PDA

View Full Version : Are we the only planet relying on the sun?



Seeka
2008-Dec-28, 05:13 PM
Are the rest of the planets in our solar system relying on the sun in any way? If Earth was not present and every other planet was in their same position and our sun died, i know it would spell the end of the inner planets and probably the outer gas and ice giants but, hypothetically, if the sun were to be removed what effect would it have on the rest of the planets?
Regards,
Steff.

aurora
2008-Dec-28, 05:32 PM
Depends on what you mean by
our sun died.

The mass and gravity of the Sun are what keep the planets in their orbits.

Or are you asking about the energy radiated from the Sun?

Seeka
2008-Dec-28, 06:00 PM
Apologies i wasn't clear. Yes i mean in terms of the energy radiated from the sun. Earth needs heat and light for example. My question phrased differently (and perhaps better) is are there any other planets that rely on the sun for similar reasons?

Whirlpool
2008-Dec-28, 06:13 PM
All that are part of the Solar System (http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/our_solar_system/solar_system_1.html&edu=high)relys on the Sun.

Trakar
2008-Dec-28, 06:49 PM
Are the rest of the planets in our solar system relying on the sun in any way? If Earth was not present and every other planet was in their same position and our sun died, i know it would spell the end of the inner planets and probably the outer gas and ice giants but, hypothetically, if the sun were to be removed what effect would it have on the rest of the planets?
Regards,
Steff.

All of the planets in our system would be dramatically different without the radiated energy from the Sun. None of them, including the Earth, require this energy for anything in particular, but all would be different without it. Life (as we know it) on Earth requires the Sun's energy, but there is a big difference between the life on Earth and what the planet "requires" or doesn't "require." Some forms of life might persist on the Earth if the Sun's radiative input was removed, but much less on its surface than is present today, and there are questions as to whether it would or could have formed to begin with if some peculiar force had seperated the Sun and planet after it was formed.

astromark
2008-Dec-28, 08:51 PM
Apologies i wasn't clear. Yes i mean in terms of the energy radiated from the sun. Earth needs heat and light for example. My question phrased differently (and perhaps better) is are there any other planets that rely on the sun for similar reasons?

The problem is in the question; If the sun were to just whimper out... like a candle being extinguished... not real, cant happen... but for your question... what if ? well as I see it...No problem for this planet or any other. No change in mass equals no disturbance of orbital machanics... but, for the life forms living on this planet it would be all over. The only heat source would be from subterranean thermal and volcanic...hardly ideal as the food chain would be gone. we freeze. we die...
If Sol were to nova we do not escape... bad scene. mark.

Seeka
2008-Dec-28, 11:03 PM
Cheers guys. Perhaps it was a silly question to ask. Clearly it would be devestation for anything living on Earth. I just wondered what does the sun do for the other planets, what do they rely on the sun for, if anything at all but keeping them in orbit.

novaderrik
2008-Dec-28, 11:56 PM
i'd think that the weather patterns on Venus and Mars would be way different than they are now without the sun unevenly heating the atmospheres and surfaces.. everything would get really cold and really still really fast. the atmospheres would freeze out and fall to the surface in solid form.

astromark
2008-Dec-29, 01:18 AM
Yes, the word 'reliance' on the sun is indeed the issue. We and all the other life forms on Earth with perhaps the exception of those things in the deep near to volcanic venting fissures... rely entirely on the sun. Depending on what happens to the mass we are orbiting does our planet need the sun ? No. Norr do any of them. Imagining that a straight line to whatever gravity source was near enough to influence the path of each planet. The water would freeze, and then the atmosphere. The little blue dot would be white and very very cold.

Cougar
2008-Dec-29, 02:03 AM
Earth needs heat and light for example.

Only if you want life to evolve. The Planet Earth happened to have enough diverse chemical elements and fairly stable temperature over several billion years.... The sun has obviously had different effects on the other planets....


I just wondered what does the sun do for the other planets....

Which is another way of asking what effects the Sun has had and is having on the other planets. Obviously the inner planets have been greatly affected. The "flux" a planet receives from the Sun's radiation is a simple calculation when the distance is known, which it is. I imagine this is a field that has been extensively investigated and is ongoing.....

WayneFrancis
2008-Dec-29, 03:09 AM
Basically if you take life out of the equation Earth isn't that special. If the Sun was not shining everything in the solar system would be a lot colder. Some places might have little change. Io and Europa for example might not change much. Both get most of their energy from the tidal forces from Jupiter. I doubt any life that we would recognize would have formed here on earth. I wouldn't think that the oceans would have even formed which means very different dynamics around thermal vents but then that is the life topic.

Remember we don't have to stop global warming to save the Earth....we have to stop global warming to save ourselves....the Earth will be just fine one way or the other.

novaderrik
2008-Dec-29, 04:41 AM
Basically if you take life out of the equation Earth isn't that special. If the Sun was not shining everything in the solar system would be a lot colder. Some places might have little change. Io and Europa for example might not change much. Both get most of their energy from the tidal forces from Jupiter. I doubt any life that we would recognize would have formed here on earth. I wouldn't think that the oceans would have even formed which means very different dynamics around thermal vents but then that is the life topic.

Remember we don't have to stop global warming to save the Earth....we have to stop global warming to save ourselves....the Earth will be just fine one way or the other.

we don't need to stop global warming to save ourselves- the human race will continue on even if the earth gets warmer or colder or whatever. we have to at least look like we are attempting to stop global warming to help assuage any guilt we may have as a society about how evil we are.

Seeka
2008-Dec-29, 09:41 AM
Thanks for your patient replies:)
So the planets themselves would be fine just much colder and earth would be inhabitable for us. Ok one last question, the sun has a massive magnetic field right? What do we need it for?, and again, if it were removed, not going to happen tomorrow but say it did?

astromark
2008-Dec-29, 10:59 AM
The pigeons would be lost.... your magnetic compass would be a useless trinket... If the Earths magnetic field were to vanish. If the Sun were to suddenly be electromagnetically neutral would we even notice. No.

Ilya
2008-Dec-29, 02:00 PM
The pigeons would be lost.... your magnetic compass would be a useless trinket... If the Earths magnetic field were to vanish. If the Sun were to suddenly be electromagnetically neutral would we even notice. No.

Sorry, but that's very very false. In fact, Earth's life including us needs Sun's magnetic field much more than it needs Earth's magnetic field:

Sun and Heliopause (http://old.dpg-tagungen.de/archive/2000/ep_9.html) -- not a comprehensive read, but something I dug up almost at once. Most relevant quote:



An increase of the total number density of the local [interstellar medium] from the present value of about 0.1 to 1.0 hydrogen atoms/ccm would cause the heliosphere to shrink by a factor of two to three and lead to a 10- to 50-fold increase of the [cosmic ray] flux on Earth.

Complete removal of Sun's magnetic field (at hence of heliosphere) would increase cosmic ray flux to the point that Earth's atmosphere would completely strip off on geological timscale, and all surface life would die much sooner than that.

Seeka
2008-Dec-29, 07:53 PM
Thanks Ilya, checked out the link but its too complex for me :(

astromark
2008-Dec-29, 09:07 PM
Sorry, but that's very very false. In fact, Earth's life including us needs Sun's magnetic field much more than it needs Earth's magnetic field:

Sun and Heliopause (http://old.dpg-tagungen.de/archive/2000/ep_9.html) -- not a comprehensive read, but something I dug up almost at once. Most relevant quote:


Complete removal of Sun's magnetic field (at hence of heliosphere) would increase cosmic ray flux to the point that Earth's atmosphere would completely strip off on geological timescale, and all surface life would die much sooner than that.

... No, as is often the case in here. The question has been lost in a sea of detail not asked for. I am well aware of the consequence of solar energy bombardment if the magnetic effect of our 'Van allan belts,' was to be weaker. This is detail unasked for. The fact is as already said.; The planets would be fine... ( The life on them would not ) The point being that from a observational stance the effect would be ..... Why do we bother,. You all know that this can never happen. Electromagnetic imbalance is a consequence of the movement of charged particles through the mantel or magnetosphere of such, and that can never be turned off. The question does not fly... it can never happen... My point is not wrong. The sun would not look any different if its polls were to reverse, flip, or turn off. Down here on planet Earth the story is the same. The pigeons would be confused. :and yes as the downstream effect would indeed be nasty as solar winds would rip into our atmosphere... happy now?

north
2008-Dec-29, 09:28 PM
Are the rest of the planets in our solar system relying on the sun in any way? If Earth was not present and every other planet was in their same position and our sun died, i know it would spell the end of the inner planets and probably the outer gas and ice giants but, hypothetically, if the sun were to be removed what effect would it have on the rest of the planets?
Regards,
Steff.

and I would also ask ;

about the suns speed of rotation and its affects on planets , moons etc

notice too that all planets are rotating aproximately around the equatorial point of the sun

in the end the planets would just start floating away , based on their momentum at that point in which the sun was removed

Seeka
2008-Dec-30, 10:13 AM
I am really getting the feeling my OP has annoyed Astromark. I am well aware that these things can never happen but does that mean i cannot ask about it? Its how i learn-by asking silly questions.

astromark
2008-Dec-30, 11:05 AM
Wrong. 'Steffanie'... I have actually enjoyed your question; and No. No question is silly or unwelcome. You have been refreshingly honest. I hope we are OK.
Do not stop asking questions as that is how we clear any doubt and error. Yes, and I am not always right...

Durakken
2008-Dec-30, 01:22 PM
Actually... you know, absolutely anything "can" happen. It's just that the likelyhood of it happens are so stupendously large that it might as well not be able to happen.

That's one of the arguments a lot of ID proponents use to support their claim because life suddenly arising is something like a 1 in 300,000,000,000,000 chance that it might, but that's a really bad way of putting it because that does say how to calculate that. Is that per planet? per year? what? Is it at any time that it is possible for it to happen that it might? If that's that the case then that's 1-in-300trillion every millisecond for what is it 9billion years and on 100 quintillion planets? And even then...those planets that don't give rise to life will be polluted by those that due and will have life spawn from them even if it doesn't spontaneously occur. When you consider those numbers it's a lot more likely to happen.

though I think the probability of a human just suddenly being teleported to a random spot in the universe is greater than total sum of the time the universe is predicted to exist cohesively...considering that... the size of the sun is how many times bigger than humans? that's how unlikely it is that it will happen to it >.> Though i do suspect that it is easier for a mass of particles to stop existing or suddenly disperse than it is for them to all cohesively go from one spot to another.

Seeka
2008-Dec-30, 06:28 PM
We are fine 'Astromark';) Perhaps i misconstrued the tone of your replies.
Ill surely not stop asking questions either:)

Neverfly
2008-Dec-30, 06:44 PM
I am really getting the feeling my OP has annoyed Astromark. I am well aware that these things can never happen but does that mean i cannot ask about it? Its how i learn-by asking silly questions.

You can tell when he's annoyed by seeing all his words spelled correctly;)

astromark
2008-Dec-30, 08:29 PM
Neverfly ;... wheat cern I saae.:)

Quote; I am that dyslexic agnostic insomniac that lays awake all night worrying about weather there is a dog or not...

Back to subject; What I see as important here is that the planetary disk is orbiting a mass. What that mass is, does not change things a great deal. For the planets. It can be a black hole or a brown dwarf. If I can take the liberty and call Earths Eco system stable... If our sun snuffed out or novas we are dead. History and Geography show us this planets not dead yet. Ignoring catastrophic collisions we are safe for a couple of billion years yet.

If you feel the need to be the school teacher. Feel free to correct my spooling erris.
I'm 56 and do not care.:) HAPPY NEW YEAR to all. Remembering that 2009 is the year of astronomy. Lets enjoy it.