Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: EvaH on 15/04/2021 15:06:57
-
Stefano asks:
I would like to know if there are any studies on the amount of matter present in the Earth. My point is that, if the earth does not expand, the number of matter present in the earth should remain constant. If so, could this better explain the cycle of life? Who or what dictates the rules of balance of how much matter and in what form where to be present in a spacetime? And with what impact humanity changed these rules when they started "playing god"!
Can you help?
-
I would like to know if there are any studies on the amount of matter present in the Earth.
The mass of Earth is somewhere around 6x1027 grams. This has been known for a while and further studies might only add a few significant digits to prior estimates.
My point is that, if the earth does not expand, the number of matter present in the earth should remain constant.
If you dump enough new material onto it, it will expand. Earth tends to lose about 100,000 tons of mass per year to space, mostly in the form of hydrogen. Its annual gain is about half that on average from dust, meteors, etc.
If so, could this better explain the cycle of life? Who or what dictates the rules of balance of how much matter and in what form where to be present in a spacetime? And with what impact humanity changed these rules when they started "playing god"!
There is no balance or set of rules. Life seems to not have anything to do with it other than to have changed the chemical makeup of the atmosphere which arguably has a small effect on the rate of atmospheric escape.
Humans are responsible only for a tiny fraction of the changes mentioned above. We have negligible effect on the atmospheric escape, and also even more negligible effect on the rate of meteors coming in.
-
We also receive H+ ions from the sun via the solar wind and also solar energy both of which can be absorbed and converted to matter by nuclear fusion in the core of the planet.
-
We also receive H+ ions from the sun via the solar wind and also solar energy both of which can be absorbed and converted to matter by nuclear fusion in the core of the planet.
except that there is no fusion in the core of the planet...
-
Stefano...Do You even Know the Meaning of the phrase
" Playing God " ?
🤔
Halc.
Very Nicely Explained.
👍
acsinuk.
Photosynthesis might be contributing to add mass.
(Corrections Requested)
🙏
P.S. -
[ Invalid Attachment ]
-
The cycle of life occurs within the fixed mass of stuff on or near the surface of the planet. Simply put, plants absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and water and other nutrients from the soil when the sun shines, and convert it into carbohydrates, hydrocarbons etc, releasing oxygen as they do so. Animals eat the plants and get energy by oxidising them, returning the CO2 to the air. Dead plants and animals get broken down to their simpler components by fungi and invertebrates, and return nutrients to the soil.
"Playing god" just means altering the balance between plants and animals by eating one or other and encouraging the growth and reproduction of whatever it is that we like to eat.
-
Thanks Halc & Alan for vivid explanations.
👍
(I stand Corrected)
But...umm...Plants do Absorb Photons.
Photons are Massless but still have Momentum Energy.
Heat diffusion transferring Might be Adding a teeny weeny tiny toe OR eeny meany miney moe amount of micromasses to the system?
(Corrections Requested)
🤔
P.S. - mass - energy equivalent.
( U know, i still Do Not Understand how just simply Heating an object adds to the Total Mass of it)
🤔
Adding Heat makes molecules vibrate more or atoms rotate faster...adding to Kinetic Energy.
But if the System is at Rest Momentum, like a press iron, then it ain't moving or running around.
So the Heat Energy, converting to Kinetic Energy is Not being consumed as Momentum Energy...
Hence, just bcoz it has to add somewhere, so it adds on to the Rest Mass of the System.
(Does any of the Gibberish above make any Logical sense?)
😇
But if the Above were to be True...
Then Cooling an Object to say near absolute zero would slightly decrease the Total Mass?
(I think i should just shhut upp now)
🤫
(ReEdit) -
Perhaps Photosynthesis is a very small Negligible factor.
Maybe factoring the whole Planet would make sense.
Like say, Earth absorbs Sun's energy, in form of Heat.
So Earth's mass should be changing in micromasses Right?
Cuz all that Energy is not adding to Tangential momentum isn't it?
🤔
Fun Fact - If hot water & cold water are mixed together, cold water sinks at the Bottom!
Bcoz of higher density of cold water, molecules are densely packed.
😇
(Pretty much same reason why hot air balloons rise up...yaay!)
🎈
Hope that's Correct.
It ain't bcoz of molecules fizzing & hitting against inner balloon wall providing lift momentum, Right?
🤔
Helium then must be having real low density..like amount of molecules per cubic meter.
-
Stefano asks:
I would like to know if there are any studies on the amount of matter present in the Earth. My point is that, if the earth does not expand, the number of matter present in the earth should remain constant. If so, could this better explain the cycle of life? Who or what dictates the rules of balance of how much matter and in what form where to be present in a spacetime? And with what impact humanity changed these rules when they started "playing god"!
Can you help?
Stefano, the idea of a 'space' expanding doesn't change the matter density, eh, the intrinsic matter density I better add. If that is that you mean? A analogue to the universe expanding is the one in where everything 'shrinks', you, me and everything consisting of matter. It's somewhat flawed as it somewhere should make us into 'Black holes', presuming the universe to have a scale and 'size'.
There are four forces normally defined to physics, and no matter if and how that space expands they still will keep us together.
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-are-fundamental-forces-of-physics-2699070
=
although it do change the matter density in the universe, globally defined, so it was a poor choice of words there. We don't need to know anything about the universe scale or size to notice that it must, logically defined.