ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
Venus is NOT a "Runaway" Greenhouse Effect!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ส.ค. 2024
- Thanks to Squarespace for sponsoring this video. Go to Squarespace.com for a free trial and when you're ready to launch, go to squarespace.com... and add code "SCIENCEASYLUM" at checkout to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain.
Mars and Venus are both in the habitable zone, but their climates are not human-friendly. What if they formed in opposite locations? Would either one be habitable then? To find out, we'll need atmospheric science and a little help from NASA.
00:00 Cold Open
00:53 Current Venus Conditions
02:39 Dr. Chris Colose
04:22 Solar Radiation
06:29 Greenhouse Effect
07:32 Thermal Equilibrium
08:34 Conclusions
10:22 Outro
10:44 Sponsor Message
11:31 Featured Comment
Nick Lucid - Creator/Host/Writer/Editor/Animator
Special thanks to Dr. Chris Colose for speaking with me!
Watch our entire conversation here:
• Mars and Venus Habitab...
________________________________
VIDEO ANNOTATIONS/CARDS
Inverse Square Laws:
• Is EVERYTHING an Inver...
The Oldest Light in the UNIVERSE!
• Cosmic Microwave Backg...
Farkle Probabilities:
• Dice Combinatorics, Ex...
________________________________
RELATED TH-cam VIDEOS
PBS Space Time on Colonizing Venus:
• Should We Colonize Ven...
________________________________
SUPPORT THE SCIENCE ASYLUM
Patreon:
/ scienceasylum
Advanced Theoretical Physics (Paperback):
www.lulu.com/sh...
Advanced Theoretical Physics (eBook):
gumroad.com/l/...
Merchandise:
shop.spreadshir...
________________________________
HUGE THANK YOU TO THESE PATRONS
Asylum Counselors:
Matthew O'Connor, Nikolaos Vasiloglou II
Asylum Orderlies:
Fabio Manzini, Josiah Gleaton, Medec Hurtz, ProDan, William Morton
Einsteinium Crazies:
Charles Copley, Eoin O'Sullivan, Glen Northrop, Ilya Yashin, Ken Davis, LT Marshall, Wacky
Plutonium Crazies:
Al Davis, Compuart, Ellis Hall, Kevin MacLean, Madhu Subbu
Platinum Crazies:
André Weyermann, Boris Petrovchich, Cody Martin, David Johnston, Jon Adams, Jonathan Reel, Kyle Bowles, Marino Hernandez, Mikayla Eckel Cifrese, Mr. Orn Jonasar, Olga Cooperman, Stephen Blinn, Tom Hawking, Vittorio Monaco
________________________________
OTHER SOURCES
agupubs.online...
nssdc.gsfc.nas...
nssdc.gsfc.nas...
nssdc.gsfc.nas...
solarsystem.na...
Dr. Chris Colose:
www.giss.nasa....
pubs.giss.nasa...
________________________________
LINKS TO COMMENTS
• Dice Combinatorics, Ex...
• Dice Combinatorics, Ex...
• Dice Combinatorics, Ex...
________________________________
IMAGE CREDITS
Mars Surface Image:
mars.nasa.gov/...
Venus Surface Image:
www.planetary....
(Used with Permission)
#GlobalWarming #ClimateChange #GreenhouseEffect
![[Official Music Video] ฝังใจ - BOW Maylada [Prod. By Tan LIPTA]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rSjk1jKWRN4/mqdefault.jpg)
Hi all, I'm the Chris Colose in the video: some people below asked about Mars forming in Venus' orbit.
Ultimately, it would have had a runaway greenhouse effect early on and lose whatever atmosphere it took on (water heavy in the runaway phase, and maybe CO2 heavy in the post-runaway phase). Right now, it would probably just be a dry/hot rock without much atmosphere, but have a slower rotation due to tidal effects from the Sun.
what are the odds of ceres being caught by venus gravity and becoming a moon of the planet?
venus will have a greater gravity than mars have in this hypothetical scenario, wouldn't that influence the belt?
Out of curiosity, how do we know it was a runaway greenhouse effect and not related to its resurfacing event? Could it have just been hit by some large object to cause all that heat, which would also help explain the resurfacing and the reverse rotation?
@@josephsalomone Exactly. Because Venus's day is 1/4 of a Venus year, the oceans would have boiled, or they just wouldn't have formed in the first place (as comets fed the inner planets, according to theory). Water is a greenhouse gas, so that would heat the atmosphere much like CO2.
And how much of Venus's lost water made it's way to Earth? The zodiacal light is dust and gas in the plane of the ecliptic, and the Earth is zipping through this gas at 67,000 mph, and collecting some. Of course, we lose more mass than we collect in asteroids these days, but imagine the early days if Venus lost a mile thick ocean.
How much would the Earth have collected?
How much would Mars have collected?
And if Mars and Venus had formed in opposite locations?
@@jorgenitales412 Pretty low odds. Mars perihelion is 1.666 AU while Ceres aphelion is 2.56 AU: a difference of 0.9 AU.
Heck, the Earth and Mars are a lot closer than that (0.38 AU), and the Earth and Venus are a LOT closer than that (0.28 AU). I worry Venus and Earth might come together or swap positions.
So it would be a larger mercury?
One funny thing about Venus' acid rain is that the atmosphere closer to the surface gets so hot that it evaporates way before reaching it (a phenomenon called virga), forming clouds that rise and rain once again without ever reaching the ground.
😱😱😱
That would explain why the rocky surface doesn't show what I expected from acid rain, raining on it.
Groundhog Day: Venusian Rain edition
I saw that same exact thing when I lived in Gila Bend Arizona. Seen a lone cloud raining and the water never hit the ground.
@@aurorathekitty7854 Well, that's Gila Bend for you. 😈
My favourite lightbulb moment about Venus was in discussing the pressure on the surface and this is one of those obvious explanations that, if you're like me, you'd just never realized:
If you're at the bottom of the Marianas Trench there's all that ocean mass squishing down above you but if you boiled the entire ocean then all that mass would still be there just... dispersed.
The pressure is so high at the surface on Venus because the entire ocean has boiled and you're now standing at the bottom of it while it FLOATS ABOVE YOU!
That makes a lot of sense. I was wondering how a planet smaller than Earth could hold on to so much atmosphere to create that pressure, but your explanation would do it.
How could you do this to me, Venus? How could you do this to us?
It's not floating, it is blanketing.
@@hillaryclinton2415 I suppose that's a better term from an accuracy perspective. :)
Still! Super cool to clue into that. Blanketed and crushed via steam ocean. Heh.
An apt analogy/explanation! In order to get to the surface pressure on Venus, in Earth's ocean, you'd need to dive to a depth of only about 900 m ≈ 3000 ft; nowhere *near* as deep as you *could* go.
(Each 10 m of depth in water, in Earth's surface gravity, increases the pressure just about 1 atm.)
Fred
I must say, it's a little strange seeing infrared light being drawn with a short wavelength, and visible light drawn with a long wavelength haha.
Whoops! 🤦♂️ I knew I was going to miss some little detail with this video. I guess you found it.
I missed this too!
@@ScienceAsylum on the other hand, it's a good idea for easter eggs.
yeah that was bugging me every time haha
I can't believe I missed that!
I took an astrophysics class three semesters ago. Your mention of the Stepham-Bloztmann law was so much clearer than my profs approach who went from the equation to the physical interpretation. Your way of explaining it by starting with a question and moving to the equation to answer it was so much better.
Keep up the great work man!
Thanks! I'm glad it resonated with you 🤓
Dude! You just got a shout-out from Matt on PBS Spacetime!
This video indirectly answers a pair of questions I was wondering about: If Venus gets about twice as much solar radiation as Earth, why isn't it even hotter than it is? If Mars gets less than half the solar radiation that Earth dies, why isn't it even colder? Answer: By the Stefan-Boltzmann Law, temperature should be as the fourth root of solar radiation, which greatly moderates things.
Stephan-Boltzmann Law talks about the radiation a body emits, not the one it receives, assuming it emits perfect radiation (like a black body would). Therefore, this law isn't formulated so that Sun radiation at the planet = Boltzman constant * Planet Temperature^4, but rather, Planet-emitted radiation = Boltzman constant * Planet Temperature^4
It's actually really unfortunate that we don't have another earth like planet in our habitable zone. I suspect humanity would have colonized it decades ago and commercial space travel would probably be on-par with commercial air travel.
wouldn't we have conflict with aliens on that earth
@@gamerpro608 Not necessarily. It might have only had weird plants instead of animals. Or only developed animals as their higher life forms and no Sapient races like ours. Or if it did they might have been purely oceanic-based and unable to exit their seas.
@@WorldWalker128 what if the animals developed intelligence
I'd definitely be living there.
"Would you move to Venus if it formed in Mars' orbit?"
- Maybe, but I would need a little bit more information first. I would also have to discuss it with my wife.
Those surface images from the Russian probe; the first time I saw them I just stared at them for about an hour. I fell into this existential loneliness hole. I just thought about standing on and the idea that no one has stood on it before, and won't in my lifetime.
To see that in 'reality', watch 'The Martian'....
Anton Petrov has a video about Venus a while back. He presented a study that said that Venus’ ocean stopped its rotation through tidal effects coming from the sun. As the planet stopped rotating, the side that faced the sun started boiling, leading to a runaway greenhouse effect. This makes sense, IMO.
That's an elegant solution for boiling the sea so quick like that!
I gotta say: the shout-outs the science content creator community has been doing for each other is a welcome sight. I've been watching and following all of you for A WHILE, and to see this solidarity playing out makes me happy beyond description. Keep being awesome, guys!
It's like the good kind of circle jerk.
I like the way Wikipedia is placing a climate denier warning under your video. I am also little disappointed that you didn't factor in the rotation speed of Venus.
it's like the pope telling Galileo to shut up lol
@@jamescollier3 Not really. That event is *very* misunderstood these days.
@@jeffbenton6183 which event?
@@jamescollier3 The Galileo trials.
Galileo was imprisoned because he's an asshole
Dude, TH-cam Is broken
This guy clearly should have like 30 million subs
We should fix TH-cam
Fixedtube
It's a tube not a plumbing network
There's actually some truth to that - but what can we do except tell all our friends about such great content, check manually for new videos and pretty much do all the stuff that we can't trust youtube to do :)
Or put TH-cam in a box and beat it with a stick, yelling "yeild", until it submits.
@@borisdorofeev5602 But then how do we know if it is alive or dead :p
3:50 so "runaway greenhouse" only applies when the feedback loop is positive.
Correct. The term applies to positive feedback loop scenarios (many of which involving water vapor). Just because a planet is warming, that doesn't mean it's a "runaway greenhouse." But, on the flip side of that, warming can still be a problem for life even if it's not a "runaway greenhouse."
@@ScienceAsylum Could it be a useful weapon for an alien who wishes to wipe out all life?
Probably not as easy as throwing a rock.
@@cyruskarloff7219 That was the plot of "The Arrival" (1996).
Thermal runaway, essentially.
@@ScienceAsylum Can you give an example of where warming can be a problem for life?
If Mars forms in Venus's orbit, then the show called "My favorite Martian" would instead be "My favorite Venusian".
Thanks for this comment. I'm so glad I read it instead of having 10 more seconds of free time.
It would still be called "My favourite Martian", but the weather would be much hotter
@@Fromatic Mars was named after the god of war because it is red, not because of it's orbit.
If Venus was cool enough to support life, "My Favorite Venusian" wouldn't be sci-fi.
You should do a part 2! "What if Mars started in Venus's orbit?"
I tried to include in this video as a side note, but it wasn't actually very interesting. Chance are it would have just been a little warmer and that's it. Similar thin atmosphere. Similar CO2 levels.
@@ScienceAsylum Wouldn't Mars have lost its atmosphere very soon in Venus's orbit?
@@mrdraw2087 It already lost most of it's atmosphere where it is now. It's essentially "airless."
@@mrdraw2087 yes, it would loose atmosphere much faster and probably all water marks on the surface would never had a chance to form.
@@volkhen0 So basically just a larger Mercury.
I'm pretty sure the sulfuric acid rain does not reach the surface. At 1 bar, sulfuric acid boils at around 338C. The coldest surface point on Venus is the summit of Maxwell Montes which is about 330C, where the pressure is still about 45 bar. I don't have a phase diagram to hand but I'd be surprised if the boiling point we're elevated to a point where it actually remained liquid long enough to wet the surface.
It's thought that Mars is small because Jupiter messed with the rock cloud that formed it. It's very possible that if Venus formed in Mars's orbit, we'd just have 2 copies of Mars.
I had the same thought, that Mars formed from part of the asteroid belt and that it's unlikely that an Earth size planet could ever form there, because of Jupiter. Although that theory could be wrong, There are theories that state the planets formed in a completely different orbit from where they are now, and that they after a while settled into these stable orbits - evidence of this is provided through observation of exoplanets, as most exoplanets discovered are gas giants with orbits ranging from extremely close, out to Jupiter's orbit. Sensitivity is now high enough to detect earth size planets, but they are quite lacking in observations. I'm willing to bet that when sensitivity is increased further, many mercury-sized planets will emerge.
Also, The theory that Earth is the product of a merger of two smaller planets has a lot of logic as Earth's orbit is also in Jupiter's range of influence. It's also very possible (but probably can never be confirmed) that Venus also formed from multiple, smaller (proto)planets.
Correct. I think you're the first person here to point out Jupiter's gravity well is IMMENSE and would prevent any Earth-sized world forming near it.
@@abloogywoogywoo How did the four planet-sized moons of Jupiter form if its gravity was that disruptive?I have never heard any real explanation for their existence, let alone how Jupiter prevented a planet forming in the asteroid belt. How about it?
Speculation at best, Paul. I' m not expert, but I DO know one has to do dome fancy "teaching", to make these collision theories even come close to being practical explanations. Also the grazing collision theories about the Moon for instance. The more we think we know, the more unanswered questions arise.
@@starmnsixty1209 Possible debris from the destruction of the Super Earths as Jupiter migrated inwards towards the Sun, only to be pulled back out by Saturn's orbital resonance influence.
This channel is really one of the best on TH-cam, I wish I had discovered it before.
It's slow rotation would still be a problem, the day is longer than its year, plus its weak magnetic field wouldn't help. If the earth had same day and magnetic field as Venus, I think the earth would look more like Venus.
Having double the solar radiation helps too
Earth, with the same day length, gravity, and magnetic field as Venus would be more like Mars given it’s original atmospheric composition. The lower gravity and magnetic field would have allowed for a faster and more profound stripping of oxygen and hydrogen atoms by the solar wind than we have experienced throughout Earth’s history.
Venus has a weak magnetic field you say? How so?
Cause it does. Low rate of rotation= low magnetic field. That and it spins opposite of the rest of the planets
Venus is identical to Earth, smaller population ...4billion, an they reside, in the interior an the surface, same as earth ...
only dif population,...
an opposite rotation ...
3k yrs ago, a massive, Nuclear War, on Venus, brought their planet to a standstill,
3k yrs ago they warred in heaven ...
according to the bible ....
Earth is not "right in the middle of the habitable zone".
It is in the habitable zone, of course, but it's very much in the close-to-the-sun half.
But it's still many times further from the edge than venus or Mars.
On charts I've seen, Mars is just barely inside the habitable zone.
Earth is barely in it
There is no such thing as a 100% mathematical habitable zone. It depends on the age of the sun and the size and atmosphere of the planet. The younger the sun the closer you'll find the habitable zone towards the sun. The bigger the planet, the thicker the atmosphere, the richer the atmosphere in green house gasses and older the sun the further out the habitable zone stretches.
@@harmvandorp6017 that’s what the habitable zone means, why are you trying so hard when your just saying the same thing as what the habitable zone is.
Hey Nick. I've first met your channel in October 6, 2020 and finished all your videos by today. Keep up with this 🙏
I actually think about this a lot, like a weird amount. Thank you for making a video about it!
You're very welcome 🤓
Why? Is it work related?
As an alien to Venus, I would find a nice level in that dense atmosphere and build a floating city.
but you would need to go down to the surface for the minerals anyway, otherwise it is no much better than the space station in orbit
Building a floating city would actually be really easy on Venus since the higher pressure makes buoyant forces a lot stronger, to the point where a single helium balloon might be able to lift several kilos.
@@younscrafter7372 and now we just have to worry about the city melting
@@younscrafter7372 There are sources of data on the Venus atmosphere that allows some calculation of an altitude that would have similar pressures as earth and gravity that would be comfortable. One could imagine having nearly normal clothing and some sort of oxygen mask only. Another thing is the trip to Venus is less exposure to radiation. Sorry if I am bursting the idea of the atmosphereless Mars.
@@jskratnyarlathotep8411 Floating in the atmosphere is not the same as being in an orbit. Thinks of a ship at sea or a submarine with the ability to change its vertical as well as horizontal positions. The atmosphere has the some very good building block atoms for life. C, O, H, S in particular. The solar energy is pretty good compared to orbiting planets beyond earth. The trip from earth is close and less radiation. Any mineral you might need could come from home or nearby rocks.
About Venus' lighting conditions: does it get dark on the surface? If the daytime is perpetually overcast and of uniform lighting thanks to the thick cloud layer, do the clouds also refract enough light to keep the night side surface from going completely dark?
Doesn’t venus’ huge , 900 times more than earth ‘s , atmospheric pressure entirely account for Venus’ high surface temp , regardless of co2 ? It must be possible to determine the effect of pressure on temp , while the effect of co2 on a planet where very little light reaches the surface must be problematic ?
Yes. It's purposefully ignored
No, pure atmospheric pressure cannot be used in that manner because different gasses have different interactions with light. The reason CO² is called a greenhouse gas is because it is less transparent to infrared light than most other gasses in the atmosphere, like nitrogen and oxygen.
In Earth's history we've run the gamut from snowball Earth to hothouse Earth, with largely the same atmospheric pressure, but widely varried atmospheric composition
The dry adiabatic lapse rate. At the same atmospheric pressure as earth (altitude 70km) the temperature is the same...despite a 90% CO² atmosphere...so what "greenhouse" anything? Venus is not an example of how CO² is of any big significance as regards the temperature. The AMOUNT of atmospheric gas IS important. Understand that NASA scientists are regularly misrepresenting temperature records of earth to conform them to their faulty climate models, all of which are proving highly inaccurate as predictors. Data is regularly 'adjusted' to fit their pre-conceived theories about climate so they can continue to receive funding from misinformed government entities that wish to demonstrate how seriously they are combating the phantom climate crisis.
pretty much. And the sulfuric acid accounts for the rest.
CO2 is actually a very weak "greenhouse gas", both on Venus and on earth.
If it weren't, Mars with its 90% CO2 atmosphere would be far hotter than Venus or the earth, but it isn't (yes, I know, but using the "logic" of the "CO2 is the mother of all evil, and even a tiny amount will cause the atmosphere to boil" uses).
That "rule" about pressure and temperature is oversimplified. Example: Even if an increase in pressure increases the temperature, a maintained pressure doesn't necessarily maintain the temperature. There are more factors at play. I mean, consider the deep ocean. It's under a lot of pressure, a lot more than Venus's atmosphere actually. The deep ocean is freezing cold though.
I really hope the recent call out by PBS Spacetime helps this channel grow its is absolutely amazing.
Great video! The other problem for life on Venus is its weak magnetic field and probably why it has so little water and Oxygen as well.
Correction: Not all incoming radiation that is trapped in the atmosphere makes a rise in temperature. Some of it is locked in chemical bonds (photosynthesis).
On a planet that has plant life, yes, but on a planet WITHOUT life, no.
@@WinVisten I'm sure it's quite insignificant. The amount of energy absorbed in chemical bonds over the lifetime of the planet I'm sure doesn't come close to the nuclear decay in the mantle and core of the planet. I haven't calculated it, but I just can't see life having that much mass.
I believe we use power in the terawatts at a global scale and we could never power ourselves with biodiesel. Photosynthesis is not very efficient. Solar panels are way better at absorbing that energy and changing its form.
Umm...photosynthesis with what plants?
@@boggless2771 this is very true. Incase anyone was wondering, according to Wikipedia the typical plant is only .1% efficient
Point of contention: the gas that "surrounds" a planet is actually a part of that planet.
agreed. otherwise gas giants are pretty small and nothing to talk about
Well I mean yes in a sense but on terrestrial planets there's a pretty clear distinction between all of the atmosphere and the solid/liquid below.
The atmosphere is defined as the gasses trapped by the gravity so its mass is also calculated as mass of planet I thought? 🤔
@@confectortyrannis275 The atmosphere's weight is added to the mass of solids and liquids to find the total mass. It's just for the earth the mass of the atmosphere is so small compared to the mass of the rest of the earth that it is negligible. Mass of the earth is about 6*10^24 kg where as the mass of the atmosphere alone is around 5*10^18 kg. This means you would need about 1.2 million earth atmospheres to equal the mass of the earth. Wow I thought the atmosphere was smaller then that guess you learn something new every day.
For the gas giants it is of course relevant though and the atmosphere's mass must be taken into account. Although really it's just the gaseous part of the planet at that point since when we say the atmosphere of something we generally mean a small coating. For instance it'd be silly to say the sun has an 'atmosphere' of plasma since it is almost entirely plasma.
Really wanted to know the answer to this. Thanks.
I'm not more than 40 seconds in and I've wondered for a long time what could have happened if Venus and Mars had formed at each other's respective orbits.
I imagine a white Venus at Mars orbit. A snowball world where it doesn't have enough warmth so it turns white and reflects much of its radiation, but doesn't lose its atmosphere.
Mars' atmosphere would get washed away by the solar radiation for lack of a magnetic field to protect it. Basically, the same thing that has happened to it already, but much faster and with more heat.
“It’s 870f all the time”
Still not hot enough to fully cook my hot pocket
😂
Earth's atmosphere isn't a 'greenhouse' either. A greenhouse works by suppressing convection. Atmosphere is always convective.
The greenhouse effect is a common usage of the word greenhouse in planetary science. I would know, I've studied venus and it's past. So yes, you're right it's not technically a greenhouse in the crop growing sense. However, like a lot of other terminology in astronomy we're kind of stuck with what we've got since the categories and phrases have already been established.
For instance the sun is a 'dwarf' star in spite of the fact it is larger then most stars in the universe. Asteroid means 'star like' in spite of the fact that asteroids are about as far as you can get from being a star because they looked similar when we first discovered them.
Most underrated channel
Deserves 1 million
4:35: Which is logical because light spreads out in all three dimensions. The number of photons stays the same but the the equidistant area (spherical surface) grows with the square of the distance. Because... it's an area.
Exactly.
You deserve so many more subscribers
The comparison that I've never seen done by anybody is: What if Earth formed in Venus' orbit? And what if Venus formed in Earth's orbit? This would be interesting to speculate on, because so many people point to Venus and say "Look what's going to happen to Earth!" without taking into account that Venus is 30 million miles closer to the Sun (among other things - rotation speed, etc.)
In many relationships they have. Oh, you're talking about the planets. Sorry...
What about the fact that a Venus day is longer than it's year? Maybe it got hit early on, like Earth did, by something large that caused it to rotate retrograde, and slowly. What if we spun up it's rotation to say a 22 hour day?
Or to 30?
How would we do that???
It's kind of sad that there's no real Earth 2 within reach. Imagine how many sentient beings in the vast universe have faced extinction due to inevitable solar circumstances and whose history is gone forever. We may end up like that one day.
The closest possible one is Proxima Centauri B but that'd still take a while to get to. Scientists still skeptical about the planet though
This was surprisingly refreshing compared to other content producers of this type.
Kurtgestat comes close but this is special.
It's not so dreary and serious and yet you learn a lot.
Like Simba says, slimy, yet satisfying
Stop spoiling us all with the terrific content!!!
Interesting experiment. What interests me the most is : What was the "initial atmospheric content" of Venus before the runaway process (supposedly) started. Was there ever a vegetation or organic life on Venus? It there was water, the evaporation of water would by itself add significantly to an increase of temperature. Where did all the heat-caused CO2 come from? If it came from water, would that not indicate that there had been fossils there, or would it all come from non-fossile carbon-12? Regarding the runaway greenhouse effect, it resonates with the fear of reaching a GHG runaway situation on Earth. It is wise to remember that geological records show CO2 levels above 8000 ppm in the remote past, and such levels did not cause a runaway effect. What is the CO2_carbon12/Co2_carbon13 based ratio in the atmosphere, and how has that changed over the years? As always, there are more questions than answers 😃
It's very unlikely any form of life or liquid water ever existed on Venus, as it was so hot that it never even got cool enough to form tectonic plates, resulting in its unique geographic formations on its surface. It's crust is essentially eternally semimelted.
Even if a Venus in Mars' orbit wasn't human-habitable, I'll bet it would be a heckuva lot easier to terraform than Mars!
Actually... I should go run this in Universe Sandbox and see what happens!
Even if you flung current Venus out into deep space, it would still take a _ridiculously_ long time to cool off. We'd need to have some serious atmosphere-altering technologies before we could make any significant changes.
@@ScienceAsylum Isaac Arthur did a great video a few years ago explaining how terraforming venus would work. We're looking at 10k years, and lack of hydrogen means it would never be able to have more than a negligible amount of water, relative to what life needs.
@@LeoStaley ...needs to spawn live in an ocean of chemical opportunities. We might thou make it there in simmilar ways we plan to initiate habitation on mars: collecting the little there is in isolated habitable bubbles.
I never knew there were people that thought it was a "runaway" greenhouse effect. learn something new every day.
Well I think the normal description is that Venus 'underwent' a runaway greenhouse effect. Implying it did so in the past. Over relatively short timescales a planet's temperature must reach a stable point (baring changes which will periodically disturb it). The alternative is either unchecked growth in temperature (which would be nonsensical) or perpetual dropping (which would be literally impossible). So no one really believes that Venus today is warming however, in the past it almost certainly went through a positive feedback loop of warming.
Assuming something completely out of the blue and still getting to enlighten thousands of followers. Only Nick can do this!!!
Love how youtube is so scared of people having differing views that they put wikipedia under the title lol.
Global warming is not a matter of debate. The fact that humans are causing it is not a matter of debate. The only thing open for debate is how we're going to deal with it.
den books name shd be changed to Women Are from Mars, Men Are from Venus....🌌
At around 7 min, "greenhouse effect" is a misnomer: heat transfer on our planet rests on 3 processes: convection, radiation and conduction. In actual greenhouses, the heat stays within just because convection is blocked by the walls and the roof. To cool down the atmosphere within a greenhouse one opens up vents on the roof and let the hot air go up by convection. What happens in gaseous systems like atmospheres is that some of their molecules (CO2 or H2O for instance) absorb light in certain frequency bands and retain it for a moment before it is emitted in any direction (it is random) - not only towards the ground, but until equilibrium is reached (which is never the case in fact) the energy balance shows that the atmosphere heats up under constant flux of energy from its nearby star.
Gonna comment to force YT's algorithm to recommend this channel to others.
That was interesting about Venus in Mars' orbit. But what about Mars in Venus' orbit?
Slightly hotter red ball
@@crsmith6226 Not slightly hotter, rather a much hotter red ball.
Actually, @@crsmith6226 is correct. It would only be _slightly_ hotter. It would be about the temperature of Earth's tropics. That's it. It doesn't have the atmosphere to be any hotter.
Had I the funds to move to the alternate Venus, I'd probably move to Wicklow in Ireland or to a chalet in the Alps instead. Maybe I'd just visit my cousins on Venus for a few weeks. Maybe.
I've been wanting this answer for years so thank you!
He's an Earth climate modeler and you can see the despair in his eyes, and hear it in his voice..Some would say that's projection, but since I've worked with these people, I can spot it from a mile away...
Content and presentation level 9000. Awesome as always.
Oh my word - had an exam question yesterday exactly on this topic (the equation for temperature equilibrium)...Pity I didn't have this video to watch on Wednesday because then I would have nailed it! ;) Great explanation as always! :)
Venus may be easier to transform than Mars. The atmospheric pressure is the main problem and not even the content. One need to "snow" carbon out of the sky for starters and keep it down.
Venus would be a good candidate for cloud cities.
Forming Venus in Mars Orbit is one of the greatest questions of myself ... thank you.
Glad I could help 🤓
"... That would have made Venus habitable. If you ask me, that's pretty cool."
Me: actually that's warm.
😂
Based on its position and how much light it gets, if Venus had an Earth-like atmosphere, it would be habitable at the poles. It would just have an average surface temp in the 60c-70c range.
Yup. If you double the power of the sun, that's basically what would happen here.
I reduced the play speed to 50% thinking that it would add some bass to your voice. Instead, it makes you sound drunk and sarcastic. Good for a couple of laughs.
Amazingly - if you removed the CO2 - the remaining atmosphere would almost be the same as Earth's. The sulphuric acid can only be in the atmosphere because of the high temp. Also, most models I've seen is that Venus didn't start with the thick atmosphere - originally it was much more like Earth and may have even had water. Then volcanic outgassing pumped a LOT of CO₂ and SO₄ into the atmosphere.
As for moving it to Mars' orbit - don't need to. We can terraform Venus where it is. Things like purple sulphur bacteria are exceptionally good at eating CO₂ and SO₄ and we could replenish the water by deflecting water asteroids towards it and crashing them onto the surface. It would take a few hundred years, but we could end up with Earth 2.0 after all. The downsides? Tidally locked to the sun and no magnetic field but there may be ways around that too - and Mars has a similar problem - but at least Venus would have an atmosphere.
You didnt mention the effect of the magnetic field on a planets ability to retain an atmosphere? Dont think it would affect Venus, but just thought it was weird when you even went into tectonics.
Everybody gangsta until Dr. Chris Colose shows up.
This has become my favorite science channel on TH-cam. Thank you for all your work Nick. You make my highs so much more mind blowing with your astrophysics videos!
7:56 "A weak greenhouse lets more light into space".
Might be more accurate to say that "A weak greenhouse effect lets more light into space for a lower temperature".
Once a planet reaches equilibrium, it always lets exactly the same energy flux of light into space as it absorbs from the Sun, no matter how thick or thin the atmosphere. All the thickness of the atmosphere determines is how hot it has to get to equilibrate. (Minus radioactive decay heat from the inside of the planet)
That’s a fair critique, but a video that is perfectly nuanced would be unwatchable.
@@ScienceAsylum
Yeah, I hear ya.
It's too bad we don't have a second inhabitable planet in our solar system. I really learned something about greenhouse gasses here today!
Yeah. There's only one Earth.
We're not the only waterworld in our solar system tho, Titan, Enceladus, Europa, Ganymede, Ceres, Triton, and Pluto all have subsurface oceans but ppl don't know about that tho
@@deshaughnmolette9205 When the Sun becomes a red giant, those moons will be really comfortable to inhabit.
Think we can cover what would happen to Venus if we were able to move it to the orbit of Mars now, and maybe Mars if we put it where Venus is, both in their current conditions? Would anything happen to either?
You forgot to mention that the temperature on Venus is "hot enough to melt lead"
There are two scenarios:
1. Venus is on the orbit of Mars from beginning and the evolution of the planet goes completely different.
2. We move today’s Venus to Mars orbit and model how it would change.
Venus would have a chance on Mars orbit. Imagine the consequences for human culture if there were two life supporting planets in Sol system.
Once one side got spacecraft it could move and dominate the other, taking over the planet and striping its resources, that's just how life is, so the last thing we want is to have et turn up here.
@@CrusaderSports250 it would not be so simple as discovering Americas and subsequent colonization.
I love how TH-cam makes a point to put a definition of climate change, from the most reputable place ever, Wikipedia…. 1st thought what does earth climate change have to do with Venus. 2nd thought why did they use Wikipedia as a source, 3rd thought was circling back to the 1st
It's TH-cam. They ban people for "misinformation" that becomes the official narrative 3 hours later.
If there is a strong GHE, why is the temperature at 1atm or 50km high the same as at Earth, corrected for Sun distance?
yup about 27C right?
@@bencoad8492 no, more than that.
We measure area with square feet since square feet aren't much good for running. It's hard to find a square footed when you need to measure an area, but once you spot them, it's super easy to catch them. Plus they are glad to help, really makes them feel useful.
Let's talk about Venus!
TH-cam: you're missing context about climate change
Hey Nick, can you make a video on the physics of electroboom-Walter Lewin controversy. Whether KVL holds true in changing magnetic field.
I am confused.
Can you put a link up so we can see it? That was a year or two ago.
@@westinthewest part one th-cam.com/video/0TTEFF0D8SA/w-d-xo.html
part 2 th-cam.com/video/Q9LuVBfwvzA/w-d-xo.html
@@realvedantnagre I've actually had a video about this exact topic half-written for about 2 years now. When I heard about the ElectroBOOM/Walter Lewin dispute, I stopped working on the video because I didn't want to get caught up in all the drama. *Short Version:* They're both correct. They're just speaking different languages. Lewin is a physicist and ElectroBOOM is an engineer.
wouldn’t some of the excess CO2 in the Venus at Mars orbit have been absorbed into forming limestone per the carbon cycle as it did on earth, perhaps supporting a more balanced and habitable environment?
The carbon cycle would require the life forms to have contributed to this hypothetical limestone. But worth mentioning in the context of the # climate change etc tags stamped on this way over-simplified explanation ( that conveniently does not dispute climate alarmists)
The story is even MORE nuanced. Earth's plate tectonics provides a feedback mechanism that keeps the temperature in a fairly narrow range by regulating the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. But plate tectonics requires liquid water, and Venus doesn't have it.
And we can in principle terraform Venus by somehow shading it from the Sun for a while and adding a bit of water to re-form the oceans. It can be done by putting a bunch of comets inside the Roche zone of Venus and waiting for them to rain down on the surface. Then we can sequester the CO2 as elemental carbon on the bottom of the newly formed oceans. Over geological times it'll get pulled inside the mantle by restarted plate tectonics.
Just love the YT comment on two eminent physicists' discussion: "if it ain't mostly human caused, it ain't climate change."
doesn't the pressure of the atmosphere effect the temperature? I've always understood that t=pV...so with 92 times the pressure would it even matter what the composition of the gasses are? I mean, what if Venus' atmosphere were argon, or xenon, or just nitrogen...wouldn't it still have super high temps due to the enormous pressure, sort of like we think Jupiter has super high temp the lower down it is measured?
It's glossed over because it doesn't support the GHG narrative, that CO2=bad.
Also, Jupiter creates more heat than it gets from the sun, or so I've heard.
That "rule" about pressure and temperature is oversimplified. Example: Even if an increase in pressure increases the temperature, a maintained pressure doesn't necessarily maintain the temperature. There are more factors at play. I mean, consider the deep ocean. It's under a lot of pressure, a lot more than Venus's atmosphere actually. The deep ocean is freezing cold though.
@@ScienceAsylum it still is a very important part of the equation. Probably more important than the fact that it's CO2, but probably less important than it's proximity to the sun. For example, Mercury is nearly as hot as Venus, and it has no atmosphere.
Although it's difficult to say precisely, earth would certainly be far hotter than it is now, if it were in Venus' place.
This is an incredibly complicated topic, and I feel like it's being simplified to support a narrative.
@@ScienceAsylum Exactly, a steady pressure with no outside influences would cool, yet there are so many idiots that thing "hIGh prESsuRe mEaNs HiGH tEMpeRaTurE"
@@prich0382 But is a planet's atmosphere a steady pressure or a dynamic system of rising and falling volumes of atmosphere, like our Hadley Cells on Earth where the volume of the gas constantly changing sort of like an engine? Certainly if the pressure remained static it would cool but atmospheric systems dont seem to be static but rather in a kind of dynamic equilibrium. Do you have insight on this conundrum?
Somewhere in the universe, there is a star system where there are 2 habitable Earth like planet next to each other. Colonization is ridiculously easy compared to the human’s situation. With more incentive, their space tech is way more advanced, as it is a trillion dollar profitable business. And probably 100 years after their first airplane, thousands of people have already moved to that other planet, and millions more are planning to go.
I'd be more interested in the situation if somehow two different sentient beings evolved in each world independent from each other before the space age of either. Like if we had a early Venus in Martian orbit, and that also happened in the same way.
The effects... I wonder how inevitable it would be for some sort of interplanetary war. I think it's possible, but also maybe avoidable. It really does make a lot of interesting questions. I think I would learn more from being able to witness such a system and it's history than simply a system that had two planets that one simply colonized due to it being a habitable world for them to expand into, but didn't have intelligent life interrupting that expansion (which I think, is probably the possibility that happens far more often, but I would imagine in the universe, both probably do happen often enough)
@@adrianbundy3249 Also possible, but very little chance that it would happen at the exact same time. The chances are, one of them would develop it millions of years earlier, and occupy the other one before it could happen there.
@@juzoli A third possibility exist. Hundreds of millions of years, yeah, it could happen. But with the cushion of just hundreds of thousands of years, we could have one reach space age, and the other just starting their journey into civilization, like the proto-cavemen societies that were just developing tools and fires hundreds of thousands of years ago. And iirc, some of our ancestors before the homo sapiens, even were documented to have tools to some degree like 1+ million years ago? Can't recall the specifics, but I imagine it is true.
It is quite possible such a space faring people might come across them in time, and realize they are sapient, but it would probably be like the Europeans finding the Americas, but with a far, far more extensive imbalance of both technology, and probably intelligence itself (not having the full time to properly evolve too much better, but then again, a guess).
what about the intense atmospheric pressure? Would that have somehow been less?
If it _formed_ in Mars's orbit, it never would have built up all the atmospheric pressure in the first place. The pressure would be normal 👍
Anyone else ever think the universe just works so impossibly perfect in such a weird way.
You could do another video on what would have happened if Mars never lost its magnetic field
If Mars was more massive, perhaps triple the mass it is now, it would still be geologically alive. Pity it isn't...
Also i assume that "geological activities" includes people digging up petrified plants and adding their share excess to the natural equilibrium CO2 level?
I doubt petrified plants ever existed on Venus.😅
The temperature of a planet's crust influences the amount of volcanic activity on that planet.
If the surface of Venus were cooler, then it would likely have more of those "Geological Activities" that were refered to.
Which in turn is a very very significant factor when trying to hypothesize a scenario of Venus in the orbit of Mars.
E.g., on Earth, there is technically 6 times more water chemically combined with rocks in the earth's crust, than there is in the entire oceans of the earth. Six times more water in rocks...than in the ocean.
Geological Activities release large amounts of such water from rocks. It's a significant part of how Earth's oceans formed. If Venus had more eruptions, it would have more water.
If Venus were cooler, not only should the be way more water, it could have liquid water.
This is significant because new igneous material released by Volcanic eruptions can sequester large amounts of CO2 when liquid water is present...in a series of chemical reactions called Carbonization.
Venus doesn't really have plate tectonics. It's crust is too hot, and thus too malleable. Which is why a planet having a hotter crust results in less Geological Activity.
Every once in a while the earth turns into a snowball covered in ice (even at the equator), which is inevitably followed by a crap ton of Geological Activity because of a colder crust (saving the earth from this icy fate...which happened more than once)
A Venus that has plate tectonics (a.k.a, Geological Activities) would change the game completely.
The point is, "Geological Activities" make the hypothetical Venus in Mars' orbit a lot more difficult to hypothesize, hence why the guys in the videos meantioned that fact.
@@tylerdurden3722 in other words: if it was cooler it didn't have as much CO2... cool.
If I had one wish, it would be to live long enough to witness terraforming planets
I was told that science generally agrees that planets tend to move in toward the star rather than out. Eventually burn.
That depends on whether the star is expanding due to ageing, or the planet is already close to the star and/or in a retrograde orbit. Anything orbiting retrograde will have its orbit shrink until it hits its parent, like with Triton and Neptune. If a planet is already as close to its sun as a hot Jupiter like, say, WASP 18b, then the planet would already have a year less than 24 hours long and would probably only survive for a million or so years later before drag from the star's atmosphere combined with tidal forces caused it to be dragged in and eaten by its sun. And a star that is ageing and expanding in size usually won't have the planets move outwards until the star begins losing mass. When the star loses a lot of mass at once, it's caused by a much stronger solar wind, which blows the planets further out, just like wind blowing a sailboat along. IIRC this happens right before the first helium flash I think? Right after it expands the first time and then shrinks again.
This happens as the star expands until its solar wind calms back down, at which point the planets stop moving outwards and stay put. This is why Earth has a pretty much 50/50 chance of surviving the Sun's death, because even though the Sun's surface will expand past Earth's widest possible orbit nowadays, if the solar wind caused its orbit to expand and it managed not to be slowed down by drag from the star's atmosphere, it could survive being eaten, but it would still be a scorched, lifeless and barren ball of rock. there's a 10% chance that Venus might also survive, and probably a 1% chance for Mercury (It wouldn't survive due to orbital expansion, but rather due to a that-likely chance of Jupiter ejecting it from the system.) the Earth WILL burn and be eaten by the sun if it cannot escape the atmospheric drag. Though, it won't matter anyways because all life on the planet would've been baked to death billions of years beforehand.
I would happily move to Venus even if it had hypothetically formed exactly where it is. Sure the surface is a literal hell-scape, but go up about 50km and you find a pleasant ~1atm at ~30 C. All you'd need is some O2 and a thin acid-proof suit. Imagine the views from up there...
So it would basically be like Florida...
@@Dr.Frankensteen more suffocating like NYC or LA in summer.
So, the Nerd clone got glasses and is practicing social distancing via Zoom?
Thank u sir, for helping me to clear the doubts about black hole.
Although it's not specifically said, it's implied in the video that there's sulfuric acid rain on the surface. The surface is too hot for liquid sulfuric acid. Any rain that happens would happen in the upper atmosphere and evaporate before hitting the surface.
I'm calling it now, ceres would be a moon of venus if those 2 switched places.
So a belter would actually be a Martian?
@@john-or9cf it would make sense if ceres was caught in venus orbit.
if you notice the orbit of ceres and mars, ceres gets unnaturally close to mars during its perihelion(nearest point).
you could clearly see ceres in mars sky with the naked eye.
so venus which is roughly earth sized would attract ceres with its gravity and make ceres its moon.
ceres would be the triton of venus though, it will have a retrograde orbit.
though it will be really hard to see the moon from other places since ceres is too small and also it wouldn't influence the ocean of venus that much...
I dunno. Mars perihelion is 1.666 AU while Ceres aphelion is 2.56 AU: a difference of 0.9 AU.
Heck, the Earth and Mars are a lot closer than that (0.38 AU), and the Earth and Venus are a LOT closer than that (0.28 AU). I worry Venus and Earth might come together or swap positions.
or way more likely ceres would just shoot off into space or go on a collision course into venus instead of getting into a stable orbit.
I'm looking forward to celestial engineering in a couple of thousand years' time. Lets chop up the other rocky planets, asteroids, and moons; drag them into the 5 mutually stable L4/L5 points in the earth orbit; and terraform them all. We'd have 6 earths instead of 1.
Hey, I saw you and your channel were named checked in the most recent PBS Spacetime video. I discovered both channels about the same time a few years back and thought it was awesome that two of my favorite channels were aware of and respected each other.!
Yep, I saw Matt's video, but thanks for letting me know just in case 🙂
I love that word, "equilibrium".
I've been saying that a lot lately in philosophical constructs.
Justitia, goddess of equilibrium, or equating, stuff like that.
Love this guy! He is so entertaining! Makes learning science fun! :)
I'd like him much more if he didn't talk like a children's show character. I presume his schtick is making somewhat complex science palatable to kids, but as one in my 30s I'm not going to sub due to it, despite that the material he spoke of is unique and interesting.
@@PoochieCollins He has a great sense of humor, and I believe he is just being himself, which makes his videos, at least to me, entertaining to watch.
@@JH-en6ql : I'm in my 30s and never heard a man talk like that naturally. It's a lot like a man might talk to little kids.
I like these planetary videos with a physics slant.
Can’t wait to watch the full interview.
Venus could be more habitable than you think, if only it's atmosphere was less acidic and poisonous. At 100,000 feet altitude, the average temperature on Venus is about 72 F, and coincidentally the air pressure is about 15 psi, about the same as Earth at sea level. At this altitude, except for the toxic atmosphere, Venus would be a fine place for airplanes, zeppelins, and floating cities. The environment could be similar to the Mediterranean at that height above the ground. God forbid your plane have mechanical trouble and you need to make an emergency landing though. Perhaps on Venus zeppelins are a better idea.
The resurfacing events are probably the biggest reason Venus is the way it is. Unless you could make tectonic plates, I don't think a Venus further from the sun would look too much different long term.