Хайдар Галимович от Августа 21, 2015, 05:01:05 pm ---
--- Цитата: Suresh Bansal (India) от Августа 21, 2015, 03:33:40 pm ---Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich please fin my paper ,published in PSI , London ,U K.
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Suresh Bansal, I have read your article published in http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html.
Answer, all Your proposition I did not raise no objection. However, you diplomatically leave a "door" for supporters of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen" :) on Earth. And I'm not against Your opinion, because most of the accumulations of minerals have different Genesis. But, apparently, industrial or commercially significant deposits of gas, oil and bitumen non-biogenic education, and primary underlying the formation and feeding of volatile hydrocarbons.
But about the formation of biogenic kerogen, I unfortunately, nothing new can't tell You, except that are in different directories.
Success in Your business!
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich, I afraid to state here that I have closed all the doors for bogenic origin of hydrocarbons by saying that sedimentary rocks that has been formed WITHOUT any INVOLVEMENT of ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS are DRY only and we are NOT getting single drop of oil there . I have disproved the fossil fuel theory by saying that productive sedimentary source rocks essentially has been formed with the involvement of abiotic hydrocarbons flux .
I am totally against the biogenic theory . perhaps big communication gap . please reread my article .
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Suresh Bansal! Unfortunately, all the "contradictions" in our communication on the Forum comes from the "difficulties of translation". I write You letters using a "Hauler". I myself, relatively well, I know German language. In my last letter to You I said with humor that you Left open "the door"for supporters of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen". I also Left open "the door" for supporters of the paradigm of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen". And, here the supporters of the "paradigm" of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen" closed all doors to supporters of the paradigm of "the dominant factor underlying the formation of gas fields, oil and bitumen".
But, I will say a second time: "the accumulation of minerals in the upper layers of the earth's crust have different Genesis", BUT (!) education commercial ore deposits, including gas, oil and bitumen are determined by the factor depth of flow of volatile hydrocarbons from the deeper layers of the Earth! And I agree that the saturation of the "parent rocks", which is determined by the "paradigm" of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen", predefined tributaries volatile hydrocarbons from deep layers of the Earth.
We are in agreement. No problem!
Good luck!
Suresh Bansal (India):
--- Цитата: Зинатов Хайдар Галимович от Августа 22, 2015, 10:06:21 am ---
--- Цитата: Suresh Bansal (India) от Августа 22, 2015, 09:00:08 am ---
--- Цитата: Зинатов Хайдар Галимович от Августа 21, 2015, 05:01:05 pm ---
--- Цитата: Suresh Bansal (India) от Августа 21, 2015, 03:33:40 pm ---Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich please fin my paper ,published in PSI , London ,U K.
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Suresh Bansal, I have read your article published in http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-true-origin-of-hydrocarbons.html.
Answer, all Your proposition I did not raise no objection. However, you diplomatically leave a "door" for supporters of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen" :) on Earth. And I'm not against Your opinion, because most of the accumulations of minerals have different Genesis. But, apparently, industrial or commercially significant deposits of gas, oil and bitumen non-biogenic education, and primary underlying the formation and feeding of volatile hydrocarbons.
But about the formation of biogenic kerogen, I unfortunately, nothing new can't tell You, except that are in different directories.
Success in Your business!
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Zeenat Haidar Galimovich, I afraid to state here that I have closed all the doors for bogenic origin of hydrocarbons by saying that sedimentary rocks that has been formed WITHOUT any INVOLVEMENT of ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS are DRY only and we are NOT getting single drop of oil there . I have disproved the fossil fuel theory by saying that productive sedimentary source rocks essentially has been formed with the involvement of abiotic hydrocarbons flux .
I am totally against the biogenic theory . perhaps big communication gap . please reread my article .
--- Конец цитаты ---
Dear Suresh Bansal! Unfortunately, all the "contradictions" in our communication on the Forum comes from the "difficulties of translation". I write You letters using a "Hauler". I myself, relatively well, I know German language. In my last letter to You I said with humor that you Left open "the door"for supporters of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen". I also Left open "the door" for supporters of the paradigm of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen". And, here the supporters of the "paradigm" of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen" closed all doors to supporters of the paradigm of "the dominant factor underlying the formation of gas fields, oil and bitumen".
But, I will say a second time: "the accumulation of minerals in the upper layers of the earth's crust have different Genesis", BUT (!) education commercial ore deposits, including gas, oil and bitumen are determined by the factor depth of flow of volatile hydrocarbons from the deeper layers of the Earth! And I agree that the saturation of the "parent rocks", which is determined by the "paradigm" of the "biogenic formation of deposits of gas, oil and bitumen", predefined tributaries volatile hydrocarbons from deep layers of the Earth.
We are in agreement. No problem!
Good luck!
--- Конец цитаты ---
Agreed communication gap .
2) I fully agreed originally hydrocarbons has been formed in the deep origin of earth and has been migrated in the reservoir rock via surface of the earth throw sedimentary rocks . Ancient bio mass has just contaminated these abiotic hydrocarbons in the burial history of the mixture of abiotic hydrocarbons and ancient bio mass ,just to confuse us .
Навигация
Перейти к полной версии