Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fish Hunter
You ignore the more serious points. Reflectivity is not the total problem. A real solar sail is rigid and flat. It has a high surface-area to mass ratio.

The Earth just is not a solar sail. The Earth is actually highly reflective, but most of the reflectivity is in the atmosphere, mostly clouds. The energy it is eating is not transmitted as kinetic energy to the surface at all. Ice cover is also very reflective, the so-called albedo effect. At any given time, however, most of the Earth's ice is near one or the other of the poles. These areas are icy precisely because they are very inefficiently irradiated. Again, the momentum transfer of photon to water molecule will not be transmitted without loss down through the lithosphere. The loss will in fact be something like 100 percent. It's all friction, all heat and no large-scale mechanical motion. That's where the energy goes and if it goes there, it can't push the Earth around.

If solar sail effects could push planets around, we would have spotted it in the orbit of Mercury. Mercury is very much closer to the Sun. It also has no atmosphere or oceans. Being far less massive than Earth, it has a more favorable surface/mass ratio and thus simply easier to move with a tiny but relentless push. Whether or not its as reflective, it should be a far better solar sail with all of the preceding going for it.

Doesn't happen. The day side gets spectacularly hot. It's still all heat loss. There is no notable acceleration out of its current orbit. There's a funny precession from other causes of the long axis about the Sun, but no net outward drift.

Stupid model. Period.

401 posted on 03/10/2005 5:52:22 AM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies ]


To: VadeRetro

The model he used was for a small speck of dust. The Earth is a much larger speck of dust.


418 posted on 03/10/2005 6:17:04 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies ]

To: VadeRetro

The model he used was for a small speck of dust. The Earth is a much larger speck of dust.


419 posted on 03/10/2005 6:17:25 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies ]

To: VadeRetro
The solar effect exists and is very small we both agree on that. If the solar system was millions or billions of years old we would see it effects. We do NOT see them; therefore one must conclude the solar system is not as old as we think.

The force exists. You can do pages of calculations with water reflectively, atmospheric effect, or whatever and you will eventually come up with a small, positive number. Take any small positive number and integrate it over a billion years and you will get a very big number. This is a fact of physics. The Earth's orbit CANNOT remain constant over a billion years, it is measurably constant now so the only SANE conclusion is your assumption that the solar system is a billion years old is invalid.

F H
424 posted on 03/10/2005 6:25:14 AM PST by Fish Hunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson