Will CO2 absorb photon in all directions?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Believe said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

Is is in fact a law of physics
Click to expand...
That is true but I was talking about kinetic energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inelastic_collision
An inelastic collision, in contrast to an elastic collision, is a collision in which kinetic energy is not conserved.

In collisions of macroscopic bodies, some kinetic energy is turned into vibrational energy of the atoms, causing a heating effect, and the bodies are deformed.
Click to expand...
 
Robittybob1 said:
That is true but I was talking about kinetic energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inelastic_collision
Click to expand...

The conservation of energy referres to ALL ENERGY. You need to read the dam webpage before you talk. The transfer of kinetic energy to heat energy IS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Kinetic ENERGY is called kinetic ENERGY because it is ENERGY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Either way the conservation of kinetic energy has nothing to do with DIRECTION, only the overall energy present in the system.
 
Believe said:
The conservation of energy referres to ALL ENERGY. You need to read the dam webpage before you talk. The transfer of kinetic energy to heat energy IS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Kinetic ENERGY is called kinetic ENERGY because it is ENERGY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Either way the conservation of kinetic energy has nothing to do with DIRECTION, only the overall energy present in the system.
Click to expand...
Don't get angry! Kinetic energy will be determined by the conservation of momentum. Momentum has a direction and so does velocity, so KE has plenty to do with direction. :)
 
NO, the direction does not matter, it can be ANY DIRECTION and the DIRECTION CAN CHANGED. Only the amount of TOTAL ENERGY is conserved. If you don't believe me throw a ball at the wall or 2 balls at eachother and see it direction is conserved. IT CLEARLY ISN'T. Though the particle IS imparted with kinetic energy in that certain direction as soon as a collision occurs, several of which will happen every second, the DIRECTION WILL BE CHANGED even the thought the TOTAL ENERGY IS CONSERVED. Direction is not a form of energy and is not conserved.
 
Any sport involving a ball would only be possible if the balls didn't fly off in any direction. There is skill in knowing where the ball will go e.g. golf soccer or football.
OK the ball changes direction but it is far from being random. Direction is changed with elastic collisions. I will admit after a few collisions the direction that individual balls would be going after multiple ball to ball interactions will be hard to predict. But the total initial momentum brought in by the balls is never lost. (Conservation of momentum).
Except that with friction the ball will stop rolling - so you might ask where has the momentum gone in that case? But it will be there in the surroundings. :)
 
Last edited:
Robittybob1 said:
Any sport involving a ball would only be possible if the balls didn't fly off in any direction. There is skill in knowing where the ball will go e.g. golf soccer or football.
OK the ball changes direction but it is far from being random. Direction is changed with elastic collisions. I will admit after a few collisions the direction that individual balls would be going after multiple ball to ball interactions will be hard to predict. But the total initial momentum brought in by the balls is never lost. (Conservation of momentum).
Except that with friction the ball will stop rolling - so you might ask where has the momentum gone in that case? But it will be there in the surroundings. :)
Click to expand...

Friction creates heat, rub your hands together for while. This is where the energy of the rolling ball goes. As you said the direction will be unpredictable and random after a few collisions which will take about a second or less in the air. How could it push the earth in any direction if the direction of the momentum is lost long before it reachs the ground? It will have the same energy yes, but this only makes they molecules in the air zip around faster, but they WILL NOT be going in the same direction for any length of time.
 
Believe said:
..... How could it push the earth in any direction if the direction of the momentum is lost long before it reachs the ground? It will have the same energy yes, but this only makes they molecules in the air zip around faster, but they WILL NOT be going in the same direction for any length of time.
Click to expand...

That is how a wind develops. For one or other reason, even though the air molecules are moving in all directions, there is a component that can be called "velocity", and the body moves along.

OK a single photon's momentum contribution might go unnoticed but when there is a source as powerfull as the Sun this can't be ignored.
On Earth the incident light is mostly in the visible spectrum. Once it has passed through the atmosphere and struck the ground, the light energy is changed into heat. The heat is radiated in all directions. So there is no net momentum change in the atmosphere. But where this whole chain of events occurs in the gaseous atmosphere I think the momentum is not lost but is gained by the atmosphere. :)

We need to concentrate as to what happens on Venus, for it is different to the Earth situation. But some understanding of what happens on Earth and examples of it won't hurt.
 
We need to concentrate as to what happens on Venus, for it is different to the Earth situation
Click to expand...

Are you abandoning your 'Life began on Mercury' nonsense?
 
AlexG said:
Are you abandoning your 'Life began on Mercury' nonsense?
Click to expand...
I'll give up when you give it up too!

Mercury has not had a substantial atmosphere for a long time. Early on in its existence it might have had a modest atmosphere allowing for periods of drying and concentration of life forming chemicals. Only once they land a robotic rover that can check out if there still is a trace of life in the frozen poles will we know for sure. :)
 
Did you read Dynamics in Planetary Atmospheric Physics: Comparative Studies of Equatorial Super-rotation for Venus, Titan, and Earth?

techdigest.jhuapl.edu/TD/td2602/Zhu.pdf

OK I could find any references to his mechanism this "Thermal Pumping" but when I have been thinking about it, that paper and my idea are similar,
The Sun powers the atmospheres on these planets to super-rotate (Zoom around the planet much faster than the planet spins itself).

It is only one step further to realise that this mass of atmosphere dragging on the surface of the planet will have a speeding up effect on the planet's rotation.

Did you see this similarity? :)
 
waitedavid137 said:
Its not speeding up, its slowing down and it has nothing to do with solar radiation.
Click to expand...
Now what planet are you talking about?

If the wind is super rotating and prograde there is no option but to effect an acceleration of the planet's spin rate.

Why would you say it is slowing down? There could be other factors slowing it. What are they then?

"Thermal pumping" was to do with solar radiation. Did you disgree with the paper presented "Dynamics in Planetary Atmospheric Physics: Comparative Studies of Equatorial Super-rotation for Venus, Titan, and Earth?

techdigest.jhuapl.edu/TD/td2602/Zhu.pdf"?
 
Super rotator - where the wind moves around the planet faster than the planet spins on its axis. This must in the absence of other factors make the planet spin faster and faster till the forces that drive the super rotation are balanced against other forces. :)
 
Robittybob1 said:
Well this only applies to the current Earth situation in a very minor way as the GHG are only a small fraction of the Earth's atmosphere.
Add to that the effect of tidal angular momentum transfer to the Moon which is slowing the Earth. So there are opposing effects and they are beyond sorting them out.

But as you point out prior to the Moon (being a slowing influence) the Earth was roaring around at a frightening rate, and fully covered with a range of GHG at that time.

Venus definitely doesn't have a Moon now but was thought to have had one. The collision of it's moon may have stopped it spinning the way all other (bar 1) planets do (counter clockwise) so I think of Venus' atmosphere speeding up its rotation in the way it is now going.

Jupiter is the prime example of this effect on the planets spin. No scientist can offer the reason it spins as fast yet I believe the effect I have described accounts for some of it.

The other planets I'm just not sure about at this stage of my study.

Also the random nature of the heating only appears on the Earth where the atmosphere is clear enough for the sunlight to strike the land surface. On planets orbiting the Sun, even if they were not rotating with respect to the stars, as they orbited the Sun, from the Sun's perspective the planet will rotate once per year. Hence as far as the incoming radiation from the Sun is concerned the photons absorbed by GHG will tend to occur on the side appearing to be going away from the Sun, not the approaching side.
Now I do realise that due to the angular momentum in the planetary dust disc, from the beginning, it is unlikely that the forming planets did not have some spin from the very beginning.
Click to expand...
A great animation of the Earth's super rotating winds found in the YouTube
"Why Mars Died, and Earth Lived"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&v=oC31pqk9sak&NR=1
Uploaded by SpaceRip who on the whole has very informative material.
 
Hi Robbitybob,
This thread is too long, too old, and too woo to be resurrected. If there's something new to discuss, a new thread would be a better idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top