ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 6032|回复: 7
打印 上一主题 下一主题

faint sun paradox 一点中文解释

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2007-10-24 03:14:00 | 只看该作者

faint sun paradox 一点中文解释

Faint young Sun paradox. 当太阳系年轻时,太阳的温度比目前要低25~30%。太阳达到目前的温度大概是在45亿年前。而化石记录显示水和生命在40亿年前就存在。为什么随着太阳温度的上升没有把水烧干?太阳较冷的时候,地球大气中主要是二氧化碳和水。吸收了太阳的部分热量,使地球保持温暖。没有二氧化碳的月亮的地表平均温度是-18C,地球是15C,仅仅因为地球大所中0.035%的二氧化碳及水气、甲烷等有温室效应的气体(硝酸、氧不吸收热量)。

關於 the Faint Young Sun Paradox
posted on 11/11/2005

內容是否如此?

就是指地球冰河時期是如何結束的問題, 有一派的理論指的是, 因為
太陽的亮度在這一段時期中稍為增加了, 而導致地球的溫度提升, 冰
河時期停止. 如果沒有太陽溫度的改變, 地球應該永遠都是一顆冰封
的行星, 氣候是不應該會有太特殊的異變的.

但另一派的理論則指出, 從地質學的角度看, 冰河時期到現在太陽照
臨地球的溫度並不變.

後者的理論則認為冰河時期的結束是基於溫室效應, 但為何冰河時期
結束之後, 地球的溫度沒有一直提升下去, 則建基於當大氣中的溫度
越高, 二氧化碳的消耗速度就越快.


[此贴子已经被作者于2007-10-24 3:16:54编辑过]
沙发
发表于 2007-10-24 04:01:00 | 只看该作者
lZ 牛
板凳
发表于 2007-10-24 07:54:00 | 只看该作者

我的理解是,许多学者当时(40亿年前)应该说温度是很低的,水都结冰了,那么在那个时期就不会形成沉积岩,但是沉积岩是是有很多的,这就矛盾了,所以有学者就视图这么解释,当海洋结冰了以后,就没有水去溶解二氧化碳和甲烷了,所以二者浓度显著升高,这个greenhouse的温室效应使得海水融化,有水了那么浓度又得到了抑制,浓度越来越低,到了一定程度就又结冰了(比如说寒武纪,6.5亿万年前),然后浓度再上升,又融化,,,,,

地板
发表于 2007-10-24 07:58:00 | 只看该作者
牛!!!!
5#
发表于 2007-10-24 08:02:00 | 只看该作者

The faint young sun paradox describes the apparent contradiction between observations of liquid water early in Earth's history and the astrophysical expectation that the sun's output would be only 70% as intense during that epoch as it is during the modern epoch.

The standard solar model describes the history and evolution of stars. An aspect of this model is that stars similar to the sun should gradually brighten over their life time (excluding a very bright phase just after formation). This prediction is supported by the observation of lower brightness in young stars of solar type. However, with the predicted brightness 4 billion (109) years ago and with greenhouse gas concentrations the same as are current for the modern Earth, any liquid water exposed to the surface would quickly freeze solid. This contradicts geological observations of sedimentary rocks, which required the presence of flowing liquid water to form.

The tension between the two hypotheses stems from the incorrect assumption that atmospheric gas concentrations in the past were the same as today. First, before the advent of abundant life the atmospheric oxygen concentrations were orders of magnitude lower than today. In the presence of oxygen methane breaks down to carbon dioxide, so in the absence of oxygen the methane concentration could be much larger than currently observed. Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, so the relative abundance of atmospheric methane throughout Earth's history must be considered when modeling the temperature.

Further, the inorganic version of the carbon cycle can be expected to provide negative feedback towards an Earth with liquid water. Carbon dissolved in liquid water can form carbonic acids, which can then interact with calcium to produce calcium carbonate. If rainfall were to cease and the oceans froze over, then this part of the inorganic carbon cycle would shut down. Periodic explosions from volcanoes would then cause a net increase in the atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane levels with no liquid water to absorb these emitted gases. Eventually the concentrations would become large enough that the surface temperature would rise due to the greenhouse effect. When the surface temperature became large enough for the oceans to melt and rainfall to resume the other half of the inorganic carbon cycle would turn on and moderate the greenhouse gas concentrations.

It is also noteworthy, that even though evidence of flowing water exists even from very early in Earth's history, there may still have been a number of examples of periods when the Earth's oceans
            
froze over completely. The most recent such period may have been ~630 million years ago, and may have been instrumental in leading the Cambrian explosion of new multicellular life forms.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faint_young_sun_paradox"

6#
发表于 2007-10-24 08:20:00 | 只看该作者
thanks a lot
7#
发表于 2007-10-24 21:17:00 | 只看该作者
關於 the Faint Young Sun Paradox
posted on 11/11/2005
图片点击可在新窗口打开查看
內容是否如此?

就是指地球冰河時期是如何結束的問題, 有一派的理論指的是, 因為
太陽的亮度在這一段時期中稍為增加了, 而導致地球的溫度提升, 冰
河時期停止. 如果沒有太陽溫度的改變, 地球應該永遠都是一顆冰封
的行星, 氣候是不應該會有太特殊的異變的.

但另一派的理論則指出, 從地質學的角度看, 冰河時期到現在太陽照
臨地球的溫度並不變.

後者的理論則認為冰河時期的結束是基於溫室效應, 但為何冰河時期
結束之後, 地球的溫度沒有一直提升下去, 則建基於當大氣中的溫度
越高, 二氧化碳的消耗速度就越快.

 

请问LZ 这个是从哪里来的,什么意思啊??

8#
发表于 2007-10-24 21:41:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用lisy在2007-10-24 7:54:00的发言:

我的理解是,许多学者当时(40亿年前)应该说温度是很低的,水都结冰了,那么在那个时期就不会形成沉积岩,但是沉积岩是是有很多的,这就矛盾了,所以有学者就视图这么解释,当海洋结冰了以后,就没有水去溶解二氧化碳和甲烷了,所以二者浓度显著升高,这个greenhouse的温室效应使得海水融化,有水了那么浓度又得到了抑制,浓度越来越低,到了一定程度就又结冰了(比如说寒武纪,6.5亿万年前),然后浓度再上升,又融化,,,,,

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-4-26 12:39
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部