Posted on 12/11/2004 11:15:46 AM PST by SamAdams76
...The short answer to your question is that no one knows the answer. I have come across some interesting information, though, and I will try to give you my thoughts on the matter from a physicist's point of view, but you might also want to resubmit the question with my answer attached and see if you can get further input from a biologist.
First, let's consider how long the planet could support large land animals like ourselves. Just think about the temperature difference between night and day and it should be pretty clear that the atmosphere (at least the troposphere, where we live) cools quite rapidly by radiation. It should only be a matter of days before the surface temperature drops below freezing everywhere on the planet. In, fact in six months to a year, the temperature should drop to less than 150 Kelvin, half its current value. I would not expect any biological activity to remain at this temperature. However, there may be organisms which could survive in a suspended state if they were to freeze before they starved. That's something a biologist would have to comment on. So I would say that an upper bound for the survival of large land animals would be less than six months, just based on temperature. However, it should be much less than this since the food chain, which starts with sunlight (which plants use), would break down almost immediately.
What would happen with the oceans? Well, there's a tremendous amount of latent heat in the oceans, which would help to warm the atmosphere. However, once the surface of the ocean began to freeze, it would become more and more insulated by the cover of ice. Thus, it appears that the transfer of heat from the ocean to the atmosphere could be significant only in the early stages of the cooling. However, the insulating effect of the ice would allow the oceans to stay above freezing for quite a while, though once again, the food chain would break down radidly, and the supply of oxygen would be cut off.
Now, there is another energy source which is significant - geothermal heat. There are organisms which live on the seafloor near geothermal vents - fissures from which superheated water laden with various gases and nutrients are expelled. The question is - are these organisms dependent only on the nutrients and heat that they recieve from the vents, or are they connected to the rest of the food chain? There are many more qualified to answer this than I. I wouldn't be surprised if they were dependent on the oxygen generated by photosynthesis, and thus vulnerable.
I have also seen mention of organisms found in core samples from quite deep in the Earth's crust which may depend only on geothermal heat, but I don't know how credible this is.
Of course, it's possible that technology would allow a very small population of humans to survive, just as they might on a lunar base. However, if such a facility does not already exist, it is doubtful whether one could be constructed before the atmosphere froze out onto the ground, especially since it would probably take more people to construct it than it would be able to support. It might be possible to modify a bomb shelter to serve such a purpose, but it would need to be able to generate breathable air, and there would need to be a way of obtaining fuel. With no solar energy, you would need to use nuclear energy, fossil fuel, or geothernal energy.
In short, we wouldn't last long, but there may be organisms which could survive indefinitely, either by freezing before they starve, or because they don't depend on solar energy at all. I would definitely recommend submitting this to a biologist for further comment.
What would happen if the sky fell? My goodness gracious.....what would we do?
If the sun went out, it would certainly make it easier for the Democrats to win the recount in Washington state.
If the sun went out I seriously doubt we'd last 6 months. More likely it will "hiccup" and incinerate us one day.
There was some cafeteria speculation a couple years ago that the sun has already gone out. It is dark inside and the surface is glowing from residual heat. Won't be long until we notice, maybe a few thousand years.
This is not just cafeteria speculation but a current topic of debate among astrophysicists, particularly trying to find explanations why there are fewer neutrinos being detected from the sun than are predicted by the prevalent theories. A paper on the University of Toronto Physics web site raises this possibility:
There are two possible explanations for the solar neutrino deficit. The first, and simplest, is that the sun is producing fewer neutrinos than we think. One dramatic possibility is that the sun has stopped burning at its core and is already in the final phases of the stellar life cycle. Fortunately for us, it would still take several million years before the energy output of the sun would be noticeably reduced.
Note that they say it would "still take several million years" for us to notice the change.
Another possibility is that the sun's nuclear fusion is cyclical and that we are going through a "downtime" in solar fusion. Whether it is permanent or not, the possibility exists that the sun has already 'gone out.'
By the way, my favorite SF story about the sun messing up, in my mind, is Larry Niven's "Inconstant Moon," which was made into an episode of the revived Outer Limits TV show. In this case it's a massive solar flare event which occurs while Los Angeles is on the far side of the Earth from the sun. He does a great job speculating about the first telltales and then the growing affects of the event. His characters are a bit less convincing (which is typical of his stories) but still fun.
Fritz Leiber's story "A Pail of Air" is closer. In it, the Earth is ripped out of orbit by a passing star, and the air freezes into layers of different gasses. A few people survive.
The name of the story comes from an everyday activity -- going outside to bring in buckets of frozen oxygen.
Jack
None of this matters anyway. The budget deficit is going to kill us all long before the sun disappears. *end sarcasm*
I seem to remember that the sun will, at some point, go out. But before that happens it will expand and we'll all become crispy critters. I think I'll just not worry about it, I'm going to hop back over to the thread where they are worrying about the state of Alabama having "Heart of Dixie" on their car license tags!
Would that be the Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinal or the Chicago Sun-Times? Frankly, I could care less if either were to go out of business.
-PJ
Why would someone even think of this must less write a paper on it? I've got the answer in 2 words "We're DOOMED".
What would happen if I asked a theoretical question?
The Democrats would blame Bush.
Seriesly-it would be bad...
First, core contraction as pressure at the core falls. That allows ignition of elements beyond hydrogen. Helium burning would then support a larger, more tenuous sun - a red giant - with a higher power output but for a much shorter period of time than hydrogen burning. Eventually that too runs out, and the same repeats.
The next to trigger is carbon burning, and after that it goes very fast. The final elements up to iron (the most stable nuclei) take only days. When it is all gone, assuming the mass isn't enough to ignite the energy consuming trans-iron elements, you have only gravitional collapse pushing temperature up.
The sun shrinks to a white dwarf, stabilizing there as Pauli exclusion pressure counteracts infalling weight. It then takes millions of years for the resulting fusionless but white hot star remnant to cool off by radiation.
The sun needs fusion to maintain its state and to prevent gravitational collapse, but not to be hot. Infall of matter - shrinkage - can release plenty of additional energy. And the interior of dense, white hot bodies do not exactly cool off in an instant.
As for the scientist's musings, photosynthesis drives earth life by capturing about 0.5% of sunlight energy that hits the earth. Total human energy use is a fraction of that amount, about one quarter of it last I checked. We would have a substantial amount of energy from existing sources, for a while. But not enough to maintain the biosphere (it is less than currently does, and plants have very low mechanical efficiency, and we'd have no easy way of pumping our own power into them, rapidly).
On the other hand, given enough warning time there is plenty we could do. Fission energy release is basically unlimited - the amount of uranium in the earth's crust would suffice to replace solar power for millions of years, if we had access to it (which is a matter of capital for extraction etc). With enough lead time and capital, any power source can be used to feed plants e.g. in hydroponic tanks under UV light.
The total biosphere and thus population we can support is set by our income, not the form in which is arrives. Free sunlight is a huge "gift" portion of our income. But one kind can replace another - with adapation costs (thus net income reduction) and lead time.
Assuming that all the hot stuff didn't come erupting out the hole? You'd fall back and forth for a long time before stopping near the core.
Yeah, it'll be rough for me to deal with a population explosion, I'm still dealing with the aftereffects of running out of oil back in 1980.
Could the diparity be suppresion of the minirity neutrinos?
Is Karl Rove and Diebold behind this?
Sorry. I've spent too much time lurking over at DU.
"What would happen if I asked a theoretical question?"
You'd have the makings of a theoretician joke:
A guy was walking along the street one night, when he came upon a man--a theoretical physicist--on his hands and knees under a street light, searching the street. The fellow asked him what he was looking for, and the theoretician replied, "I'm looking for my car keys." Being a helpful sort, the fellow started searching, too.
After a time he asked, "Are you sure you lost them here?"
"Of course not" replied the theoretician. "But at least there's light here."
And, no, I'm not an antitheorentite!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.