Could humans survive on earth without the sun?

Discussion in 'Science' started by modernpaladin, Dec 24, 2017.

  1. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,457
    Likes Received:
    14,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We cannot survive without the Sun AND greenhouse gases.

    One without the other and we freeze to death.
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  2. primate

    primate Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    370
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The core is warm still because all the heavy elements including the radioactive ones sunk deep to the middle of the planet. That's part as the earth is large enough to still stay warm for several other reasons including friction etc. But it will take much more than a few million years to cool. In fact the earth will be engulfed by the sun as it becomes a red giant and will remain warm AFAIK.
     
    modernpaladin and Bowerbird like this.
  3. primate

    primate Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    370
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yes a limited number of humans could live underground using geothermal energy. There is enough underground water along with the heat to survive. We'd have to have the seeds to grow the plants necessary to eat and to feed the cattle etc. Lot of technology necessary to make it work. You'd lose the forests and its medicinal properties. You'd need enough insects of the right kind to make it as well as the proper bacteria etc.
     
    modernpaladin and Bowerbird like this.
  4. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Some dumb too deep to plumb

    CO2
    well I tried making it as simple as possible
     
  5. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When you talk about 'we' it is possible that a 'few' humans might survive but 99% will die off. The same scenario with colonizing Mars in which a 'few' people might make it but billions others will not. Fortunately we don't need to worry about the Sun going dark for a while. Long before that happens Earth is in big trouble from over-population and climate change issues...
     
    Bowerbird and modernpaladin like this.
  6. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,105
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, all true. I meant 'we' as in 'humans,' not 'you and I' (I would certainly try, but my resources are quite limited).
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  7. primate

    primate Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    370
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The sun doesn't lose enough mass in the conversion of mass to energy to matter much. The mass doesn't go anywhere but is converted to higher elements on the periodic chart. Hydrogen to helium then to carbon and oxygen up to iron where it all stops outside of supernova. More mass is cast into space thru coronal mass ejections etc.
     
    Pax Aeon and Bowerbird like this.
  8. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I meant the collective 'we'...the way I see it 'we' have a couple of choices; colonize some place away from Earth to save a 'few' humans, and/or, do much more than we are doing today to extend our existence on Earth. I doubt we will manage the latter, therefore, in the grand scheme of things, somewhere in our relatively near future, billions of humans/animals will be terminated. Who said 'all good things must come to an end'? Or, 'nothing is permanent'? I don't look at it as doom and gloom but more about the natural progression of a biological rock like Earth and it's inhabitants. Earth cannot support 50-100 billion humans, and even numbers much less than this, so who knows what this future holds...
     
    modernpaladin likes this.
  9. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,105
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    i think we should do both.
     
  10. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I suppose most humans have other things to think about other than the sustainability of our environment. Most humans seem to only care about the small space which they occupy, and in many cases, don't even care about their own spaces. Why do we need a law about littering? Who gives a rip about the byproducts of humans and animals? Humans look to the sky and can't see changes to our atmosphere so why be concerned about burning fossil fuels? And how many humans each day give some thought to the other 7+ billion Earthlings, and growing, and extrapolate the impacts to our atmosphere and oceans? So...the chances of humans doing a better job sustaining Earth are highly unlikely...
     
  11. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
  12. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, it was pointed out several times how your model of heat is simply absurd.

    For example:
    Your statement here is monumentally wrong, undoubtedly because you've ignored pretty much everything people have been pointing out.

    Systems just don't work like that. In fact, heat doesn't work like that.
     
  13. Equality

    Equality Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,903
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Could humans survive without the Sun? A simple no , we could also not survive if the sun or earth became displaced.
     
  14. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
  15. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would think that would DQ that poster as having an opinion worth hearing.
     
  16. robot

    robot Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Not if the amount of heat lost is regulated. There could be some insulation around the pipes so that the water does not freeze. If needed antifreeze could be added. That way a very efficient engine could be built.

    But really I doubt if such a system would work long term. Anything goes wrong and humans are doomed.

    One way the sun stops working is if it swallows a small black hole. One a millimeter or so in diameter. We would know because the black hole would give out vast amounts of energy before getting swallowed. It may take a long time for it to then destroy the sun.
     
  17. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Given the various places we consider interesting to go (various moons and a couple planets) it does seem interesting to think about what would be required to survive in extreme conditions.

    Let's say we had a bunch of time to work on it - enough time to get fusion reactors working, move underground in a major way, preserve all the life forms we could, etc.

    And, let's say the catastrophic event left us with FAR fewer humans to try to save.

    ... but, I'm still on your side on this one. We're hugely and intricately dependant on our environment. We're 50% or so non-human cells due to microbiota we need. etc., etc. And, "survive" means generations into the future, not just some folks surviving on an outpost.
     
  18. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    William Shakespeare's vocabulary has been estimated by the experts at twelve thousand words. The vocabulary of a Negro from the Mumbo Jumbo tribe amounts to three hundred words. Ellochka Shukin managed easily and fluently on thirty.

    I am just trying to see if religious fanatics of the cult of GW or any other cult will ever get to more than 10.

    So far I counted only 7:

    1. - Troll-speak from you
    2. - Allah is God and Mohammed is his prophet,
    3. - It was already debunked many times,
    4. - The evidence was given to you by numerous posters
    5. - You don’t understand ___________________ (fill the blank)

    6 - You don’t understand ___________________ (fill the blank), google it.

    7. - Have a nice day , you are not worth my attention.

    Yours are #3 and #4.

    Can you try something different?
     
  19. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I was referring to the cartoon of the 3 atomic molecule you posted, supposedly H2O, not to IPCC report.

    The IPPC report does not pull up to the level of a kindergarten mentality if to assume that kids have some vague idea that the Earth is not standstill and flat and the sun does not shine on it 24/7 as the IPCC report pictures for mentally handicapped public:

    http://politicalforum.com/index.php...-climate-change.521738/page-3#post-1068434198
     
  20. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't believe that would be nearly enough to allow survival on the surface where temps would get unbelievably cold.

    The surface temperature of Pluto is -387F, for example. Heat from within earth comes in part from tidal action such as tectonic plate movement. That's affected by the gravity of the sun, as I understand it. Some of the moons in our solar system are detectably warmer due to the heat that comes from stretching. My bet is that without the sun, we would be more like Pluto. Our atmosphere would still allow heat to escape and there would be no substantial source of replacement.

    I think we'd have to go deep and depend on fusion reactors for energy.
    Your ideas WERE debunked several times!

    If you don't want to try to rebut, fine.

    But, it isn't some sort of offense to point out that you got debunked.

    And, why would you want me to "try something different"? Insisting on sticking to the facts would seem to be the proper direction.
     
  21. robot

    robot Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Most of the heat from deep underground comes from the decay of radioactive particles. The moon and tectonic plates have nothing to do with it. The Earth is far bigger than Pluto so it has retained far more of its heat. But yes, without the sun the surface will cool down to not much more than the surface temperature of Pluto. It would be interesting to see what sort of atmosphere the Earth would get. Oxygen boils at -183C and freezes at -218.8 °C; nitrogen boils at -195C and freezes at 210 °C. Pluto is colder than that so the surface of the Earth would eventually be coated with a mixture of frozen nitrogen and oxygen above water ice.
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  22. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So, we would be underground, drilling through to the surface to mine o2 to replace what is lost by our vast o2 reclamation and reuse infrastructure, maybe?
     
  23. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    An Earth without a Sun, and the lowering of Earth's temperature, basically will freeze and render useless the land, atmosphere and water. Without water humans, plants and animals are in big trouble. What about photosynthesis? Radiation? I suppose a 'few' humans could survive for a short period deep under ground but basically with no Sun we will have a dead planet...
     
  24. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure. I am assuming the thread is about having fun in a highly hypothetical and sci fi mode.

    If some event dislodged us from the solar system, any survivors of that event would die.

    But, it's fun to speculate what would be required were we to have a huge warning period, for example.
     
  25. Channe

    Channe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    14,961
    Likes Received:
    4,064
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, we need the sun.
     

Share This Page