Earth's atmosphere & oceans came from space, not from volcanoes
Yousuf Khan
surface fluids, air and water, came not from within but from outer
space. I have my doubts about these studies' conclusions, it seems like
a stretch that there could be enough air and water brought from meteors
that are being randomly hurled toward the inner solar system, especially
when the vast majority of them are likely heading towards the Sun.
Yousuf Khan
Are Earth's Oceans Made Of Extraterrestrial Material?
"According to books, the ocean and the atmosphere were formed from
volcanic gases and the Earth's interior is the source of volatile
elements. However, the rocks of the Earth's mantle are deficient in
water (geochemists estimate its concentration at two hundredth percent).
The same is true on Earth's sister planets, Venus and Mars. The main
reason proposed by Albar�de is that, during the formation of the Solar
System, the temperature never dropped sufficiently between the Sun and
the orbit of Jupiter for volatile elements to be able to condense with
planetary material. The arrival of water on Earth therefore corresponds
to a late episode of planetary accretion."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091111110045.htm
Earth's atmosphere came from outer space, scientists find
""We found a clear meteorite signature in volcanic gases," said Dr Greg
Holland the project's lead scientist.
"From that we now know that the volcanic gases could not have
contributed in any significant way to the Earth's atmosphere."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210153538.htm
Jan Panteltje
<bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote in <4b24114c$1...@news.bnb-lp.com>:
>Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two most prominent
>surface fluids, air and water, came not from within but from outer
>space. I have my doubts about these studies' conclusions, it seems like
>a stretch that there could be enough air and water brought from meteors
>that are being randomly hurled toward the inner solar system, especially
>when the vast majority of them are likely heading towards the Sun.
>
> Yousuf Khan
It is obvious in a way, and I think this is correct.
It could also mean earth gained volume long ago, gained a lot of mass,
and the heavier creatures could not handle the gravity and died.
My speculation :-)
That could have happened much later, impacts of one or more a huge ice balls.
BradGuth
> Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two most prominent
> surface fluids, air and water, came not from within but from outer
> space. I have my doubts about these studies' conclusions, it seems like
> a stretch that there could be enough air and water brought from meteors
> that are being randomly hurled toward the inner solar system, especially
> when the vast majority of them are likely heading towards the Sun.
>
> Yousuf Khan
>
> Are Earth's Oceans Made Of Extraterrestrial Material?
> "According to books, the ocean and the atmosphere were formed from
> volcanic gases and the Earth's interior is the source of volatile
> elements. However, the rocks of the Earth's mantle are deficient in
> water (geochemists estimate its concentration at two hundredth percent).
> The same is true on Earth's sister planets, Venus and Mars. The main
> System, the temperature never dropped sufficiently between the Sun and
> the orbit of Jupiter for volatile elements to be able to condense with
> planetary material. The arrival of water on Earth therefore corresponds
> to a late episode of planetary accretion."http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091111110045.htm
>
> Earth's atmosphere came from outer space, scientists find
> ""We found a clear meteorite signature in volcanic gases," said Dr Greg
> Holland the project's lead scientist.
>
> "From that we now know that the volcanic gases could not have
> contributed in any significant way to the Earth's atmosphere."http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210153538.htm
An icy Selene, of say 8e22 kg (possibly <8.5e22 kg), could have easily
contributed quite a bit of its original icy contents upon
lithobraking, into becoming a naked satellite of Earth.
~ BG
dlzc
On Dec 12, 2:55 pm, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two
> most prominent surface fluids, air and water, came
> not from within but from outer space.
Well, the contents of the Earth came from outer space. These
materials did not come from our Sun.
> I have my doubts about these studies' conclusions,
> it seems like a stretch that there could be enough
> air and water brought from meteors that are being
> randomly hurled toward the inner solar system,
> especially when the vast majority of them are likely
> heading towards the Sun.
Planets are the vacuum cleaners of space. The Sun is constantly
venting materials that can supply hydrogen for water production, and
the "missing mass" in intergalactic space was hydrogen and lots of
oxygen.
David A. Smith
Yousuf Khan
I have no problem accepting that the original air and water came from
the meteors and planetesimals that formed the Earth at the beginning, as
there was plenty of material to go around at that time. And the Sun
wasn't as much of a target within original nursery dust cloud, as it too
was forming at that time.
But after formation, things must have gotten a bit more static in their
mass ratios. Any asteroids and comets coming towards the inner solar
system were likely hitting the objects of the inner solar system (i.e.
the terrestrial planets & the Sun) based on the ratio of these objects'
masses.
So when things were a bit more mixed up during formation, these items
had more chance of getting to every object as they formed.
Basically, it's more likely the chemicals arrived during formation than
during late heavy bombardment.
Yousuf Khan
Jan Panteltje
<bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote in <4b24...@news.bnb-lp.com>:
If you look at very old maps of the earth, you will see the continents
sort of glued together.
Those are now apart, due to continental drift they say.
In the middle of the oceans between those continents there is
a volcanic ridge still spewing out material.
It could also be that some giant body impacted and increased the earth mass,
blew it up like a balloon, and caused the oceans and the separation of the continents,
Yousuf Khan
> An icy Selene, of say 8e22 kg (possibly <8.5e22 kg), could have easily
> contributed quite a bit of its original icy contents upon
> lithobraking, into becoming a naked satellite of Earth.
Oh, you mean like a car hitting the brakes, and a passenger breaking
through the window taking all that glass with him/her? ;)
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
> Dear Yousuf Khan:
>
> On Dec 12, 2:55 pm, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two
>> most prominent surface fluids, air and water, came
>> not from within but from outer space.
>
> Well, the contents of the Earth came from outer space. These
> materials did not come from our Sun.
I have no problem accepting that the materials all came during the
original formation event, since everything came from space during that
time. It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and water came during
the later period of Late Heavy Bombardment that I have trouble with.
> Planets are the vacuum cleaners of space. The Sun is constantly
> venting materials that can supply hydrogen for water production, and
> the "missing mass" in intergalactic space was hydrogen and lots of
> oxygen.
Yes, understood, but why would it come later rather than right at the
beginning?
Yousuf Khan
John Curtis
> Are Earth's Oceans Made Of Extraterrestrial Material?
>
Water emanating from Halema'uma'u crater at Kilauea is low in
deuterium, a composition closer to solar hydrogen as well as
primordial hydrogen trapped in seafloor basalts:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V61-473FFCJ-2J&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=39aadd547c6854d043f81bda6daee8b1
or
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976E&PSL..31..369C
In contrast, comet water has twice as much deuterium as ocean water:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-19690571.html
and meteorites have even more deuterium:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981Natur.294..639M
John Curtis
BradGuth
Lithobraking is one icy orb encountering another at a slow enough
velocity so that each orb manages to survive.
Gravity/tidal actions do the rest of pulling ice away from Selene.
~ BG
dlzc
On Dec 13, 6:09 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> dlzc wrote:
> > Dear Yousuf Khan:
>
> > On Dec 12, 2:55 pm, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two
> >> most prominent surface fluids, air and water, came
> >> not from within but from outer space.
>
> > Well, the contents of the Earth came from outer
> > space. These materials did not come from our Sun.
>
> I have no problem accepting that the materials al
>l came during the original formation event, since
> everything came from space during that time.
Well, not "everything", but 99+%...
> It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and
> water came during the later period of Late Heavy
> Bombardment that I have trouble with.
I don't hear them saying this. I only hear them ruling out one source
of our atmosphere, not saying anything about when it arrived.
> > Planets are the vacuum cleaners of space.
> > The Sun is constantly venting materials that
> > can supply hydrogen for water production, and
> > the "missing mass" in intergalactic space was
> > hydrogen and lots of oxygen.
>
> Yes, understood, but why would it come later
> rather than right at the beginning?
I think all they are saying is that our atmosphere was not produced
primarily by subterrainian emission.
For all we know, Theia could have been covered in ice... both water
and atmosphere. If you'll recall, there have been quite a few
discussions about lightning passing through the gases in the early
atmosphere, making the "soup" from whence life sprang. That cannot
happen with a vacuum, and water can just as easily be steam and still
be attached to the Earth.
David A. Smith
YKhan
> On Dec 13, 6:09 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I have no problem accepting that the materials al
> >l came during the original formation event, since
> > everything came from space during that time.
>
> Well, not "everything", but 99+%...
>
> > It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and
> > water came during the later period of Late Heavy
> > Bombardment that I have trouble with.
>
> I don't hear them saying this. I only hear them ruling out one source
> of our atmosphere, not saying anything about when it arrived.
Really? You didn't hear them saying that? That's all I heard them
saying. At least in one of the articles they had specifically quoted
one of the scientists, Dr. Greg Holland:
"Therefore the atmosphere and oceans must have come from somewhere
else, possibly from a *late bombardment* of gas and water rich
materials similar to comets."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210153538.htm
And in the other article, they didn't specifically reference "late
heavy bombardment", but identified it by its description quite
thoroughly:
"The major delivery of volatile elements on our planet could have
corresponded to a phenomenon that occurred some tens of millions of
years after the lunar impact: this was the big clean up of the outer
Solar System initiated by the giant planets. Due to their very strong
gravity, they sent the final ice-rich planetary rubble in all
directions, including in our own direction."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091111110045.htm
Yousuf Khan
dlzc
On Dec 13, 5:16 pm, YKhan <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 13, 1:28 pm, dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 13, 6:09 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I have no problem accepting that the materials al
> > >l came during the original formation event, since
> > > everything came from space during that time.
>
> > Well, not "everything", but 99+%...
>
> > > It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and
> > > water came during the later period of Late Heavy
> > > Bombardment that I have trouble with.
>
> > I don't hear them saying this. I only hear them
> > ruling out one source of our atmosphere, not
> > saying anything about when it arrived.
>
> Really? You didn't hear them saying that? That's
> all I heard them saying. At least in one of the
> articles they had specifically quoted one of the
> scientists, Dr. Greg Holland:
>
> "Therefore the atmosphere and oceans must
> have come from somewhere else, possibly
<pretend quote>
"possibly, but our data set does not touch this interpretation"
> from a *late bombardment* of gas and water rich
> materials similar to comets.
> "http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210153538.htm
>
> And in the other article, they didn't specifically
> reference "late heavy bombardment", but
> identified it by its description quite thoroughly:
>
> "The major delivery of volatile elements on our
> planet could have
<another pretend quote>
"could have, but our data set does not touch this interpretation"
> corresponded to a phenomenon that occurred
> some tens of millions of years after the lunar
> impact: this was the big clean up of the outer
> Solar System initiated by the giant planets.
> Due to their very strong gravity, they sent the
> final ice-rich planetary rubble in all directions,
> including in our own direction.
"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091111110045.htm
... which could have occurred anytime in the last 4 billion years.
Their data only decreases the likelihood of the "volatiles" having
been emitted from the interior of the Earth. It says nothing about
when they arrived. It says nothing about how they arrived (other than
"not from inside the Earth").
You are getting your ire up at their *opinions*, not their reports, it
seems to me.
David A. Smith
YKhan
> On Dec 12, 1:55 pm, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:> Are Earth's Oceans Made Of Extraterrestrial Material?
>
> Isotopic composition of hydrogen in juvenile water speaks otherwise.
> Water emanating from Halema'uma'u crater at Kilauea is low in
> deuterium, a composition closer to solar hydrogen as well as
> primordial hydrogen trapped in seafloor basalts:
Thanks, it helps me populate the Dispute Finder.
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
Quite a bit of our solar system may have come from the sudden and
recent demise of the nearby Sirius(B) situation.
~ BG
BradGuth
Our moon(Selene) was likely icy and worth at least 8e22 kg before
lithobraking into us.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> If you look at very old maps of the earth, you will see the continents
> sort of glued together.
> Those are now apart, due to continental drift they say.
> In the middle of the oceans between those continents there is
> a volcanic ridge still spewing out material.
> It could also be that some giant body impacted and increased the earth mass,
> blew it up like a balloon, and caused the oceans and the separation of the continents,
Well, it sounds like you're thinking about the Theia hypothesis. The one
that suggests that a Mars-sized protoplanet hit the Earth protoplanet
early in its history which resulted in the Moon being created in orbit
around the Earth from the leftover debris. But of course that hit
would've happened 4.5 billion years ago, too long ago for the
continental drift you're talking about.
There is another theory of Moon formation, called Fission, which
suggests that a rapidly spinning Earth with an instability in its
interior ended up lopping off a portion of itself. The remaining piece
went into orbit as the Moon. The continents are the scar left behind by
the emergence of the Moon.
I personally don't think either theory is likely. I prefer the
co-formation theory, which suggests that both the Earth and Moon formed
within the same region simultaneously as co-planets. The Earth got the
bulk of the materials, and became the main body. This would better
explain the fact that the Moon orbits in the same plane as the Earth
orbits the Sun.
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
> ... which could have occurred anytime in the last 4 billion years.
> Their data only decreases the likelihood of the "volatiles" having
> been emitted from the interior of the Earth. It says nothing about
> when they arrived. It says nothing about how they arrived (other than
> "not from inside the Earth").
>
> You are getting your ire up at their *opinions*, not their reports, it
> seems to me.
Well, most of the science is about the final interpretation of the
opinions, not the initial raw data.
Yousuf Khan
Jan Panteltje
<bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote in <4b2d198e$1...@news.bnb-lp.com>:
I was not talking about the moon's formation.
Could well have happened that last way you mentioned, or some other way.
Try reading again what I wrote.
Antares 531
<bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
>Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two most prominent
>surface fluids, air and water, came not from within but from outer
>space. I have my doubts about these studies' conclusions, it seems like
>a stretch that there could be enough air and water brought from meteors
>that are being randomly hurled toward the inner solar system, especially
>when the vast majority of them are likely heading towards the Sun.
>
> Yousuf Khan
>
Where did the crepe rings around Saturn come from? The are made up of
water/ice coated dust particles.
Gordon
BradGuth
Moons and ice are captured. This is not saying that water doesn't
come from within planets and moons.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> Where did the crepe rings around Saturn come from? The are made up of
> water/ice coated dust particles.
>
> Gordon
Current theory is that one of Saturn's moons broke up and the rings are
the debris left over from it.
Of course, recently they discovered a nearly invisible additional ring
around Saturn, the Phoebe-Ring, which they suspect is created by
emissions from (probably asteroid impacts on) Saturn's moon, Phoebe.
Yousuf Khan
Antares 531
wrote:
Thanks, Yousuf. Is it possible that Earth once had similar crepe
rings? If so, what was the time frame and what happened to them?
Gordon
Yousuf Khan
> Thanks, Yousuf. Is it possible that Earth once had similar crepe
> rings? If so, what was the time frame and what happened to them?
It's possible, but it depends on having a shepherd moon to stabilize
them. Otherwise they dissipate. All of the rings around the gas giants
are shepherded by moons. They usually need to be shepherded on the inner
part of the ring as well as the outer part. One moon does the inner
part, the other does the outer part. We only have one moon, the Moon. If
we had two or more, then we could've had rings.
Yousuf Khan