atomsmasher Posted August 26, 2023 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2023 On 8/14/2023 at 10:48 AM, Moontanman said: You are suffering from the delusion that Earth's water was somehow created on the Earth. When you see a white smoke trailing a jet what you are seeing is the reflection of water crystals created by the burning of hydrogen and oxygen. Yes, water was created during this burning process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 27, 2023 Report Share Posted August 27, 2023 23 hours ago, atomsmasher said: When you see a white smoke trailing a jet what you are seeing is the reflection of water crystals created by the burning of hydrogen and oxygen. Yes, water was created during this burning process. This would be true, but that doesn't mean all or even a significant fraction of the Earth's water was made on the Earth. In fact quite the opposite is true, most of the Oxygen in Earth's atmosphere was made by plants by splitting up H2O and CO2 and combining the result to make sugars and free oxygen. Earth's water, the vast majority of it, existed before the Earth formed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 27, 2023 Report Share Posted August 27, 2023 Our planet was formed by the condensation of an interstellar gas cloud triggered, in all probability, by a nearby supernova 5.0, or so, billion years ago. atomsmasher 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomsmasher Posted November 5, 2023 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2023 The question I have been asking is not where the water came from but the process in which the water molecule was formed in the first place. My second question is how much energy was released when our earth’s water was formed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted November 5, 2023 Report Share Posted November 5, 2023 1 hour ago, atomsmasher said: The question I have been asking is not where the water came from but the process in which the water molecule was formed in the first place. My second question is how much energy was released when our earth’s water was formed? Our planet condensed out of the same cloud of gas and dust that our Sun condensed out of, it was already water at that time. Water in the form of molecules or icey dust particles permeates our universe, in fact H2O is the second most common molecule in the universe. The reactions that produce this water generally occur everywhere all the time when a hydrogen molecule meets an oxygen molecule. This is a chemical reaction and therefore has little visible effect over the nuclear reactions of stars in the interstellar medium. While the Earth's oceans are vast from our point of view compared to the Volume and mass of the Earth the oceans are just a thin film of mist. If all the hydrogen and oxygen necessary to make up the Earth's ocean were to react it would not have much effect on the earth. It might sterilize the surface but the energy released would be tiny compared to even the normal radioactive decay of elements in the Earth's crust. I can't tell you in joules or watts what the number is but you are talking about a chemical reaction. On the scale of the solar system chemical reactions are tiny and insignificant. You seem to be laboring under the impression that Earth's ocean form from hydrogen and oxygen reacting here on the Earth, nothing could be further from the truth, our water and all the water in our solar system was water well before the solar system was even formed. Free oxygen is quite reactive and seldom occurs in nature in it's free form. Oxygen reacts with nearly everything and so oxygen is mostly bound up as silicates and other minerals on the Earth. One comparison to make is with the silicates in the Earth, the amount of energy released by the combination of all the silicon and oxygen that make up our silicates on our planet would have released vastly more energy than the hydrogen oxygen reaction that made our water but yet again silicates were already silicates way before the Earth formed and the chemical processes that formed silicates out in space were and are too weak to compare to nuclear reactions that dominate the universe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomsmasher Posted January 26 Author Report Share Posted January 26 On 11/5/2023 at 9:08 AM, Moontanman said: combination of all the silicon and oxygen that make up our silicates on our planet would have released vastly more energy than the hydrogen oxygen reaction that made our water but yet again silicates were already silicates way before the Earth formed Please tell my what solicates have to so with the water molecule? (:- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomsmasher Posted January 26 Author Report Share Posted January 26 What is Silicate? Oxygen, silicon, and aluminium are the most abundant elements in the surface of the earth; more than 80% of the atoms in the solid crust are oxygen or silicon, mostly in the form of silicates. Silicates are the minerals containing silicon and oxygen in tetrahedral SiO44- units, which are linked together in several patterns. About 95% of the earth’s crust is composed of silicate minerals, aluminosilicate clays or silica. Silicates are extremely important because the cement, ceramic and glass industries are based on their chemical composition. Metallurgical extraction processes often produce silicates as waste products or slag either because the minerals are silicates. https://byjus.com/chemistry/silicate/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 26 Report Share Posted January 26 7 minutes ago, atomsmasher said: Please tell my what solicates have to so with the water molecule? (:- I was pointing out why your assertions around the formation of water and the energy released by the oxygen hydrogen reaction is moot considering how little oxygen has reacted with hydrogen compared to other oxygen compounds in the Earth. Water is but a tiny fraction of the chemicals found on the Earth and not the most energy productive of the chemical reactions that formed the chemical compounds making up the Earth. I will point out yet again that many of these chemicals and chemical compounds had already formed in space before gravity brought them together to form the Earth. Your questions/assertions about where water came from and or the energy released by that formation are not relevant to the formation of the Earth since these compounds already existed before the Earth formed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 26 Report Share Posted January 26 14 minutes ago, atomsmasher said: What is Silicate? Oxygen, silicon, and aluminium are the most abundant elements in the surface of the earth; more than 80% of the atoms in the solid crust are oxygen or silicon, mostly in the form of silicates. Silicates are the minerals containing silicon and oxygen in tetrahedral SiO44- units, which are linked together in several patterns. About 95% of the earth’s crust is composed of silicate minerals, aluminosilicate clays or silica. Silicates are extremely important because the cement, ceramic and glass industries are based on their chemical composition. Metallurgical extraction processes often produce silicates as waste products or slag either because the minerals are silicates. https://byjus.com/chemistry/silicate/ I know exactly what a silicate is and where they come from, do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomsmasher Posted January 26 Author Report Share Posted January 26 7 minutes ago, Moontanman said: Water is but a tiny fraction of the chemicals found on the Earth What does other chemicals found on earth have to do with the formation of a water molecule and the energy released as a result of the water molecule formation-? Water on earth We can create water by igniting hydrogen gas and oxygen. The reverse process, separating water into hydrogen and oxygen, requires the presence of salt. This reaction gives off a great deal of heat and in the end a water molecule is formed. The volume of the largest sphere, representing all water on, in, and above the Earth, would be about 332,500,000 cubic miles (mi3) (1,386,000,000 cubic kilometers (km3)), and be about 860 miles (about 1,385 kilometers) in diameter. https://tinyurl.com/2p9puutd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 26 Report Share Posted January 26 30 minutes ago, atomsmasher said: What does other chemicals found on earth have to do with the formation of a water molecule and the energy released as a result of the water molecule formation-? Those other chemicals release energy as well when they form. 30 minutes ago, atomsmasher said: Water on earth We can create water by igniting hydrogen gas and oxygen. The reverse process, separating water into hydrogen and oxygen, requires the presence of salt. This reaction gives off a great deal of heat and in the end a water molecule is formed. I know that, the amount of heat given off is insignificant compared to the mass of the Earth. Why are you so obsessed with the formation of water? 30 minutes ago, atomsmasher said: The volume of the largest sphere, representing all water on, in, and above the Earth, would be about 332,500,000 cubic miles (mi3) (1,386,000,000 cubic kilometers (km3)), and be about 860 miles (about 1,385 kilometers) in diameter. https://tinyurl.com/2p9puutd So? The Earth is about 260 billion 260,000,000,000 cubic miles in volume. Almost 1000 times the volume of the Earth's oceans, three orders of magnitude! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomsmasher Posted January 26 Author Report Share Posted January 26 4 hours ago, Moontanman said: Those other chemicals release energy as well when they form. Agree The point I was trying to make was in the form of a question. Earth has been a snowball and a hothouse at different times in its past. So if the climate changed before humans, how can we be sure we’re responsible for the dramatic warming that’s happening today? How Earth’s Climate Changes Naturally (and Why Things Are Different Now) | Quanta Magazine The largest global-scale climate variations in Earth’s recent geological past are the ice age cycles (see infobox, p.B4), which are cold glacial periods followed by shorter warm periods . The last few of these natural cycles have recurred roughly every 100,000 years. Recent estimates of the increase in global average temperature since the end of the last ice age are 4 to 5 °C (7 to 9 °F). That change occurred over a period of about 7,000 years, starting 18,000 years ago. CO2 has risen more than 40% in just the past 200 years, much of this since the 1970s, contributing to human alteration of the planet’s energy budget that has so far warmed Earth by about 1 °C (1.8 °F). If the rise in CO2 continues unchecked, warming of the same magnitude as the increase out of the ice age can be expected by the end of this century or soon after. This speed of warming is more than ten times that at the end of an ice age, the fastest known natural sustained change on a global scale. 6. Climate is always changing. Why is climate change of concern now? | Royal Society The Snowball Earth hypothesis proposes that during one or more of Earth's icehouse climates, Earth's surface became entirely or nearly entirely frozen Snowball Earth - Wikipedia Snowball Earth: The times our planet was covered in ice Ancient rocks suggest that ice entirely covered our planet on at least two occasions. This theory may help explain the rise of complex life that followed. The Earth has endured many changes in its 4.5-billion-year history, with some tumultuous twists and turns along the way. One especially dramatic episode appears to have come between 700 million and 600 million years ago, when scientists think ice smothered the entire planet, from the poles to the equator — twice in quick succession. The story of Snowball Earth | Astronomy.com WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THIS? ADAPT Snow ball earth means planet earth was at in point in history covered in “ice”, aka “water”. Ok, Moontanman I must admit I had no point to make when I started this discussion. But I do know a water molecule is formed when two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen combine to form a water molecule energy is released in the process. My question is, is the energy released during this process the energy used to create earths molten core-? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 27 Report Share Posted January 27 (edited) 1 hour ago, atomsmasher said: Agree The point I was trying to make was in the form of a question. Earth has been a snowball and a hothouse at different times in its past. So if the climate changed before humans, how can we be sure we’re responsible for the dramatic warming that’s happening today? How Earth’s Climate Changes Naturally (and Why Things Are Different Now) | Quanta Magazine The largest global-scale climate variations in Earth’s recent geological past are the ice age cycles (see infobox, p.B4), which are cold glacial periods followed by shorter warm periods . The last few of these natural cycles have recurred roughly every 100,000 years. Recent estimates of the increase in global average temperature since the end of the last ice age are 4 to 5 °C (7 to 9 °F). That change occurred over a period of about 7,000 years, starting 18,000 years ago. CO2 has risen more than 40% in just the past 200 years, much of this since the 1970s, contributing to human alteration of the planet’s energy budget that has so far warmed Earth by about 1 °C (1.8 °F). If the rise in CO2 continues unchecked, warming of the same magnitude as the increase out of the ice age can be expected by the end of this century or soon after. This speed of warming is more than ten times that at the end of an ice age, the fastest known natural sustained change on a global scale. 6. Climate is always changing. Why is climate change of concern now? | Royal Society The Snowball Earth hypothesis proposes that during one or more of Earth's icehouse climates, Earth's surface became entirely or nearly entirely frozen Snowball Earth - Wikipedia Snowball Earth: The times our planet was covered in ice Ancient rocks suggest that ice entirely covered our planet on at least two occasions. This theory may help explain the rise of complex life that followed. The Earth has endured many changes in its 4.5-billion-year history, with some tumultuous twists and turns along the way. One especially dramatic episode appears to have come between 700 million and 600 million years ago, when scientists think ice smothered the entire planet, from the poles to the equator — twice in quick succession. The story of Snowball Earth | Astronomy.com WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THIS? ADAPT Snow ball earth means planet earth was at in point in history covered in “ice”, aka “water”. Ok, Moontanman I must admit I had no point to make when I started this discussion. But I do know a water molecule is formed when two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen combine to form a water molecule energy is released in the process. My question is, is the energy released during this process the energy used to create earths molten core-? No, the energy created via chemical reactions is not enough to account for the molten core of the Earth. Gravitational collapse figures in but the vast majority comes from radioactive decay. I cannot stress enough that the materials making up the Earth had already reacted chemically, especially the water. Oxygen... free molecular oxygen, on the Earth comes mainly from photosynthesising plants, before plants any significant oxygen was bound up chemically in chemical compounds. The hydrogen in the water vapor you see exiting jet engines comes from hydrocarbons being burned in free oxygen, hydrocarbons, in this specific case, that come from plants as well. As the Earth formed over the millions of years of gravitational collapse of the solar system all the water and most other chemicals and compounds had already formed before this collapse began so any energy they might have created via chemical reactions had already been radiated away into space as these chemicals formed. Almost all of the energy of accretion came from gravitational collapse and radioactive decay! I'm not sure why this would even be a question, your questions here indicate a profound lack of understanding of chemistry as well as physics. I am more than willing to help you understand these things better but I do need to understand your motivations. You seem to be asking questions generally asked by religious fundamentalists. Am i close in deciphering your motivations or do you have other reason to ask? Edited January 27 by Moontanman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomsmasher Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 On 1/26/2024 at 6:53 PM, Moontanman said: No, the energy created via chemical reactions is not enough to account for the molten core of the Earth. Gravitational collapse figures in but the vast majority comes from radioactive decay. If there was radioactive decay one would expect to detect this radioactive decay even today, but no such detection has taken place. Moontsanman, Help me out here, in what lava flow was radioactive activity detected-? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 13 minutes ago, atomsmasher said: If there was radioactive decay one would expect to detect this radioactive decay even today, but no such detection has taken place. Moontsanman, Help me out here, in what lava flow was radioactive activity detected-? The entire Earth is radioactive, from uranium to potassium and many others the Earth contains many radioactive isotopes and yes lava flows are radioactive. The radiation is generally below levels that would do biological harm but the heat released builds up due to the mass and volume of the Earth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_internal_heat_budget Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomsmasher Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 52 minutes ago, Moontanman said: The entire Earth is radioactive, from uranium to potassium and many others the Earth contains many radioactive isotopes I doubted your radioactive lava statement, so I checked it out for myself. I was wrong, you Moontanman, were right. Geothermal energy is heat that is generated within the Earth. (Geo means “earth,” and thermal means “heat” in Greek.) It is a renewable resource that can be harvested for human use. About 2,900 kilometers (1,800 miles) below the Earth’s crust, or surface, is the hottest part of our planet: the core. A small portion of the core’s heat comes from the friction and gravitational pull formed when Earth was created more than 4 billion years ago. However, the vast majority of Earth’s heat is constantly generated by the decay of radioactive isotopes, such as potassium-40 and thorium-232. http://tinyurl.com/4dxv5epn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 (edited) 3 hours ago, atomsmasher said: I doubted your radioactive lava statement, so I checked it out for myself. I was wrong, you Moontanman, were right. Geothermal energy is heat that is generated within the Earth. (Geo means “earth,” and thermal means “heat” in Greek.) It is a renewable resource that can be harvested for human use. About 2,900 kilometers (1,800 miles) below the Earth’s crust, or surface, is the hottest part of our planet: the core. A small portion of the core’s heat comes from the friction and gravitational pull formed when Earth was created more than 4 billion years ago. However, the vast majority of Earth’s heat is constantly generated by the decay of radioactive isotopes, such as potassium-40 and thorium-232. http://tinyurl.com/4dxv5epn Actually radioactivity accounts for about half the heat the earth contains. Gravitational collapse of the Earth during its formation account for the rest. Don't forget the input of uranium! 2900 k is the beginning of the outer core, this layer is molten, the inner core starts at around 5100 k, it's hotter but the pressure keeps it solid and continues to the center at 6378 k from the surface. There is a hypothesis that a ball of uranium, thorium, and other radioactive elements several miles in diameter exists at the very center of the earth and generates heat by being a natural nuclear reactor but this is heavily disputed and evidence is lacking. This is an interesting subject, feel free to ask for more. Edited January 28 by Moontanman atomsmasher 1 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.