Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No, it actually does! It's just a slow process. And obviously the colder it is, the slower the process.Not if the temperature is bellow freezing; Otherwise ice would not exist in the vacuum of space!
Cosmology!
What you say is true but the process is so slow as to have little practical meaning. Can you imagine the time it will take for Europa's ice to sublime? Even Black holes evaporate!No, it actually does! It's just a slow process. And obviously the colder it is, the slower the process.
This is why, for example, if you leave ice in an ice tray in the freezer for long enough, the ice cubes will shrink.
Two points:Since (x, y, z) is the singularity or point in Space at which all matter would disappear were the Big Bang expansion reversed and Energy requires nor Space and does not exist in Time, is there a repository for ebergy in some dimension still unknown to us?
Because the Law of Conservation of Matter/Energy tells us that this Universe can not disappear materially unless it transmutes back, into an equivalency of Energy, isn't aenergy The First Cause, even "God?"
Your premises are incorrect. There is no point in space "at which all matter would disappear were the Big Bang expansion reverse" - the expansion is the expansion of space itself. All of space is expanding, so there's no one place we can point to and say "Aha! It's all moving to this point!". Space expands like a balloon, with each point receding from every other point, but no point being the source of expansion. Everywhere sees everywhere else receding from it.Since (x, y, z) is the singularity or point in Space at which all matter would disappear were the Big Bang expansion reversed and Energy requires nor Space and does not exist in Time, is there a repository for ebergy in some dimension still unknown to us?
No. First, conservation laws are, ultimately, just theories. We say that energy cannot be created or destroyed because we've never seen it, and everything we've observed tells us that this law is true. But, nonetheless, it's still possible that the law can be broken, if only in unusual situations. This has happen with other conservation laws: Parity was once thought to be conserved, but the so-called 'weak interaction' violates parity. It's unusual, but it does happen. There's no reason why the same couldn't happen with the conservation of energy.Because the Law of Conservation of Matter/Energy tells us that this Universe can not disappear materially unless it transmutes back, into an equivalency of Energy, isn't aenergy The First Cause, even "God?"
Well, that's a slightly different issue, because Europe has significant self-gravity. So when the ice on the surface of Europa sublimates, you get an atmosphere of water vapor around the planet. The sublimation process will rapidly reach an equilibrium between the water vapor re-depositing on the surface and new water molecules sublimating.What you say is true but the process is so slow as to have little practical meaning. Can you imagine the time it will take for Europa's ice to sublime?
You are trying to restrict spacetime into 3 dimensions. This is not possible. Here is something interesting to read: Universe expansion experts win Nobel prize - FT.comSince (x, y, z) is the singularity or point in Space at which all matter would disappear were the Big Bang expansion reversed and Energy requires nor Space and does not exist in Time, is there a repository for ebergy in some dimension still unknown to us?
I stand corrected. Such is the beauty of science; A never ending quest for erudition! ThanksWell, that's a slightly different issue, because Europe has significant self-gravity. So when the ice on the surface of Europa sublimates, you get an atmosphere of water vapor around the planet. The sublimation process will rapidly reach an equilibrium between the water vapor re-depositing on the surface and new water molecules sublimating.
The evaporation of the ice off of the surface, then, is not driven by the speed of sublimation, but is instead driven by the speed at which this atmosphere of water vapor dissipates (atmospheres for spherical bodies are not stable...over time they evaporate, though it can take a while). And once a molecule from Europa's exceedingly thin atmosphere escapes Europa's gravity, it is replaced by a newly-sublimated molecule from the surface of the ice.
Well, they are also exceedingly cold....until they approach the Sun...at which point, after a number of orbits, they evaporate!I stand corrected. Such is the beauty of science; A never ending quest for erudition! Thanks
But what of comets who have insignificant gravitational effect?
Yes but what of comets at the oort cloud and kuiper belt? Surely at those temperatures close to naught kelvin and insignificant gravitational forces; Sublimation grinds to almost a halt? Also what of naught kelvin? will ice sublimate?Well, they are also exceedingly cold....until they approach the Sun...at which point, after a number of orbits, they evaporate!
Yes but what of comets at the oort cloud and kuiper belt? Surely at those temperatures close to naught kelvin and insignificant gravitational forces; Sublimation grinds to almost a halt? Also what of naught kelvin? will ice sublimate?
Well, yeah, obviously it's going to be so slow out there that it will almost not happen.Yes but what of comets at the oort cloud and kuiper belt? Surely at those temperatures close to naught kelvin and insignificant gravitational forces; Sublimation grinds to almost a halt? Also what of naught kelvin? will ice sublimate?
Thanks, and for being a good lad I shall reward you with this truly amazing videoWell, yeah, obviously it's going to be so slow out there that it will almost not happen.
One potential way to understand sublimation if all of the energy is thermal is by examining the thermal distribution of energy, Planck's Law. If all of the energy is thermal, then by following Planck's Law, just by chance, on occasion the atoms on the surface will gain enough energy to break their bonds and leave the ice. But since the amplitude drops off exponentially at high energies, the rate of sublimtation too should drop off exponentially as the temperature drops below the melting point.
Now, in reality, all of the energy accessible is not going to be thermally-distributed. In particular, even far away in the Oort cloud, these objects will be receiving energy in the form of light from the Sun. And so the true rate of sublimation is likely to be higher than the naive estimate from assuming a purely-thermal distribution. Nevertheless, it's got to be a low rate indeed.
The reverse would be... If you anti-crushed a cup of ice, it would turn into water. Well. It. Well. ordinarily, yes.Thanks all for answering my previous question.
Wiccan Child claimed that you could crush say a cup of water into ice if given enough pressure.
I was just wondering if the reverse also held true.
It's impossible, though you can fake it:How do you prove that 2=1 once again, i read it longtime ago in a math book? do you have a clue?
Haha, well, Wikipedia has a nice phase diagram:The reverse would be... If you anti-crushed a cup of ice, it would turn into water. Well. It. Well. ordinarily, yes.
(Chalnoth, on account of cider, I require specifics!)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?