http://en.rian.ru/an...8/81541029.htmlSolar wind warming up EarthTopic:
Global warming: future catastrophes16:56 28/09/2007MOSCOW.
(Yury Zaitsev for RIA Novosti) - Paleoclimate research shows that the
chillier periods of the Earth's history have always given way to warmer
times, and vice versa.
But it is not quite clear what causes this change. This is what makes
predicting climate change so difficult. Although everyone agrees that
the climate is changing very fast, hardly anyone can say whether it will
be warmer or colder in the next 100 years. At the moment it is getting
warmer. The majority attribute this change to human impact on the
environment. But are they right?
Lev Zeleny, director of the Institute of Space Research at the Russian
Academy of Sciences and an Academy corresponding member, believes that
before making Kyoto Protocol-like decisions, we should thoroughly study
the influence of all factors and receive more or less unequivocal
results. In order to treat an illness, we must diagnose it first, he
insists.
Yury Leonov, director of the Institute of Geology at the Russian Academy
of Sciences, thinks that the human impact on nature is so small that it
can be dismissed as a statistical mistake.
Until quite recently, experts primarily attributed global warming to
greenhouse gas emissions, with carbon dioxide singled out as the chief
culprit. But it transpires that water vapor is just as bad.
Paleoclimate studies have revealed that during the ice ages the climate
became much less damp, because the North Atlantic produced little
moisture. The increase in temperature in turn increased humidity, and as
a result rivers became fuller and more fresh water flowed into the
Arctic and the North Atlantic. This fresh water covered the ocean's
surface with a thin film, thereby decreasing evaporation. Another chilly
period set in, and the flow of the rivers slowed down, marking the
beginning of a new cycle. This is not a linear process - the higher the
average temperature, the more steam gets into the air.
"
Judging by Venus, a planet, which is similar to the Earth in all
respects, we can see how far this can go. The temperature on its surface
is about 500° C (mostly due to a greenhouse effect). At one time, Venus
did not have a layer of clouds, and this is probably when it was warmed
up by the Sun, causing a greenhouse effect. What if the Sun is
responsible for the warming of our climate?" queries Lev Zeleny.
"There are two channels of energy transfer from the Sun -
electromagnetic and corpuscular radiation," he explains. "The bulk of it
- about 1.37 kW per square meter of the Earth's surface - which equals
the power of an electric kettle - comes via the electromagnetic channel.
This flow of energy primarily fits into the visible and infrared range
of the spectrum and its amount is virtually immune to change - it alters
by no more than a few fractions of a percent. It is called the 'solar
constant.' The flow of energy reaches the Earth in eight minutes and is
largely absorbed by its atmosphere and surface. It has decisive
influence on the shaping of our climate."
The second channel is corpuscular radiation, consisting of solar wind
and space rays. Although transferring much less energy, it plays a key
role in forming "space weather" - changeable conditions in space which
depend on solar activity. Until recently, it was believed that "space
weather" had nothing to do with ours, but that idea has been proved
wrong.
"Solar wind becomes more intense when the Sun is active. It sweeps space
rays out of the solar system like a broom," Zeleny points out. "This
affects cloud formation, which cools off both the atmosphere and the
whole planet. We know from historic records that it was quite cold in
1350-1380. The Sun was very active during this time." Solar wind is also the main transmitter of energy for geomagnetic
phenomena in the Earth's magnetosphere, which is formed as a result of
the solar wind streamlining the Earth's magnetic field. If the influx of
energy exceeds its dissipation, energy accumulates in the
magnetosphere. If a certain level of energy is exceeded, any disturbance
outside or inside the magnetosphere may release excess energy and cause
a magnetic storm. But it may also have no consequences at all.
A statistical analysis of solar and geomagnetic disturbances shows a
rather low correlation between them. It transpires that most solar
bursts do not trigger magnetic storms. It would be interesting to know
why this correlation is so low.
Nevertheless, other Sun-related phenomena have fairly regular and
predictable consequences on the Earth. Of course, they exert influence
on humans and other species and, to some extent, on the environment,
altering atmospheric pressure and temperature. But they are not likely
to contribute much to climate change. This is a global process and is
the result of global causes. For the time being, we are far from
understanding them fully.
"Some dangers are much less discussed today, for instance, the inversion
of the Earth's magnetic field," Zeleny warns. "It is gradually changing
its polarity; the poles are crawling to the equator at increasing
speed. There were whole epochs in the Earth's history when the magnetic
field all but disappeared. Such oscillations have taken place throughout
almost its entire geological history."
Paleomagnetic data show that last time the magnetic field disappeared
was several hundred thousand years ago. It is possible that the Earth
will lose it again in the 21st and 22nd centuries. The "magnetic
umbrella," which protects us from deadly space radiation, will
disappear, exposing humankind to a heavy "rainfall" of solar particles
and space rays. Our descendants will have to understand how a weaker
magnetic field will affect the climate and what protection they will
need.
Yury Zaitsev is an expert from the Institute of Space Studies.
...
Also, on the wiki page it stated...
The solar wind affects the other incoming
cosmic raysinteracting with the atmosphere of planets.
Moreover, planets with a
weak or non-existent magnetosphere are subject to atmospheric stripping
by the solar wind......Haestrom still has a magneticsphere.
Now, I never stated particle did not strip the atmophere of planets, it obvious happening with haestrom, but the fact is it takes time to do that. Venus had no magneticsphere for millions of years and it still has an atmosphere, an very thick gas to at that. It may be being stripped slowly, but after a million years it still heavily there. Now you expect Haestrom to not have an atmosphere after only being over whelmed with solar radiation for less then 300 years? Even it the sun is expanding, it takes way longer than 300 years for a planet to lose it's atmosphere. Especilly with the planet still having a magneticsphere , even if that magneticsphere can't keep everything out in mass majority. Which is why solar radiation is the way it is on that planet, the atmosphere layers are starting to be eaten away. Key point :starting. On it realy loses more of the current atmoshere, other element will rise up and cloud the planet sky, like how water turns to cloud. And the partical will have more matter to make contact with. This will rise the planet presser, just like venus.
When the planet is totaly effected by particaleradiation, the atmosphere will be near gone. It will be like mercury or our moon.
And that can't happen in less than 300 years.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
.
