Turtle Posted August 28, 2008 Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 Sulfides are sulfur hydrogen compounds H2S, sulfates are sulfur oxygen compounds. the oxygen being used for respiration is O2 from the water. H2S is used by the bacteria, it comes from the vents, oxygen comes from the water and from the atmosphere provided by plants. the bacteria directly in the vents do not use O2, they are anaerobic. I'm not completely clear about the bacteria in the worms, i would think they are anaerobic as well and the worms use O2 to "eat" the food the worms make. Well, see, I'm no chemist & can only go on what I read. Seems a lot of what I read is in disagreement. :shrug: Not completely clear indeed. :hyper: Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: sulfur dioxide Inorganic compound, heavy, colourless, poisonous gas (SO2). It has a pungent, irritating odour (the smell of a just-struck match). It occurs in volcanic gases and dissolved in the waters of some warm springs. ...sulfur dioxide: Definition from Answers.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 28, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 Well, see, I'm no chemist & can only go on what I read. Seems a lot of what I read is in disagreement. :shrug: Not completely clear indeed. :hyper: sulfur dioxide: Definition from Answers.com You are confusing sulfides with sulfates, Sulfates are SO2, sulfides are H2S. be specific, what is not clear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 28, 2008 Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 You are confusing sulfides with sulfates, Sulfates are SO2, sulfides are H2S. be specific, what is not clear? It's not clear if you read any more at the link I quoted from, and as I say I'm not great at chemistry. :hyper: I'm looking for some helpful information, but perhaps I'm not familiar enough with the nomenclature to make the best searches. :shrug:The search for submarine volcanism, based on the newly emerging concept of plate tectonics, led in 1977 to the discovery of sulphide-containing warm and hot springs or vents at ocean floor spreading zones. These areas of hydrothermal water circulation through the Earth's crust greatly affect the chemistry of seawater. Estimation of fluxes has been based on the present composition of seawater. The estimated rate of sulphide emission as compared to the seawater (sulphate) entrainment, as well as the various chemical and biological sulphur transformations determining its deposition as polymetal sulphides and anhydrites, are significant with respect to the global sulphur cycle. This report briefly presents the information so far available on deep sea hydrothermal conversions of sulphur. ...http://dge.stanford.edu/SCOPE/SCOPE_39/SCOPE_39_3.2_Jannasch_181-190.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 28, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 It's not clear if you read any more at the link I quoted from, and as I say I'm not great at chemistry. :hyper: I'm looking for some helpful information, but perhaps I'm not familiar enough with the nomenclature to make the best searches. :shrug:http://dge.stanford.edu/SCOPE/SCOPE_39/SCOPE_39_3.2_Jannasch_181-190.pdf Possibly you are confusing sulfates with sulfates? SO2 is the simplest sulfate, the sulfate that occurs naturally in sea water would be a magnesium sulfate, there are other sulfates that occur naturally other than simple SO2. for that matter there are other sulfides other than H2S. Most sulfide using bacteria would probably use simple H2S. If you are talking about something else then you have me confused too:doh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 28, 2008 Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 Possibly you are confusing sulfates with sulfates? SO2 is the simplest sulfate, the sulfate that occurs naturally in sea water would be a magnesium sulfate, there are other sulfates that occur naturally other than simple SO2. for that matter there are other sulfides other than H2S. Most sulfide using bacteria would probably use simple H2S. If you are talking about something else then you have me confused too:doh: :shrug: Mmmm...with the boldened, either you made a typo, you're pulling my leg, or one or the both of us has no idea what they're talking about. You seem to claim the only oxygen available on the seafloor is in the water & came from photosynthesis. The source I quoted says the sulphur is changed all around chemically, and since some of its bound to oxygen (whatever the compound(s) are called), I want to know if that oxygen is from the magma/volcanic rock, and if it is made available to the bacteria. Or, as you seem to say, that it came from photosynthesis too? Are you claiming all oxygen is from photosynthesis? :hyper: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 28, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 :singer: Mmmm...with the boldened, either you made a typo, you're pulling my leg, or one or the both of us has no idea what they're talking about. You seem to claim the only oxygen available on the seafloor is in the water & came from photosynthesis. The source I quoted says the sulphur is changed all around chemically, and since some of its bound to oxygen (whatever the compound(s) are called), I want to know if that oxygen is from the magma/volcanic rock, and if it is made available to the bacteria. Or, as you seem to say, that it came from photosynthesis too? Are you claiming all oxygen is from photosynthesis? :singer: Yes, all free oxygen comes from photosynthesis, no significant free oxygen comes from any other source. The water coming out of the black smokers is recycled sea water so it could contain some free oxygen but I would guess it does not contain much due to reactions with minerals in the crust. Now having said that some bacteria do get their oxygen from sources other than free oxygen but complex animals cannot use this source for oxygen. the bacteria that live in the smokers are anaerobic, they do not need free oxygen, most are killed by free oxygen. Oxygen is a very strong poison, before photosynthesis free Oxygen was rare, it was originally a toxic waste by product of photosynthesis. The oxygen you are talking about is part of other molecules, loosely bound, and bacteria can use this oxygen to make energy. Sulfates from sulfates was not a typo, I was referring to the fact the SO2 is the simplest sulfate, there are lots of other chemicals that are sulfates or sulfites and are used by bacteria as energy sources. Iron sulfate and or iron sulfite are two sources probably in use in the smokers, copper sulfate, lead sulfate, silver sulfide, the list is long and all of these chemicals are used by life as electron receptors (oxygen) in some way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Yes, all free oxygen comes from photosynthesis, no significant free oxygen comes from any other source. The water coming out of the black smokers is recycled sea water so it could contain some free oxygen but I would guess it does not contain much due to reactions with minerals in the crust. Now having said that some bacteria do get their oxygen from sources other than free oxygen but complex animals cannot use this source for oxygen. the bacteria that live in the smokers are anaerobic, they do not need free oxygen, most are killed by free oxygen. Oxygen is a very strong poison, before photosynthesis free Oxygen was rare, it was originally a toxic waste by product of photosynthesis. The oxygen you are talking about is part of other molecules, loosely bound, and bacteria can use this oxygen to make energy. Sulfates from sulfates was not a typo, I was referring to the fact the SO2 is the simplest sulfate, there are lots of other chemicals that are sulfates or sulfites and are used by bacteria as energy sources. Iron sulfate and or iron sulfite are two sources probably in use in the smokers, copper sulfate, lead sulfate, silver sulfide, the list is long and all of these chemicals are used by life as electron receptors (oxygen) in some way. Well, sounds like you're doing as much guessing as I in many regards to what's going on with the chemicals at the bottoms of the deep blue seas. :cheer: Anyway, the extent & variety of submarine vents & volcanoes is poorly known, and I really have to question any assertions that this-or-that is what goes on. Having covered the black-smokers a bit, what do you think of the white variety? What!? :eek: White smokers? :) >> http://hypography.com/forums/general-science-news/14068-lost-city-pumps-life-essential-chemicals.html ...Lost City is exceptional, Kelley says, because chemical reactions in the seafloor produce acetate, formate, hydrogen and alkaline fluids. All these substances may have been key to the emergence of life, according to work published recently by Michael Russell and A.J. Hall of Glasgow and William Martin of Germany. In addition, acetate and formate found in Lost City fluids may have been an important energy source for the ancestors of methanogens, microorganisms that live off the methane at places like Lost City. It's perhaps one more bit of evidence about where life may have originated, Kelley says. ... So now we have acetate:Definition: 1. acetate ion (CH3COO-, C2H3O2-) an ion formed by removing the acidic hydrogen from acetic acid. 2. a fiber made from cellulose acetate. 3. a compound resulting from replacing the acidic hydrogen in acetic acid. Acetate Definition - Chemistry Glossary Terms Where is the O coming from here? Formates? ethyl formate, CH3CH2(HCOO) sodium formate, Na(HCOO), [1] caesium formate, Cs(HCOO), [2] methyl formate, CH3(HCOO) methyl chloro formate, CH3OCOCl, [3] triethyl orthoformate, C7H16O3, [4] trimethyl orthoformate, C4H10O3...Formate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Lotta O's in there. Of the whole mix, they say this in the article on white smokers...The hydrocarbons being produced at Lost City are not formed from atmospheric carbon dioxide dissolved in seawater because none of the carbon carries the radioisotopic signature that would be present if they had been exposed to sunlight, Proskurowski says. ... http://hypography.com/forums/general-science-news/14068-lost-city-pumps-life-essential-chemicals.html Just thought I'd bring more of what I don't know to the fore. :) :phones: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Well, sounds like you're doing as much guessing as I in many regards to what's going on with the chemicals at the bottoms of the deep blue seas. :cheer: Anyway, the extent & variety of submarine vents & volcanoes is poorly known, and I really have to question any assertions that this-or-that is what goes on. Having covered the black-smokers a bit, what do you think of the white variety? What!? :eek: White smokers? :) >> http://hypography.com/forums/general-science-news/14068-lost-city-pumps-life-essential-chemicals.html So now we have acetate: Where is the O coming from here? Formates? Lotta O's in there. Of the whole mix, they say this in the article on white smokers... Just thought I'd bring more of what I don't know to the fore. :) :phones: All those Os do not have anything to do with free oxygen, chemical reactions between things like methane, CO2, H2O, SO2, H2S, various metal sulfates and sulfides, and other catalysts take place with out any free O2 being involved. I'm not surprised the CO2 isn't part of the atmosphere, it comes from deep in the earth. (see The Deep Hot Biosphere) Microbes are a part of all these chemical reaction at some point. As I said all free O2 comes from photosynthesis, no significant free O2 comes from any other source. White smokers just have different amounts of chemicals at different pHs and temperatures. Even a small change in chemicals, pH, or temps can make a big difference in things like color. There are also deep sea vents that put out clear but still chemically laden water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 All those Os do not have anything to do with free oxygen, chemical reactions between things like methane, CO2, H2O, SO2, H2S, various metal sulfates and sulfides, and other catalysts take place with out any free O2 being involved. I'm not surprised the CO2 isn't part of the atmosphere, it comes from deep in the earth. (see The Deep Hot Biosphere) Microbes are a part of all these chemical reaction at some point. As I said all free O2 comes from photosynthesis, no significant free O2 comes from any other source. White smokers just have different amounts of chemicals at different pHs and temperatures. Even a small change in chemicals, pH, or temps can make a big difference in things like color. There are also deep sea vents that put out clear but still chemically laden water. The boldened I have a problem with as before; where exactly else does it come from and what exactly is 'significant'? Moreover, how do you prove a negative in this regard? Don't you mean you don't know of any significant other source(s)? :phones: PS Never mind; I think I found it. >> Where did the earth's atmospheric oxygen come from? If it was generated by plants via photosynthesis, then where did all the reduced carbon go (the fossil-fuel reserves don't seem nearly large enough)? Could some of the oxygen have come from water thOxygen can also be made by the splitting of water molecules by ultraviolet radiation from the sun, a process called photodissociation. The only way that any free oxygen product can accumulate, however, is if some of the hydrogen that is produced at the same time escapes into space, permanently removing it from the atmosphere. (Otherwise the hydrogen and the oxygen just recombine into water again.) The rate of net oxygen production by ultraviolet photodissociation is equal to the rate at which the hydrogen escapes to space. This rate is so low that this source of free oxygen is trivial compared with the amount of oxygen created by biological activity." But then, even that source seems to hedge::cheer: Oxidized reservoirs whose oxygen probably derives from organic matter are sulfate, found in both seawater and evaporite rocks (equivalent to 0.48 x 1021 moles of organics) and in ferric iron (equivalent to 0.064 x 1021 moles). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 The boldened I have a problem with as before; where exactly else does it come from and what exactly is 'significant'? Moreover, how do you prove a negative in this regard? Don't you mean you don't know of any significant other source(s)? :phones: There is no other source, free oxygen is extremely reactive, there are a few ways to get oxygen from chemical reactions but none of them occur in nature with out biology. A lightning bolt might free up a tiny amount of oxygen but it would quickly react with other chemicals disappear. Only biology can produce oxygen in enough quantity to allow it to be a major component of the atmosphere. One of the most sure fire ways to detect life on another planet would be to detect free oxygen in it's atmosphere, if significant amounts of free oxygen are there so is life. When life first started producing oxygen it took millions of years, 100's of millions of years, for it to start to build up in the atmosphere, the banded iron formations of the world are the result of this build up. Iron dissolved in the ocean used up oxygen as fast as it was produced, once the iron was oxidized it could start to build up in the atmosphere. Free oxygen is not a naturally occurring gas, oxygen is always bound up with other elements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 There is no other source, free oxygen is extremely reactive, there are a few ways to get oxygen from chemical reactions but none of them occur in nature with out biology. A lightning bolt might free up a tiny amount of oxygen but it would quickly react with other chemicals disappear. Only biology can produce oxygen in enough quantity to allow it to be a major component of the atmosphere. One of the most sure fire ways to detect life on another planet would be to detect free oxygen in it's atmosphere, if significant amounts of free oxygen are there so is life. When life first started producing oxygen it took millions of years, 100's of millions of years, for it to start to build up in the atmosphere, the banded iron formations of the world are the result of this build up. Iron dissolved in the ocean used up oxygen as fast as it was produced, once the iron was oxidized it could start to build up in the atmosphere. Free oxygen is not a naturally occurring gas, oxygen is always bound up with other elements. All well & good, except the theme here is oxygen in the deep ocean, and every one has a hedge on whether it's all from the atmosphere or not. No process you know of produces free oxygen perhaps, which is not to say such processes don't exist. And isn't the 'small' amount of Oxygen at depth that the worms 'breath' free oxygen? So, free oxygen does exist in nature contrary to your declaration. Why not a little of your UFO-we-oughta-look-before-we-declare reasoning here? Until last month, everyone knew that submarine volcanoes couldn't explosively erupt because of the water pressure, and yet an explosive eruption field is exactly what was found under the Arctic Ocean. Tell me we know all about the abyss and there is nothing further to investigate. Tell me we know all about how & what oxygen, let alone the other elements, does down there. I don't question some of your specifics, but your general implication that you et al know exactly what is going on doesn't make the mark. Science is always amendable. :singer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 However, sulphides are what? SO2? Does this oxygen remain bound to the sulphur or... As chemical suffixes to molecules go, the following is usually true: "-ide" means no oxygen - such as sodium chloride [ce]NaCl[/ce]"-ite" means some oxygen - such as sodium chlorite [ce]NaClO_2[/ce]"-ate" means quite a bit of oxygen - such as sodium chlorate [ce]NaClO_3[/ce] If you want to add even more oxygen, it's a per..X...ate such as sodium perchlorate [ce]NaClO_4[/ce]. Wish I could have offered this earlier... ~modest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 As chemical suffixes to molecules go, the following is usually true: "-ide" means no oxygen - such as sodium chloride [ce]NaCl[/ce]"-ite" means some oxygen - such as sodium chlorite [ce]NaClO_2[/ce]"-ate" means quite a bit of oxygen - such as sodium chlorate [ce]NaClO_3[/ce] If you want to add even more oxygen, it's a per..X...ate such as sodium perchlorate [ce]NaClO_4[/ce]. Wish I could have offered this earlier... ~modest And just to clarify, 'free' Oxygen means atomic Oxygen, that is, atoms of Oxygen not bound to other elements? I wasn't looking for this article, but it's apparently a new discovery in regards to the Oxygen cycle on Earth. Oxygen ions though, so I'm not sure what that means in regard to free Oxygen? Oxygen ions are constantly escaping from the Earth's upper atmosphere through the magnetic polar caps. This has long been observed but the underlying mechanism has eluded scientists - until now.A recent study reports the first experimental assessment of a physical mechanism that makes a significant contribution to the acceleration of oxygen ions towards the centre of the terrestrial magnetic tail' date=' along magnetic field lines. [/quote']Cluster Examines Earth-Escaping Ions It's not clear if this means Oxygen loss is greater than thought before, or just the mechanism of the loss is now better understood. :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 And just to clarify, 'free' Oxygen means atomic Oxygen, that is, atoms of Oxygen not bound to other elements? Yes, exactly. Free oxygen would mean elemental, diatomic [ce]O_2[/ce]... although I guess it wouldn't have to be diatomic - it could be ozone or even monoatomic O. But, no, the -ides, -ites, and -ates I mentioned above would not be "free". To be an ite or an ate, oxygen must be bound to something. As I don't know much biology, I'm not sure what form hemoglobin accepts oxygen in with different species :shrug: ~modest Turtle 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 All well & good, except the theme here is oxygen in the deep ocean, and every one has a hedge on whether it's all from the atmosphere or not. No process you know of produces free oxygen perhaps, which is not to say such processes don't exist. And isn't the 'small' amount of Oxygen at depth that the worms 'breath' free oxygen? So, free oxygen does exist in nature contrary to your declaration. Why not a little of your UFO-we-oughta-look-before-we-declare reasoning here? Until last month, everyone knew that submarine volcanoes couldn't explosively erupt because of the water pressure, and yet an explosive eruption field is exactly what was found under the Arctic Ocean. Tell me we know all about the abyss and there is nothing further to investigate. Tell me we know all about how & what oxygen, let alone the other elements, does down there. I don't question some of your specifics, but your general implication that you et al know exactly what is going on doesn't make the mark. Science is always amendable. :singer: There is no process we know of that will result in a number for Pi that is a rational number either but I don't expect to ever see such a number. Chemistry is an exact science much like mathematics. Chemical elements can only combine and react in certain predictable ways. Free oxygen is not produced in our environment by any means other than photosynthesis. If not for photosynthesis free oxygen would be at best a trace element in earths atmosphere and even less in the oceans. Free oxygen is O2, ozone O3 is produced by the effects of things like UV and lightning as is O1 both of these are even more reactive than O2. Deep sea oxygen comes from cold oxygenated polar water. sinking as it is replaced by warmer water from the equator. No one I know of doubts that oxygen in the deep ocean comes from anywhere other than the atmosphere. Oxygen ions would be O- Oxygen with one electron knocked off by energy usually in the earths upper atmosphere. This charged oxygen is easily manipulated by the earths magnetic field. O- would be very reactive as well. I don't understand why you would think oxygen might not come from photosynthesis. Where else would it come from? Can you name a chemical reaction that released free oxygen that would exist in large areas under the sea? there are chemical reactions that release oxygen but they use chemicals that are even less likely to exist in nature than oxygen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 There is no process we know of that will result in a number for Pi that is a rational number either but I don't expect to ever see such a number. Strawman. Chemistry is an exact science much like mathematics. Chemical elements can only combine and react in certain predictable ways. So like mathematics, we know everything about chemistry? Free oxygen is not produced in our environment by any means other than photosynthesis. If not for photosynthesis free oxygen would be at best a trace element in earths atmosphere and even less in the oceans. Free oxygen is O2, ozone O3 is produced by the effects of things like UV and lightning as is O1 both of these are even more reactive than O2. Uhmmm...that is a mistatement according to my previous quote: Oxygen can also be made by the splitting of water molecules by ultraviolet radiation from the sun, a process called photodissociation. The only way that any free oxygen product can accumulate, however, is if some of the hydrogen that is produced at the same time escapes into space, permanently removing it from the atmosphere. (Otherwise the hydrogen and the oxygen just recombine into water again.) The rate of net oxygen production by ultraviolet photodissociation is equal to the rate at which the hydrogen escapes to space. This rate is so low that this source of free oxygen is trivial compared with the amount of oxygen created by biological activity. Deep sea oxygen comes from cold oxygenated polar water. sinking as it is replaced by warmer water from the equator. No one I know of doubts that oxygen in the deep ocean comes from anywhere other than the atmosphere. Oxygen ions would be O- Oxygen with one electron knocked off by energy usually in the earths upper atmosphere. This charged oxygen is easily manipulated by the earths magnetic field. O- would be very reactive as well. I don't understand why you would think oxygen might not come from photosynthesis. Where else would it come from? Can you name a chemical reaction that released free oxygen that would exist in large areas under the sea? there are chemical reactions that release oxygen but they use chemicals that are even less likely to exist in nature than oxygen. I'm not saying a lot of Oxygen dosn't come from biota, or even the majority of it. I'm saying we don't know how things work at the ocean bottoms and I'm also saying that your 'absolute' claims are wrong. Now if you would qualify and say 'some' or 'most' Oxygen, and say 'no process yet discovered frees Oxygen', then I don't have a problem with that at all either. Your absolute declarations however discount the other sources and disallow new discoveries. As I pointed out, everyone 'knew' by the laws of chemistry & physics that gases at great depth would be liquid and so everyone 'knew' a volcano on the sea floor couldn't explode like St. Helens. But wait...everyone was wrong. :) Ooopppsss....:singer: Now what I don't understand is why you insist there is nothing new to discover about how Oxygen behaves in the deep blue sea. :singer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Strawman. So like mathematics, we know everything about chemistry? :eek2: Uhmmm...that is a mistatement according to my previous quote: I'm not saying a lot of Oxygen dosn't come from biota, or even the majority of it. I'm saying we don't know how things work at the ocean bottoms and I'm also saying that your 'absolute' claims are wrong. Now if you would qualify and say 'some' or 'most' Oxygen, and say 'no process yet discovered frees Oxygen', then I don't have a problem with that at all either. Your absolute declarations however discount the other sources and disallow new discoveries. As I pointed out, everyone 'knew' by the laws of chemistry & physics that gases at great depth would be liquid and so everyone 'knew' a volcano on the sea floor couldn't explode like St. Helens. But wait...everyone was wrong. :doh: Ooopppsss....:naughty: Now what I don't understand is why you insist there is nothing new to discover about how Oxygen behaves in the deep blue sea. All significant free oxygen comes from biology, there is no other significant source for free oxygen, if you know of one tell me. UV disassociation is not a significant source of oxygen, it produces most if not all ozone but ozone is not O2 and if you took all the ozone in the atmosphere and turned it into O2 it still would not be a significant amount of oxygen. What you are saying about undersea volcanoes is a straw man argument and has nothing to do with what we are talking about. I have given the accepted source for under sea oxygen, it is an accepted fact. If you have evidence to the contrary please enlighten me. No known process, expected process, or theorized process, produces any significant free oxygen in our natural environment other than biology, that's as fuzzy as I can make that statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.