Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Life in space


qxcontinuum

Recommended Posts

In fact it seems the Ozone layer was completely depleted in medieval times by unknown causes and nobody was ever mentioning about burns and mass deaths. Studies on trees is showing it.

??

The Medieval Warm Period had higher than average solar radiation and less volcanic activity resulting in global warming, but when the warm places are averaged out with the cool places, it becomes clear that the overall warmth was likely similar to early to mid 20th century warming and according to 78 scientists representing 60 scientific institutions, temperatures are now beyond those experienced during Medieval times.

LINK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally believe science with its fancy tools is improperly calculating the size of our galaxy. Don't forget that one of the Voyager deep space message in the bottle probe has went out of our solar system in just 37 years travelling with a very low speed comparing to one of a comet or meteorite.

17 kilometers per second. That fast qx.

And it would be able to make to the closest star, which is 4 light years away in only 85 thousand years. Better than the space shuttle, that would take you 165 thousand years to get there.

The "fancy tools" be math. Try it sometime.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Water molecules in the upper atmosphere are sometimes broken into the component hydrogen and oxygen by energetic particles from space and from the sun, generally giving the hydrogen enough energy to escape the earth. The oxygen may escape too but being heavier it will more likely react with something.

If microorganisms exist that are so hardy as to be able to live in outer space, then we would presume they could also live in the uppermost atmosphere, and from there it's a skip and a hop on out. I'm not sure such organisms exist, but the assertion they do disproves any assertion that they can't escape. It would just be by a different mechanism than getting the energy from an incoming particle. The further from the center of the earth you are the lower the escape velocity.

Whether the dessication of the surface (as water disappears from the atmosphere vapor pressure "boils" it away from the oceans, although we don't of course see active convection boiling) happens before the sun goes red giant (it certainly will happen then) is debated but most estimates are from half a billion to two billion for dessication and up to five billion for red giant stage.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should not confuse loss of an ozone layer with global warming.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Water molecules in the upper atmosphere are sometimes broken into the component hydrogen and oxygen by energetic particles from space and from the sun, generally giving the hydrogen enough energy to escape the earth. The oxygen may escape too but being heavier it will more likely react with something.

What it often will react with is Hydrogen to reform another water molecule.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Water molecules in the upper atmosphere are sometimes broken into the component hydrogen and oxygen by energetic particles from space and from the sun, generally giving the hydrogen enough energy to escape the earth. The oxygen may escape too but being heavier it will more likely react with something.

What it often will react with is Hydrogen to reform another water molecule.

The Oxygen doesn't escape. It's too heavy. It's been estmated that if all the Oxygen in the Atmosphere now was in the form of O+, which it is not, it would take more than a Trillion years to escape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If microorganisms exist that are so hardy as to be able to live in outer space, then we would presume they could also live in the uppermost atmosphere, and from there it's a skip and a hop on out. I'm not sure such organisms exist, but the assertion they do disproves any assertion that they can't escape. It would just be by a different mechanism than getting the energy from an incoming particle. The further from the center of the earth you are the lower the escape velocity.

I can't agree with much that you said in the above paragraph. Gravity effects all matter in the same way, this is why a Feather and a brick of lead will fall at exactly the same speed in a vaccum. At the same time escape velocity is the same for all matter. So if a Bacteria was to get into orbit just as high as the Space shuttle or ISS, it would have to have the same velocity. This wouldn't happen because they are heavy to get that high or attain that speed and there is still a thin atmosphere of mainly Hydrogen up there that would be smashing into it slowing it down and displacing it! In other words its fantasy to say it's a "hop and skip" away from escaping.

I'm just saying you need to fundamently rethink what it is you think is happening because you are way off base here!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it often will react with is Hydrogen to reform another water molecule.

Well yes but there is not much free hydrogen around, and the planet is minus one hydrogen atom with which to form water.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't agree with much that you said in the above paragraph. Gravity effects all matter in the same way, this is why a Feather and a brick of lead will fall at exactly the same speed in a vaccum. At the same time escape velocity is the same for all matter. So if a Bacteria was to get into orbit just as high as the Space shuttle or ISS, it would have to have the same velocity. This wouldn't happen because they are heavy to get that high or attain that speed and there is still a thin atmosphere of mainly Hydrogen up there that would be smashing into it slowing it down and displacing it! In other words its fantasy to say it's a "hop and skip" away from escaping.

I'm just saying you need to fundamently rethink what it is you think is happening because you are way off base here!

You need to do some research. I think you are just talking off the top of your head and need to think about it all before posting. At any rate I'm done with you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well yes but there is not much free hydrogen around, and the planet is minus one hydrogen atom with which to form water.

That doesn't make any sense with what you said before. If H2O losses a Hydrogen atom then later rfegains it to reform H2O it is a net gain of zero. The "Planet" didn't lose anything!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well yes but there is not much free hydrogen around, and the planet is minus one hydrogen atom with which to form water.

He is right though Frank. Comets bring water to earth, even Volcanic Eruptions can make water. We lose very little, and what is lost is as Lost Shaman said, in the form of gasses through extreme processes, which is replenished by the aforementioned processes.

Consider this from Professor George Lenz:

In fact, the mass of water present in the oceans, now about 10(24) grams, is about the same as the mass of water that was contained in the crust when the degassing process started. We can estimate the rate at which water is being lost today by estimating the rate at which water molecules in the atmosphere are dissociated into its constituent hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen is light enough that it easily moves off into space. The net effect of hydrogen loss decreases the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. A good estimate is that 5x10(11) grams are lost this way each year. This amounts to a volume of a cube about 100 yards on a side. The total water lost to space since the beginning of the earth thus amounts to about 2x10(21) grams, about 0.2 percent of the water in the oceans.

LINK

Oxenford says the same, but insists the lost water is also replenished:

The retention of water vapour on our planet is also favoured by the fact that it can condense, form clouds at an altitude well below the one from which water molecules can escape and precipitate back to the ground as rain or snow. Adding to all these, we have to remember that water is also introduced in the hydrological cycle from the interior of the planet, for example, every time that a volcanic eruption occurs. So, to summarize, even if few water molecules are continuously off to space, the average level remains fairly constant over geological times which is what we want.

LINK

Titles such as this - The Earth has lost a quarter of its water LINK

Can be misleading, they in fact are saying the exact same this Lost Shaman is:

The explanation, according to Emily Pope, is that when the Earth was in its infancy, part of the water in the oceans was split into hydrogen, deuterium and oxygen via a process called methanogenesis. Both hydrogen and deuterium are low-density gases, so they rose through the atmosphere and eventually floated off into space.

We do lose Hydrogen, not water as such, and through the very process Lost Shaman outlined a couple pages back.

Not being smarty pants or anything, but the man is right. To be honest, Lost Shaman usually is. I hold him in high regard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to do some research. I think you are just talking off the top of your head and need to think about it all before posting. At any rate I'm done with you.

I suggest you should be specific and tell me what you think I'm so wrong about and need to research. I did you the honor of at least trying to explain breifly why I think you are wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already made the point that deep mantle water may provide a delay if it can be tapped; the rate at which comets bring in water is negligible and has been for several billion years. The water spewed out in volcanoes is water that seeps in from shallow deposits and does not contribute. There is good reason to think there was much more water earlier on but the rate is so slow and good records only exist for maybe the last quarter of the earths existence, so this is debated. I never asserted that there is less water now, although I will concede I think probably so.

It remains that if things continue, it appears the earth will not have any water left in a few billion years. The issue he seems to object to is whether disassociation occurs in the atmosphere resulting in loss of water to the planet. He claims it is impossible. The process is well enough known that I'm not going to push it further.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already made the point that deep mantle water may provide a delay if it can be tapped; the rate at which comets bring in water is negligible and has been for several billion years. The water spewed out in volcanoes is water that seeps in from shallow deposits and does not contribute. There is good reason to think there was much more water earlier on but the rate is so slow and good records only exist for maybe the last quarter of the earths existence, so this is debated. I never asserted that there is less water now, although I will concede I think probably so.

It remains that if things continue, it appears the earth will not have any water left in a few billion years. The issue he seems to object to is whether disassociation occurs in the atmosphere resulting in loss of water to the planet. He claims it is impossible. The process is well enough known that I'm not going to push it further.

Life will be long gone by then though, water would not matter. All life will probably die within the first billion years, unless we do something very clever like find a way to refuel the sun, or use an asteroid to keep slightly nudging earth into a wider orbit. Like I say, that second answer up there comes directly from Luca Montabone, Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics dept., Oxford University, not many better places on the planet to go to for this sort of information.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I didn't bring up the subject of the sun slowly getting warmer as I thought it would just complicate the argument, and I was just trying to set the record straight. I try to avoid this sort of thing and say look it up and go away, but you interceded, which of course you are welcome to do, so I came back. I do hope it is over with now. He may be unpersuaded but this is not overwhelmingly important and I can let it go.

I think if human life can make it through the next thousand years or so it can find ways to persist indefinitely, in spite of all the disasters in store for the universe and our part of it. We will probably first find appropriate places in orbit around long-lived red dwarfs or even white dwarfs, tapping their gravitational energy. Then we will find ways to get low entropy out of space-time itself something like the inflation did. This is probably endless.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it often will react with is Hydrogen to reform another water molecule.

The Oxygen doesn't escape. It's too heavy. It's been estmated that if all the Oxygen in the Atmosphere now was in the form of O+, which it is not, it would take more than a Trillion years to escape.

The mass of the atmosphere is about 5^18, with about 20% being Oxygen. If it takes a trillion years for the oxygen to escape, that would mean roughly a million kg go into space each year, or about 2875 kg per day. That actually seems like a lot to me....

I know that you said that this is for O+, which not much of the planetary oxygen is in the form of, but just wanted to show that even if it took a trillion years that plenty would be escaping each year.

How can it be too heavy if in the hypothetical scenario above, a million kg of it disappeared each year?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mass of the atmosphere is about 5^18, with about 20% being Oxygen. If it takes a trillion years for the oxygen to escape, that would mean roughly a million kg go into space each year, or about 2875 kg per day. That actually seems like a lot to me....

I know that you said that this is for O+, which not much of the planetary oxygen is in the form of, but just wanted to show that even if it took a trillion years that plenty would be escaping each year.

How can it be too heavy if in the hypothetical scenario above, a million kg of it disappeared each year?

Obviously its not that much as you concede. Its just a trickle and obviously only a small amount of O is in the reactive form of O+.

Anyway, the simple answer to your question is that O+ is a charged ion and it is pulled out into space by the Earths magnetic field at the poles. Along the way as it flows along magnetic lines it get heated very hot and a small amount gains enough energy to escape the magnetic field and thus gets lost to space.

So it is absolutely too heavy to be lost to space except at the poles where Earths magnetic field has enough force to overcome gravity and drag a bit of it away along the magnetic lines of force in the magnetic field.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this news will just prove my point. And it is coming right from NASA

http://blogs.discove...s/#.U4Vrpdq9KK0

You had a point?????? :huh:

Holy Cow.

Again - Panspermia is not your hypothesis, and the fact earth bacteria may be present on Curiosity only slows down the possibility of detecting life, as we have introduced further variables - from the link:

Scientists don’t want to contaminate other planets with Earth life forms. They also don’t want contamination in their own instruments, which could make it appear that they have detected alien life when they’re really only measuring Earth-origin hitchhikers.

Now if we do find any microbial life. that has to be qualified as well now.

A bateria left on Mars is not going to propagate Mars with water, and then evolve and populate the planet. It's too cold. If the Bacteria survives it will more likely lay dormant forever unless a celestial strike sends it back to earth via Panspermia.

Gosh you have a vivid imagination.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think somehow the issue became escaping oxygen. That is not the point; the point is escaping hydrogen. The oxygen is highly reactive and would quickly disappear from our air if photosynthesis weren't constantly replacing it. Hydrogen escapes much more easily, and once it is gone the oxygen will react with other things and there won't be water.

In short, the effect is each two hydrogen atoms that escapes means one less molecule of water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe by seeding bacteria where ever our technology goes, we'll actually be the reason for life getting a toehold everywhere. Maybe by doing so we're propagating our kind of life/DNA so it does not die with the Earth. Wouldn't that be nice?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe by seeding bacteria where ever our technology goes, we'll actually be the reason for life getting a toehold everywhere. Maybe by doing so we're propagating our kind of life/DNA so it does not die with the Earth. Wouldn't that be nice?

Why limit ourselves to bacteria?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think somehow the issue became escaping oxygen. That is not the point; the point is escaping hydrogen. The oxygen is highly reactive and would quickly disappear from our air if photosynthesis weren't constantly replacing it. Hydrogen escapes much more easily, and once it is gone the oxygen will react with other things and there won't be water.

In short, the effect is each two hydrogen atoms that escapes means one less molecule of water.

In short, that might happen in a test tube. But Earth isn't a test tube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In short it has happened and is happening. I think you changed it to oxygen knowing that was more difficult and I was away for awhile before I could fix the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In short it has happened and is happening. I think you changed it to oxygen knowing that was more difficult and I was away for awhile before I could fix the issue.

Thank god you are back to save us! Do you believe that Micro-organisms float off into space then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.