Notices
Results 1 to 62 of 62

Thread: The hydrosphere-spending hypothesis

  1. #1 The hydrosphere-spending hypothesis 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    The hydrosphere-spending hypothesis

    ------on its cause and its evolutional significance

    This is maybe a long article, so I give an abstract first.

    Abstract:
    According to the sea-floor spreading hypothesis proposed by Hess and Dietz, the convection of the earth mantle means the interior substance and the outer substance of the earth are exchanged with each other continuously. Here we show that this exchange causes the oxygen from atmosphere to be absorbed by the interior substance of the earth persistently and irreversibly. The renewed oxygen comes from the hydrosphere, as the oxygen content is basically stable in the atmosphere, implying a spending of seawater, or a hydrosphere spending. The process of hydrosphere spending is related to the methane produced in the biosphere and decomposed by the sun’s ultraviolet ray in the upper atmosphere. The original earth is considered as a celestial body completely surrounded with water. The Cambrian explosion should be corresponding to the first land appearing on the hydrosphere.


    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    1, Introduction:

    Based on the results from marine geologic survey, Hess and Dietz put forward their hypothesis on sea-floor spreading in early 1960`s: under the influence of the thermal convection of the earth mantle, the rising flow of hot earth mantle forms new sea-floor under the mid-oceanic ridges, the newly formed sea-floor moves towards both sides with the thermal convection of the earth mantle along the mid-oceanic ridges, and eventually, the sea-floor dives back and melts in the mantle, when meeting the lithosphere of continent, which makes the counterbalance of sea-floor[1, 2, 3].

    The sea-floor spreading hypothesis has not only advanced the theory of continental drift proposed by Waggener in the beginning of 20’ century [4], but also laid a foundation for the plate theory of earth proposed by Wilson et al in 1965[5]. Furthermore, the sea-floor spreading hypothesis has led to an important conclusion: the outer layers, including the atmosphere, the hydrosphere and the lithosphere of the earth, and the interior layers, including the mantle and centrosphere are connected in their evolutional process, which should be a new approach for us to understand some mysteries in geo-science. As an attempt, we shall discuss a possible evolutional trend of the hydrosphere with the biosphere in this paper.


    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    2, The oxygen absorbed by the earth’s mantle

    As we known, the mass ratio of the lithosphere to the total mass of the earth, about 0.2%, is small, while that of the core, about 35%, is large, and that of the mantle, about 65%, is even larger[6].

    The content of chemical elements is different in each layer. According to geological survey, the most abundant chemical element in the lithosphere is oxygen with percentage about 46%, and follows are silicon, aluminum, iron and magnesium, with percentages about 28%, 8%, 6% and 4% accordingly[6].

    In general, based on the research on the chemical compositions of the meteorites, the ratio of chemical contents in the whole earth is different from in the lithosphere. The average ratios of chemical element in the whole earth is reckoned as follows: the largest portion is iron with a ratio about 35%, next is oxygen with a ratio about 30%, then silicon with a ratio about 15%, magnesium with a ratio about 13%. There also exist some portions of aluminum, sulfur and other chemical elements in the earth. So it is clearly, as a whole, the substance of the earth should be in the state of deoxidization, though the atmosphere includes oxygen being in the state of oxidization[6].

    The redox characteristic of a terrestrial planet, as a whole, is out of our focus directly. However, the characteristic of a Jovan planet is clear. Jupiter and the others include large quantity of hydrogen being in deoxidizing state, which can be considered as an indirect evidence to demonstrate the substance of the whole earth is in the deoxidizing state.

    The convection of the mantle is one of the important factors dominating geo-chemical cycle. The chemical elements in the mantle and that in hydrosphere are exchanged when the rising mantle meets with the hydrosphere on the mid-oceanic ridges. The black chimney in the ocean floor is a well-marked fact: the cold water become hot, and exchanges the chemical component with the newly formed basalt, while the seawater meets the newly formed sea-floor[7]. The oxygen from the atmosphere would be absorbed, when the deoxidants from the mantle are oxidized, e.g. the hematite is formed with the iron and FeO from the mantle on the sea-floor. Moreover, the sulfide gushed from the mantle is a conspicuous killer of the oxygen from the atmosphere: e.g. one portion of FeS from the mantle will absorbs more than 5 portions of oxygen, 4 portions of oxygen will be absorbed when the vitriol root is formed, and other one and half is needed when the Fe2O3 is formed.

    It is obvious that the process of absorbing oxygen by the substance from the mantle is boosted up through breaking forth of volcano, weathering and other geological process.

    In general, the process of absorbing oxygen by the mantle substance can not be proceeded, if there is no oxygen in the atmosphere. We therefore can assume that the speed of absorbing oxygen by the mantle substance is proportional to the density of oxygen in the atmosphere.

    A =αD (1)

    Where A is the speed coefficient of absorbing oxygen by the mantle substance, α is a ratio coefficient, and D is the density of oxygen in the atmosphere.

    In summary, the mechanism of absorbing oxygen by the mantle substance is irreversible, when the substances from the mantle and the outer layers of the earth, including the atmosphere, hydrosphere and lithosphere, are exchanged in the process of sea-floor spreading.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    3, the oxygen renewed from hydrosphere through the biosphere

    Comparing with the mass ratio of the mantle to the total mass of the earth, which is about 65%, the mass ratio of the atmosphere is very small, only 1 ppm to the total earth mass. As we known, about one-fifths of the atmosphere is oxygen, so the oxygen in the atmosphere is only (1/5) ppm to the total earth mass. Such a scale of oxygen in the earth would have been absorbed completely with the convection of the mantle substance in the long geological ages, no matter what is the original source of the oxygen in the atmosphere.

    Nevertheless, it is true that there is no a period at all when the oxygen in the atmosphere is absorbed completely, judging from the characteristic of the continuance and evolution of the biosphere on the earth.

    A possible conclusion is that there must be a source mechanism in renewing oxygen, besides the oxygen leak mechanism consuming oxygen by the earth mantle discussed above. The oxygen content in the atmosphere is maintained stable when the leak mechanisms is counterbalanced by the renewing mechanism.

    What could play the mechanism of renewing oxygen in the evolution process of the earth?

    Because the substance in mantle is in the deoxidizing state as discussed above, and it is because of the deoxidizing state, the expending oxygen from the atmosphere is formed, so we cannot imagine that the renewing oxygen would be supplied from the earth mantle.

    Furthermore, we cannot imagine that the renewing oxygen comes from outer space either, because meteorite and cosmic dust cannot act as the source of oxygen to counterbalance the absorbing oxygen of the mantle.

    It has been shown recently that the renewal of the oxygen should come from the hydrosphere, and the process of renewing oxygen is corresponding to the presence of biosphere on the earth [8].

    In the circulating process of biosphere, the most important circulation is well known: the plants, acting as the producers, absorb carbon dioxide (CO2) and water, make oxygen and carbohydrate, while the animals acting as the consumers, consume the oxygen and carbohydrate, make carbon dioxide and water. And it is also well known that methane produced by lots of germs is put into the atmosphere through the biosphere circulation. The methane is put out from everglade, lake and some shallow sea, it is also put out from paddy field, meadow and forest[9].

    It is worthy to remark that the methane (and other hydrocarbons) been produced would have withdrawn out the circulation of the biosphere, since the producers (the plants) of the biosphere cannot absorb the methane as if dioxide carbon. So the methane should be detained out the biosphere, and would become more and more in the atmosphere. This would mean a much serious aftereffect: not only strong effects of hothouse which has been reviewed widely in the popular comment, but also a big blast danger when the methane in the atmosphere run up to a certain density through about 100 thousands years. As we known, a period of 100 thousands years is not a long period in geological age!

    But, there is no any evidence to show that the blast had occurred ever in the past time. In fact, it is a little quantity that there exists the methane in the atmosphere, though the biosphere put out the methane into atmosphere continuously from ancient to now. The little existence of the methane does not constitute a clear threat to the human safety, so people do not concern very much that how and where the methane in the atmosphere is transformed.

    Say generally, methane is a kind of gas with stable chemical property.

    Before the time of mankind entering the space, Bates et al in 1950 proposed that the methane would be oxidized gradually by hydroxyl[10]. However, the hydroxyl oxidizing process was not validated strictly, and academic cycle often considered that whereabouts of the methane in the atmosphere is still a misty branch with necessary of further research[11], though the explanation of the methane oxidized gradually by hydroxyl is popular in the world now.

    In fact, an important clue for understanding whereabouts of the methane has appeared clearly since the mankind entered the space ages. It was observed through the space-probing rocket in 1955, that the resonating spectral line with wavelength of 1216 angstrom radiated by hydrogen atoms is very clear. Later, people knew that there is a great deal hydrogen atom in the upper atmosphere, and this is called as “Geocorona” in space physics[12.13].

    We suppose, the hydrogen in “Geocorona” is produced from the methane when it is decomposed by the sun’s ultraviolet radiation. According to the kinetic theory, the speed of hydrogen atoms is 4 times of that for oxygen at the same temperature, and it is close the escape velocity of the earth when the hydrogen atom is under circumstance of high temperature in the exosphere. “Geocorona” is an obvious symbol of the escaping hydrogen, however, as our understanding, it is not equivalent to the main portion of the escaping hydrogen. The hydrogen would escape to outer space from the atmosphere through 4 steps within 24 hours as follows:

    1, the methane diffuses up in the troposphere when the stratosphere becomes high at night;

    2, the methane enters the stratosphere when the stratosphere becomes low at forenoon;

    3, the methane in the stratosphere is decomposed to hydrogen atom by the ultraviolet radiation from the sun during noon. The decomposed hydrogen atoms can not escape away immediately because of the pressure of the sunlight, so the atoms will be gathered in stratosphere for a period;

    4, the gathered hydrogen atoms escape to the outer space in dusk. The speed of the escaping hydrogen atoms is accumulated according to three factors: the kinetic theory, the pressure of the sunlight and the rotation of the earth.

    The beam of escaping hydrogen should be not far from the equator as the earth rotating speed at the equator is fastest, so the escaping beam of the hydrogen should be round the equator, which can be called “a arc escaping beam of setting sun”. Some part of the hydrogen with lower speed in the escaping beam would append to Geocorona, while the main part of escaping hydrogen would run away in the arc scaping beam of setting sun.

    Since the escaped hydrogen atoms come primarily from the hydrosphere, so the residual oxygen would renew to atmosphere naturally as the water in the hydrosphere is spent away gradually.

    How much the water on the original earth?

    In general, the hydrosphere should be considered coming from the substance forming the earth. Lots of valuable messages can be gotten from the research on meteorites, which is considered coming from the original solar system and have traveled in the space for billions years.

    The water in the original ocean should be more than 300 times of that in the hydrosphere nowadays, if the water in the primitive mantle substance is same as one of main kind of meteorites, the global carbon meteorite. At least, the water in the original hydrosphere should be about 8-10 times of that in the hydrosphere nowadays, even if the water in the primitive lithosphere substance is same as the global carbon meteorite[14]. So we can see, It is more than 20 km that the depth of the original ocean would be. This mean the original earth should be surrounded with water completely.

    For all that, we can find a true instance of celestial body in the solar system, which is surrounded by water completely. According to the photos and data from the space explorers “Travelers” and “Galileo”, scientists find that, the Europa, one of the big satellites rounding the Jupiter, is surrounded by an ice-layer completely. It is sure of that the satellite is surrounded by a hydrosphere with the depth more than 10 km under the ice-layer[15].
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    4. The significance of hydrosphere spending on biological evolution

    Based on the discussion above, a riddle, the cause of formation of Cambrian explosion in the can be understood quite naturally [16,17].

    Jupiter is more far away from the sun than that of the earth, so the energy obtained of the earth from the sun is much more than that of the Europa. The earth is always quite warm with the water on the earth in liquid state except where on the two poles of the earth, while the Europa is always covered with ice thoroughly. It can be imagined, plankton such as blue algae, can exist on the surface of the warm water on the earth.

    Some hydrosphere expending through methane or other gases should exist whenever the biosphere appears on the earth. The hydrosphere expending would be strengthen on the earth when some water molecules on the upper atmosphere is decomposed under the ultraviolet radiation from the sun.

    After long time, some tableland under the original ocean would be near to the oceanic surface and form sea-floor of the shallow sea gradually in a certain period, along with the water in the hydrosphere is spent through the biosphere on the earth gradually.

    The sea-floor of the shallow sea, is bright, warm with the sunlight, and flush with oxygen. A lot of plankton should be soon seasoned with the new circumstance under the shallow sea, then formed advanced species rapidly through evolution. So we considered, the appearance of sea-floor of shallow sea should be a milestone for the biological evolution.

    The boom of the biosphere should ascend up the speed of producing of methane. So the speed of producing hydrogen and oxygen should ascend up accordingly. The density of oxygen in the atmosphere also should be ascended according to (1). The biological environment on the earth would be further improved when the oceanic surface is lowered further, and the oxygen density in the atmosphere is increased. So we can see, it is a positive feedback process that the biological evolution in this period should be.

    Along with the flourish of the biosphere, the competition, even the prey between the living creatures should appear gradually, and this should lead that some earlier species would be deracinated, which appeared earlier without competition and without natural enemies.

    The consideration above happens to have the same view of Cambrian explosion 16, which have been a puzzle since Darwinian Theory of Evolution is proposed in 19th century.

    In fact, the phenomena of Cambrian explosion would be boosted up with the mechanism of forming fossil.

    According to the principle of geological paleontology, the corpse of a creature must be covered with some sediment immediately, so that the fossil would be formed through geological ages.

    It would be impossible that the animal corpse on the sea-floor, if any, is covered with sediment brought about by the wave on the oceanic surface, if the sea-floor is far away from oceanic surface.

    The mechanism of forming fossil would become mature, when the tableland, basset up the oceanic surface, since some violent current of water would be formed on the marsh because of the tide, a storm or a heavy rain.

    When the Cambrian explosion occurred was a certain period, so the average ratio of the hydrosphere expending hypothesis after Cambrian can be reckoned, if the height of the tableland in Cambrian is determined.

    The topmost tableland in the world nowadays is Tibet Tableland, and its average altitude is about 4500 meters. How high was the topmost tableland in Cambrian? Some subtle factors, such as the change of the driving power for convection of the earth mantle, the soil erosion of the tableland and the principle of isostasy should be considered, when the height of the tableland in Cambrian is reckoned.

    As the simplest case, we assume that the height of the tableland in Cambrian was also about 5000 miters, which is just like that in the world today’s. This would mean, the oceanic surface has been lowered over 5000 meters since Cambrian, as 2 times of water on the earth nowadays has been spent within the past 600 million years.

    In general, the Cambrian explosion is considered lasting out 30 million years, and the climax of the explosion is considered lasting out 3 million years [16, 17]. So we can see, the oceanic surface would descend about 300 miters during Cambrian explosion, and the oceanic surface would descend about 30 miters during the climax of Cambrian explosion. As our understanding, the oceanic surface descending 30 meters should be a enough factor to trigger the explosion in a certain critical age.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    5, conclusion

    In conclusion, the oxygen in the atmosphere would be absorbed by the substance form the mantle, the renewing oxygen for the spending is come from the hydrosphere of the earth. The biosphere relates closely to the hydrosphere expending: the hydrosphere-expending should be proceeded according to the biosphere, and some important events of biological evolution, such as Cambrian explosion should be caused by hydrosphere expending. The hydrosphere-expending hypothesis should be a clue for us to understand why, how and when the terrestrial animal and plant appeared on the land. Further more, it is probably a revelation for us to research the history of Mars and Venus.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Acknowledgement:

    The authors are grateful to Mr. Zhu Zemin and Mrs. Wang Qiong and Miss Liu Xi-qing for the their helps, The authors are also grateful to Dr. Zhou Jun-hong, Dr. Peng Yi-hu, Prof.. Kong Xiang-peng, Prof. J. G. Sha, Prof. Chen Juan-yuan, Prof. Wan Xiao-qiao and Prof. Zhao Li-ming for their useful discussions.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Reference:

    1.Hess H. H., History of ocean basins, in petrologic studies, A volume of honor, (edit by A. F. Buddinglon), Geol. Soc. Am. 86, 599 –620(1962),

    2. Dietz R. S., Passive continents spreading sea-floors and collapsing continental rises, Am. J. Sci. 264, 177-193(1966)

    3. Qian Xiang-lin & Ma Wen-pu:Spreading sea-floors hopothesis, in Chinese Encyclopaedia (editor-in-chief by Hu Qiaio-mu,), Book of Geology (edit by Chen Yu-qi) 247 (1988)

    4. Wegener A. F. Die Entstehung der Kontinente und Ozeane, Friedr Vieweg & Sohn Braunschweig, ( republished in 1980).
    5. Wilson J. T. A new class of faults and their bearing on continental drift, Nature, 207, 343-7(1965)
    6. Schlesinger W. H., Biogeochemistry – An Analysis of Global Change. Academic Press San Diego, 588, 15-46(1997)

    7. Gu Hong-kan, Hot spring on the sea-floor, in Chinese Encyclopaedia (editor-in-chief by Hu Qiaio-mu), Book of ocean science, (edit by Zeng Chen-kui), 107-25(1990)

    8. Liu Ben-lin, A interesting talk on historic trend of the land-and-water change of the earth, World Science (in Chinese) 305, 36-42 (2004)

    9. Donalue T. M. The atmospheric CH4 beget, Proc. of the Nats advanced study, (edit by Nicclet H. & Aikin A. C.) Reidel Publshing Company(1967)

    10. Bates C. A. Nicolet M. Atmospheric hydrogen, Publi. Astro. Soc. Pacific 02, 106 (1950),

    11. Iribarne J. V. & Cho H.-R. Atmospheric Physics D. Reidel Publishing Company, (1980)

    12. Wu Jian-zheng, Geocorona, in Chinese Encyclopaedia( editor-in-chief by Hu Qiaio-mu,,) Book of Space Science (edit by Lu Bao-wei) (1988)

    13. B.A.Tinsley, B. A. Hydrogen in the Upper Atmosphere, (edit by C. W. Gordon),Gordon and Breach,NewYork,1978.

    14. Zhang Zheng-bin, Chen Zhen-dong, Liu Lian-sheng and Wang Zhao-ding, the Principle and Application of Oceanic Chemistry(in Chinese) Ocean Publishing House,ISBN7- 5027- 4307-3/P.512 13-40(1999)

    15. Wan Tong-shan, Survey on the Planets(in Chinese), compiled according to the data from NASA. Shanghai Publishing House of Literature of Science and Technology, ISBN7-S439-1778-5/P.005, (2002)

    16 Chen Jun-Yuan, “the Dawn of Animal World”, Jiang-su Sience & Technolegy Publishing House, ISBN7-5345-3797-5/Q.13,(2004)

    17. Guo Hong-jun, Evolution of Ancient Geology, in Chinese Encyclopaedia(editor-in-chief by Hu Qiao-mu,)Book of Geology(edits by Cheng Yu-qi)(1988)
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    that's quite a long text :wink: If I read through the abstract it seems this hypothesis changes the startpoint for the earth's geological evolution? Usually there's the picture of the early earth as a barren rock. Is the idea of an early earth completely filled with water consistent with predictions of the temperature in that period? If it's too hot, oceans can't exist (i think).

    I'll try to read the rest of the text as well, though that may be difficult because I've only done a small introduction in this field :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    that's quite a long text :wink: If I read through the abstract it seems this hypothesis changes the startpoint for the earth's geological evolution? Usually there's the picture of the early earth as a barren rock. Is the idea of an early earth completely filled with water consistent with predictions of the temperature in that period? If it's too hot, oceans can't exist (i think).

    I'll try to read the rest of the text as well, though that may be difficult because I've only done a small introduction in this field :wink:
    i am glad for you read the post.

    my English is not very well, so some pointview cannot explain well.

    the mainpoint of the hypothesis is hydrosphere spending: the water on the earth was, is and will be losting.

    the process of the hydrosphere spending is like a chain, contains three main links:

    1,the biosphere on the earth makes methane and oxygen from the water;

    2,the sunlight decopose the methane to hydrogrn, then the hydrogen escape to outer space;

    3, the oxygen is absorbed by the mass from the earth mantle (according to sea-floor spreading hypothesis),

    these lead a fact: water on the earth becaome less and less.

    so, i suggest, before 4,000,000,000 years ago, the water on earth was much more than that of todays, say 5 times of that of todays. as regarded in the artilcle, we can find a example: that is one of the moon for Jipiter, the Europa, which is surround by water complately.

    in fact, i suggest, the earth in the early years was surrounded with water completely.

    and the Cambrain Explosion is corresponding the time when the first land was appearing.

    now, most interesting fact is escape process of the hydrogen. i suggest in the article:

    1, the methane diffuses up in the troposphere when the stratosphere becomes high at night;

    2, the methane enters the stratosphere when the stratosphere becomes low at forenoon;

    3, the methane in the stratosphere is decomposed to hydrogen atom by the ultraviolet radiation from the sun during noon. The decomposed hydrogen atoms can not escape away immediately because of the pressure of the sunlight, so the atoms will be gathered in stratosphere for a period;

    4, the gathered hydrogen atoms escape to the outer space in dusk. The speed of the escaping hydrogen atoms is accumulated according to three factors: the kinetic theory, the pressure of the sunlight and the rotation of the earth.

    i thank, the work of escaping hydrogen is probably more important the CFC work by Paul Crutzen et.al who is Nobel prize ownner(1995).

    i thank, the idea proposed is first step. i hope, we shall do the research togather.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    the details are still quite complicated for me, as I don't know much about chemistry.

    But there may be some ways to check your theory. For example, when asteroids collide with a planet thats completely filled with water, this collision would have different characteristics then in the case of a dry planet. For example, I suppose the bottom of a deep ocean would recieve less damage from the impact then a dry rocky surface, because the water would absorb a lot of the force of the impact. As there have been asteroid collision with the earth in nearly all geological periods, some geological research on the impact craters should give you some clues. Very old craters would have more 'ocean-impact' characteristics, while younger craters would look more like the impact on a dry rock surface.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12 the problem is difficulty to find "craters" 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    thank you very much for your post.

    the problem for your scheme is difficult to find "craters".

    as we know, the sea-floor is always "young", no more older than 300 million years, because of sea-floor spreading hypothesis which has been proved.

    in the other hand, the land has appeard more than 500 million years. i do not know some place where has a such crater older than 500 million years.

    the way for breakthrough is probably the escape of hydrogen, which should be observed.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13 i should reexplain some thing 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    that's quite a long text :wink: If I read through the abstract it seems this hypothesis changes the startpoint for the earth's geological evolution? Usually there's the picture of the early earth as a barren rock. Is the idea of an early earth completely filled with water consistent with predictions of the temperature in that period? If it's too hot, oceans can't exist (i think).

    I'll try to read the rest of the text as well, though that may be difficult because I've only done a small introduction in this field :wink:
    i re-read the post. i should explain some thing.

    "it's too hot, oceans can't exist ", yes, this is wright. however, the hot period for the early earth should be not more than 10 million years, then the earth should be cold enough for the ocean can esist.

    as i thjnk, the period of 10 million years, is long for vapor to condensate to ocean, while it is short for geological age.

    my view is on long geological age after vapor condensate. i have suggested, an early earth completely filled with water after vapor condensate.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    and the Cambrain Explosion is corresponding the time when the first land was appearing.
    I hope this contention is not a critical part of your hypothethis. The evidence would be wholly against this. We have sedimentary deposits of terrestrial and shallow marine origin, eroded from land masses, going back at least 1 billion and probably 3 billion years. How do you account for them? We have clays, now metamorphosed, which may be deep sea deposits, but had to be eroded from land masses, aged over three billion years.

    On a separate note
    Quote Originally Posted by pendragon
    I suppose the bottom of a deep ocean would recieve less damage from the impact then a dry rocky surface, because the water would absorb a lot of the force of the impact
    Remember that the oldest ocean floors are +/- 200my old only. If the continental masses were also covered at this period, as ben suggests, the state of preservation of the craters would, I think, preclude the kind of analysis you suggest - a pity, as it is an otherwise elegant idea.

    Brain still running - benlinliu, I just saw a recent paper on the subject of water loss and accounting for it by continued mantle outgassing? or continued cometary impact. I can't remember which. I'll try to find it for you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    and the Cambrain Explosion is corresponding the time when the first land was appearing.
    I hope this contention is not a critical part of your hypothethis. The evidence would be wholly against this. We have sedimentary deposits of terrestrial and shallow marine origin, eroded from land masses, going back at least 1 billion and probably 3 billion years. How do you account for them? We have clays, now metamorphosed, which may be deep sea deposits, but had to be eroded from land masses, aged over three billion years.
    Thank you for your post. I am sorry for reply so late.

    I should say faithfully, I am not expert in sedimentary deposits.

    However, I should also say, two types of lithosphere, terrestrial lithosphere and marine lithosphere should appear at nearly same time after the earth was formed, though the terrestrial lithosphere was probably submerged under the original ocean before Cambrian Explosion.

    I think, if the "hydrosphere spending " is true, it should carried out just now, besides the past years. Furthermore, it should be detected in some way, such as the hydrogen escaped on sun-setting.

    I hope, we can discuss the topic on "hydrosphere spending hypothesis" further. I think, the topic is important and interesting.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16 the oxygen is absorbed in the process of some burst of volca 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    A old news: a volcano on Salvador bursted out on Oct. 1,2005, it contains many burning lapis.
    I think, for the "burning lapis", some oxygen must be absorbed.

    I would like some detail analysis for the problem, as the first step, I would like some person provide some detsil for the volcano on Salvador.

    The problems are as follows:

    1, how much oxygen has been absorbed in a such volcano burst?

    2, is there some process to recruit the oxygen? besides from "hydrosphere spending process" according to "hydrosphere spending hypothesis" proposed in the post.

    3, if it is true that the oxygen is absorbed with process of valcano burst, why we do not notice such an important topic for lang time?
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    However, I should also say, two types of lithosphere, terrestrial lithosphere and marine lithosphere should appear at nearly same time after the earth was formed, though the terrestrial lithosphere was probably submerged under the original ocean before Cambrian Explosion.
    Regretably benlinliu this turns out to be incorrect. We know that continental land masses, exposed to the atmosphere were present well before the Cambrian explosion.

    Even in my own little corner of the world the Torridonian sandstone contains sediments of a clearly terrestrial origin and these rocks are dated to around 700 or 800 mya, at least. These are young in comparison with some of the terrestrial sediments that have been found globally. Recently, rounded zircons, bearing the clear indications of having been eroded by being blown over an extensive distance on land, have been dated to older than four billion years.

    Land has been a feature of our planet almost from the beginning. I think there are other flaws in your argument, but I feel this one alone is, sadly, sufficient to falsify it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Freshman Yevaud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    87
    4, the gathered hydrogen atoms escape to the outer space in dusk. The speed of the escaping hydrogen atoms is accumulated according to three factors: the kinetic theory, the pressure of the sunlight and the rotation of the earth.


    Ummm, that's not entirely correct. What you're thinking of is Atmospheric Escape Velocity for a Species. This is determined by:

    1. The atomic mass of the species.
    2. The average temperature.
    3. The planet's "G."

    A Hydrogen atom, having a relatively tiny mass has a correspondingly low atmospheric escape velocity. However, not *that* low. While a small percentage escapes each moment, it's more than replaced by a whole range of mechanisms. As well, our Geomagnetic field traps the bulk of that and prevents it from escaping.

    The only way to alter this is to increase overall planetary temperatures (the oft-misunderstood "Greenhouse Effect"). Look at Venus: it had temperatures sufficient, during it's early life, to begin a vicious cycle of photolysis that cracked the H2O present into O and H. And the H began to escape (the O somewhat less so) - easily, as the Geomagnetic field of Venus is weak and spotty for some reason.

    And this increased the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere of Venus, trapping longwave radiation (Thermal, IR), increasing the overall surface temperatures, lowering the atmospheric escape velocity for H and O. Again and again, until most of the unbound H and O was gone, and we end with what we see today.
    *Welcome, my friends, to the show that never ends*
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite

    Regretably benlinliu this turns out to be incorrect. We know that continental land masses, exposed to the atmosphere were present well before the Cambrian explosion.

    Even in my own little corner of the world the Torridonian sandstone contains sediments of a clearly terrestrial origin and these rocks are dated to around 700 or 800 mya, at least. These are young in comparison with some of the terrestrial sediments that have been found globally. Recently, rounded zircons, bearing the clear indications of having been eroded by being blown over an extensive distance on land, have been dated to older than four billion years.

    Land has been a feature of our planet almost from the beginning. I think there are other flaws in your argument, but I feel this one alone is, sadly, sufficient to falsify it.
    thank you for your quite expert post.

    As I have stated before, I am not very expert in geology. However, I doubt that the some geological ages, such as "around 700 or 800 mya", are determined strictly. I think, it probably contains some mistake, and it would be adjusted in future.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Yevaud
    A Hydrogen atom, having a relatively tiny mass has a correspondingly low atmospheric escape velocity. However, not *that* low. While a small percentage escapes each moment, it's more than replaced by a whole range of mechanisms. As well, our Geomagnetic field traps the bulk of that and prevents it from escaping.
    thank you for your interesting post.
    "A Hydrogen atom, having a relatively tiny mass has a correspondingly low atmospheric escape velocity. "

    The concept is maybe incorrect.

    As physical principle, all matters, no matter its mass, have same escape velocity! In the other hand, according to kinetic theory of monecule, the high velocity, the tiny mass of an atom, when the same temperature. As I know, the velocity of a hydrogen atom is about 5000 m/s, when its temperature is at 1000 C, the velocity is close to the escape velocity at high atmosphere.

    The pressure of sunlight is a subtle and important factor, we would pay more attention for the factor.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman Yevaud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    87
    http://www.astro.washington.edu/labs...atmos_esc.html

    Well, read this first. It's very, very basic, but it'll describe the law I'm referring to.
    *Welcome, my friends, to the show that never ends*
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Thank you for your imformation.

    Yes, it just very basic.

    11200m/s, the escape velocity on the gruond, all matter have the same value in the world, no matter it is large or small. However, it will become small when the place become high, since the gravity become weak. it become1400m/s, when it is as high as the moon.

    My English is not very well, nevertheless, I think, I know these things quite well.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    As I have stated before, I am not very expert in geology. However, I doubt that the some geological ages, such as "around 700 or 800 mya", are determined strictly. I think, it probably contains some mistake, and it would be adjusted in future.
    Point 1:
    It doesn't matter if the age is correct or not, we know these sediments are Pre-Cambrian. Stratigraphically they lie below the Cambrian. They were ldeposited on land long before the Cambrian explosion.
    Point 2: They are relatively young compared with other land sediments found around the planet.
    Point 3: The zircons found in Australia and elsewhere indicate there was substantial land 4,000 mya.

    There has been land almost since the birth of the Earth. This fact appears to disprove your hypothesis absolutely.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman Yevaud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    Thank you for your imformation.

    11200m/s, the escape velocity on the gruond, all matter have the same value in the world, no matter it is large or small. However, it will become small when the place become high, since the gravity become weak. it become1400m/s, when it is as high as the moon.
    Well, that's still not correct. All gasseous species don't have the same atmospheric escape velocity at all. The lower the mass, the correspondingly lower the atmospheric escape velocity. Remember, this isn't the same as gravitational escape velocity, which does, in fact, effect everything equally. Atmospheric escape velocity is different.

    This link is perhaps somewhat less topical than the last one I'd provided.

    http://askascientist.binghamton.edu/...9may04ask.html
    *Welcome, my friends, to the show that never ends*
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Yevaud
    Well, that's still not correct. All gasseous species don't have the same atmospheric escape velocity at all. The lower the mass, the correspondingly lower the atmospheric escape velocity. Remember, this isn't the same as gravitational escape velocity, which does, in fact, effect everything equally. Atmospheric escape velocity is different.

    This link is perhaps somewhat less topical than the last one I'd provided.

    http://askascientist.binghamton.edu/...9may04ask.html
    thank you for your post. some problem should discussed.

    "All gasseous species don't have the same atmospheric escape velocity at all. "

    Yes, this is naturaly, I know the concept in Chinese well, as my memory,which is named "distribution" of the velosityin English, as the meaning in the text before, it point "average velocity. Just because of the distribution, a part of the hydrogen can get 8000m/s, though the average velocity is 5000m/s.

    "The lower the mass, the correspondingly lower the atmospheric escape velocity."

    As my understanding, the concept is incorrect. it should be same the atmospheric escape velocity! it would escape when it get 11200m/s on the ground, no matter it is hydrgen atom, or a heavy rocket, if any resistace is neglected.

    I think, some coursein physics, such as kinetic theiry of molecular, should be refered, which is more strict than some pointviews on the net, when the problem of hydrogen escape is discussed.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman Yevaud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    As my understanding, the concept is incorrect. it should be same the atmospheric escape velocity! it would escape when it get 11200m/s on the ground, no matter it is hydrgen atom, or a heavy rocket, if any resistace is neglected.
    Well, I see where it might be assumed to be so. But I do know this to be true from my schooling.
    *Welcome, my friends, to the show that never ends*
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Point 1:
    It doesn't matter if the age is correct or not, we know these sediments are Pre-Cambrian. Stratigraphically they lie below the Cambrian. They were ldeposited on land long before the Cambrian explosion.
    Point 2: They are relatively young compared with other land sediments found around the planet.
    Point 3: The zircons found in Australia and elsewhere indicate there was substantial land 4,000 mya.

    There has been land almost since the birth of the Earth. This fact appears to disprove your hypothesis absolutely.
    thank you for your qute expert post.

    "It doesn't matter if the age is correct or not, we know these sediments are Pre-Cambrian. Stratigraphically they lie below the Cambrian. They were ldeposited on land long before the Cambrian explosion."

    As i know indirectly, such evidences are not very much, and they should be refined in some way.

    "They are relatively young compared with other land sediments found around the planet."

    sorry, what is the meaning?

    "The zircons found in Australia and elsewhere indicate there was substantial land 4,000 mya. :

    the evidence is not conflict with "hydrosphere spending hypothesis" clearly, as I have stated before, the lithosphere of land type should exist very early.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28 the topic is also discussed in E v C forum. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    I would like to post, the topic is also discussed in E v C forum these days.

    http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.c...&t=364&m=23#23
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Benlinlui, I quote from your opening thread:

    The original Earth is considered as a celestial body completely surrounded by water. The Cambrian explosion should be corresponding to the first land appearing on the hydrosphere.
    I have stated, and I repeat here, we know with certainty that there was land – i.e. ground above the level of the hydrosphere – for billions of years before the Cambrian explosion. Indeed recent evidence suggests, to the surprise of many, that there was land of at least hundreds of kilometres in extent over four billion years ago, quite soon after the formation of the Earth.

    In a later post you, again, state clearly
    the terrestrial lithosphere was probably submerged under the original ocean before Cambrian Explosion.
    So we have gone from the first land appearing after the Cambrian explosion, to the first land probably appearing after the Cambrian explosion. And in your most recent post
    as I have stated before, the lithosphere of land type should exist very early.
    Yes, but this land, according to you, does not appear above the water till after the Cambrian explosion. There are mountains of evidence (literally) to prove this is wrong.

    I say again, the evidence wholly contradicts and disproves your idea that there was no land above the water until the Cambrian explosion. That idea is wrong, and as far as I can see that must mean your hypothesis is wrong.

    Please comment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Benlinlui, I quote from your opening thread:

    The original Earth is considered as a celestial body completely surrounded by water. The Cambrian explosion should be corresponding to the first land appearing on the hydrosphere.
    I have stated, and I repeat here, we know with certainty that there was land – i.e. ground above the level of the hydrosphere – for billions of years before the Cambrian explosion. Indeed recent evidence suggests, to the surprise of many, that there was land of at least hundreds of kilometres in extent over four billion years ago, quite soon after the formation of the Earth.

    In a later post you, again, state clearly
    the terrestrial lithosphere was probably submerged under the original ocean before Cambrian Explosion.
    So we have gone from the first land appearing after the Cambrian explosion, to the first land probably appearing after the Cambrian explosion. And in your most recent post
    as I have stated before, the lithosphere of land type should exist very early.
    Yes, but this land, according to you, does not appear above the water till after the Cambrian explosion. There are mountains of evidence (literally) to prove this is wrong.

    I say again, the evidence wholly contradicts and disproves your idea that there was no land above the water until the Cambrian explosion. That idea is wrong, and as far as I can see that must mean your hypothesis is wrong.

    Please comment.
    Thank you for your post. I am sorry for reply late, since I am busy these day.

    Yes, "the hydrosphere spending hypothesis" is maybe wrong. However, I can not deduce the conclusion from your post.

    You said: "we know with certainty that there was land", I want to ask, how, how many is your certainty? Perhaps, new understanding would be given in future.

    The hypothesis is corresponding some facts now, hydrogen escape, which should be observed in space, if so, the hypothesis is correct, otherwise, it is wrong.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31 You sure 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    We have sedimentary deposits of terrestrial and shallow marine origin, eroded from land masses, going back at least 1 billion and probably 3 billion years.
    Are you sure about that because i dont think so.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Merry Christmas, and happy new year! to every one.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33 important discovery: plant produce methane 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34 important discovery: plant produce methane 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35 important discovery: plant produce methane 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-tfm011006.php

    original title: The forgotten methane source

    In the last few years, more and more research has focused on the biosphere; particularly, on how gases which influence the climate are exchanged between the biosphere and atmosphere. Researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics have now carefully analysed which organic gases are emitted from plants. They made the surprising discovery that plants release methane, a greenhouse gas - and this goes against all previous assumptions. Equally surprising was that methane formation is not hindered by the presence of oxygen. This discovery is important not just for plant researchers but also for understanding the connection between global warming and increased greenhouse gas production (Nature, January 12, 2006).

    Methane is the greenhouse gas which has the second greatest effect on climate, after carbon dioxide. The concentration of methane in the atmosphere has almost tripled in the last 150 years. Methane is best known as natural gas, currently an important energy source. Nonetheless, only part of the methane uptake in the atmosphere is due to industrial activities connected to energy production and use. More important for the increase of methane in the atmosphere is the increase in so-called "biogenic" sources, e.g., rice cultivation or domestic ruminants related to the rise in the world's population. Nowadays, methane in the atmosphere in fact is largely of biogenic origin.

    Until now, it has been assumed that biogenic methane is formed anaerobically, that is, via micro-organisms and in the absence of oxygen. In this way, acetate or hydrogen and carbon dioxide are transformed into methane; they themselves are created in the anaerobic decomposition of organic materials. The largest anoxic sources of methane are wetlands and rice fields, as well as the digestion of ruminants and termites, waste disposal sites, and the gas produced by sewage treatment plants. According to previous estimates, these sources make up two-thirds of the 600 million tonnes worldwide annual methane production.

    Scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics have now discovered that plants themselves produce methane and emit it into the atmosphere, even in completely normal, oxygen-rich surroundings. The researchers made the surprising discovery during an investigation of which gases are emitted by dead and fresh leaves. Then, in the laboratory and in the wild, the scientists looked at the release of gases from living plants like maize and ryegrass (see image 1). In this investigation, it turned out that living plants let out some 10 to 1000 times more methane than dead plant material. The researchers then were able to show that the rate of methane production grew drastically when the plants were exposed to the sun.

    Although the scientists have some first indications, it is still unclear what processes are responsible for the formation of methane in plants. The researchers from Heidelberg assume that there is an unknown, hidden reaction mechanism, which current knowledge about plants cannot explain - in other words, a new area of research for biochemistry and plant physiology.

    In terms of total amount of production worldwide, the scientists' first guesses are between 60 and 240 million tonnes of methane per year. That means that about 10 to 30 percent of present annual methane production comes from plants. The largest portion of that - about two-thirds - originates from tropical areas, because that is where the most biomass is located. The evidence of direct methane emissions from plants also explains the unexpectedly high methane concentrations over tropical forests, measured only recently via satellite by a research group from the University of Heidelberg.

    But why would such a seemingly obvious discovery only come about now, 20 years after hundreds of scientists around the globe started investigating the global methane cycle? "Methane could not really be created that way," says Dr. Frank Keppler. "Until now all the textbooks have said that biogenic methane can only be produced in the absence of oxygen. For that simple reason, nobody looked closely at this."

    The fact is that, in order to determine the quantity of emissions, scientists indeed have to make very careful measurements. The researchers from Heidelberg conducted most of their experiments in methane-free air, in order to factor out the high natural background of methane. Furthermore they used isotope analysis to show beyond doubt that this was an undiscovered process of methane production. By "looking closely" - despite established opinion - they made a discovery that will require textbooks to have their passages about methane production rewritten.

    Following up on this discovery, the scientists now will continue laboratory work, as well as field and remote sensing studies, to better quantify the strength of these methane emissions. A related exciting question is which role the biosphere has played in methane production in the history of the earth, and what kind of influence rising global temperatures and carbon dioxide concentration have on the production of methane from plants. Answers to these questions are important for understanding the feedback mechanisms between climate change and greenhouse gas production.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36 important discovery: plant produce methane 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    I think, the new source means new sink to be needed.

    As I considered, the old source of the methane should be much more than 600 million tons per year.

    And, the methane in the atmosphere has been about 1700-1800 ppb for long time, is not increased for long time. I have find some date 25 years ago, and I shall show these work.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41


    :P



    Some mistake leads some empty post, please admin delete the empty posts previously.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    I meet some problem in researching the hypothesis, and hope the friends who know English well help me.

    I have read a lots of referance about source and sink about methane in the atmosphere, I also know the con concept of "budget", which can refer the "Climate Change 2001 "

    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/134.htm#4211

    I want to revise the concept accoding to the new hypothesis, as an important step, I want to know the origin of the concept "budget" of source and sink of methane in atmosphere. I hope some friends who learn English well, find the origin through Google or some other way, and post here.


    thank you, everyone!
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    This link may help you :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    399
    The problem is that most sedimentary rocks are marine. But there were still tectonic processes that would have formed mountain chains that would have certainly have been above sea level. Evidence for shallow marine shelfs exist in old stromatolite fossils of pre-Cambrian age, most probably accompanied by land nearby.

    There is no serious doubt amongst those who know that there was land prior to the Cambrian explosion. Ophiolite is a geologist so I trust he knows.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by billiards
    The problem is that most sedimentary rocks are marine. But there were still tectonic processes that would have formed mountain chains that would have certainly have been above sea level. Evidence for shallow marine shelfs exist in old stromatolite fossils of pre-Cambrian age, most probably accompanied by land nearby.

    There is no serious doubt amongst those who know that there was land prior to the Cambrian explosion. Ophiolite is a geologist so I trust he knows.
    Thank you for your comments.

    Indeeed, one can not observe directly the Cambrian explosion, so I can not provide clear explanation for the history, very old history.

    However, Hydrosphere spending hypothesis relates facts nowdays, e.g., hydrogen escaping, should be observed quite easily. If so, the hypothesis should be right, otherwise, it is wrong.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42 American edition of hydrosphere spending hypothesis 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Some monthes ago, the hydrosphere spending hypothesis in American edition was publicized by Michael Wysession et. al.

    I have googled the web of Michael Wysession:

    http://epsc.wustl.edu/seismology/michael/web/index.html

    if possible, please read and describe the work done by Wysession. And I shall try to touch with Wysession and his team.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43 Re: You sure 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by wall2991
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    We have sedimentary deposits of terrestrial and shallow marine origin, eroded from land masses, going back at least 1 billion and probably 3 billion years.
    Are you sure about that because i dont think so.
    It's a year and a half late, but yes, I am very sure about that.
    Furthermore, (I may have mentioned this in an earlier post - too lazy to check back) the presence of rounded zircons in ancient rocks points to extensive land masses within a couple of hundred million years of the Earth's origin.

    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    Some monthes ago, the hydrosphere spending hypothesis in American edition was publicized by Michael Wysession et. al.
    No it wasn't. Wysession identified, from seismic data, the presence of anomalies in the upper mantle associated with high water content. This water content is not part of the original mantle. Your hypothesis requires that water has been steadily being output from the mantle over the course of time. He demonstrates that the water present in the upper mantle has been carried there from the surface by subducted oceanic plates with their entrapped water. i.e. The water is coming from the surface.
    This research is another piece of evidence which shows your hypothesis to be incorrect.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Ophiolite, if possible, would you please iterance hydrosphere-spending hypothesis?
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45 many volcano on the seabed....... 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    most newly news (in Chinese):

    there are many, about 3,000,000, volcanoes on the seabed, which is about 10 times the number known someyears ago. I hope someone introduce the news in detail in English.

    the fact means that many matter from mantle, including sulfur, could be tranfered to the surface of the earth, which absorb oxygen quickly.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by benlinliu
    Ophiolite, if possible, would you please iterance hydrosphere-spending hypothesis?
    Please excuse me but I am not sure what you mean by iterance. Would you explain?
    Also, you have never answered my points made in the previous post where once again I explain and demonstrate that your hypothesis is wrong. Even the example you give is evidence for it being wrong, not for it being right.

    There are not 3,000,000 volcanoes on the ocean floor. There is much activity along the mid-ocean ridges. Doubtless we might find 3,000,000 locations where this activity has occured recently, but it is hardly on the scale that the phrase '3000000 volcanoes' suggests.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    I want to say, would you please gather up hydosphere-spending hypothesis as you understand.

    And, please gather up your coments too, i shall answer you.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Dr.Bernhard Steinberger have published new develoment in the area, and I shall overview the new development.

    The homepage is:

    http://www.geodynamics.no/STEINBERGER/
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    When the methane decomposes and the hydrogen escapes what becomes of the carbon?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    it is that CO2.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    If the carbon gets oxidized to CO<sub>2</sub> why doesn't the hydrogen get oxidized to water?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    this is a good problem.

    as i understand, the H is light, a majority of H can escape out quickly after it is formed, before it combine with O. and C is heavy, its velocity is less than (1/3) of that of H,under same temperature, so it is no possible to escape out, so it must keep down in the atmosphere, then it is oxidized gradually.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    I think I see what you’re getting at. There is a constant loss of hydrogen, which must be sourced from somewhere. You propose that the hydrogen comes from the oceans, via the biosphere. Water is converted to methane by plants and animals, and methane is decomposed in the stratosphere to hydrogen and carbon. The carbon is retained as CO2 and the hydrogen escapes to space as atomic hydrogen. This latter part is apparently correct since the Earth does indeed possess a large corona of atomic hydrogen, as observed by the Galileo probe.

    Since we have now lost hydrogen that originated in the sea, the oxygen from those water molecules must also be somewhere, and I think you are saying it’s in the rocks as oxides formed at hydrothermal vents. This part is unclear to me.

    The hydrothermal vents you discuss produce copious amounts of methane themselves, some of which, from the shallower vents, escapes to the atmosphere. This would be an alternative source for the stratospheric methane and hence hydrogen, that eliminates the need for conversion in the biosphere and therefore eliminates the loss of water.

    Isn’t it possible for the observed hydrogen to have originated from hydrothermal vent methane rather than from seawater?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    I've copied this from another forum and a different argument, but the information is somewhat relevant.

    The critical factor here is the mass of hydrogen being lost to space. It turns out that this is not sufficient to be important.

    These quotations from Chemistry of Atmospheres, Richard P.Wayne, Oxford Science Publications 1991, illustrate the point.
    Escape is seen to involve the high velocity particles in the tail of the Maxwell velocity distribution. Atomic hydrogen has a most probable velocity of ~3 km/sec at 600K. and the fraction of atoms with v > 11.2 km/sec is just greater than 10^-6. (page 61)
    There are three major stages in the escape process: transport of the constituent through the atmosphere, conversion to the escaping form, and the actual escape. Normally one of these will be the slowest and rate determining. On Earth, for example, hydrogen loss is limited by upward diffusion flux and not by any process involved in the conversion to escaping H atoms. With this knowledge, the flux of the escaping hydrogen can be estimated from the diffusion rate through the stratosphere. Mixing ratios for H2O, H2 and CH4 yield an escape flux of 2.7 * 10^8 H atoms per cm^2 per second.(page 62)

    That may sound like an awful lot of atoms in just one second through just one square centimetre. Recall, however, that there are approximately 6 * 10^23 H atoms in just one gram. So it takes roughly 70 million years to lose 1 gram of hydrogen through one square centimetre of the atmosphere, and since the origin of the Earth no more than about 65 gms will have been lost per square centimetre.

    A quick, back of the envelope calculation reveals that the total mass of hydrogen lost in this way since early times is around 90 million kilograms. That would be equivalent to about 800 million tons of water. Again, it sounds like a lot, but in practice it isn’t – a cube measuring 90 metres on a side weighs that much.
    I think you can see from the point of view of losing hydrogen we really don’t have a problem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    I think the math is wrong. I've just done a back of enevelope calculation using the data in the preceding post and am getting about 72 million kg per year, so depending on when we start counting from early times, our results differ by many orders of magnitude. I'll do a more careful calc when I get home, but meanwhile anyone else want to check the math?

    OK, I've done a more careful calculation and I find that the loss of water is about 11 kilometres cubed per million years. Still perhaps an insignificant amount (but the calc in the preceding post is not correct). In a billion or so years it would be significant.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    I need to get larger envelopes. :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    You guys are completely loosing me here although its a quite interesting topic. I wondering if this hydrophere depletion is fast enough to subtantially deplete oceans before the earth's magnetic field presumably fades away(when the earths core no longer moves enough) or the sun expands to a point that will broil the earth.

    In any case the more we learn about the solar system and the earth the more it seems the human race should establish colonies beyond earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Far as I can tell there's beaucoup water disappearing into space (at least the hydrogen part) but in the whole scheme of thangs it don't amount to a hill of beans.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    the hypothesis take part in 33 IGC:

    http://www.cprm.gov.br/33IGC/1197724.html
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    In any case the more we learn about the solar system and the earth the more it seems the human race should establish colonies beyond earth.

    yes,quite important!
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunbury View Post
    Far as I can tell there's beaucoup water disappearing into space (at least the hydrogen part) but in the whole scheme of thangs it don't amount to a hill of beans.
    how can you derivate the conclusion?

    the carbon products on the Earth are 60 billion tons per year, it shows that 5-10percent(5-10%) are returned through methane. and this means that 6-12Cubic kilometers water are involved in the process. and large part of hydrogen inthe methane escape to space.



    so, it is possible that the Earth loss water at the rate 2-4 Cubic kilometers peryear, instead per million years.


    to #62: if you do not understand such topic, you should be polite and patient.
    Last edited by benlinliu; September 7th, 2011 at 08:08 AM.
    The hydrosphere-spending, is a long chain in space & time.
    In space, one end links sea-floor, another end links upper atmosphere, and the middle relates biosphere.
    In time, the chain links remote antiquity, now and future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    please stop bumping your thread if no one has responded to it.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •