tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post4311770769817278018..comments2024-01-02T10:55:10.607-06:00Comments on Angry Astronomer: Bad History ChannelJon Voiseyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11550625188837528980noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post-1396411141481600702011-05-10T18:22:57.769-05:002011-05-10T18:22:57.769-05:00If a GRB nailed Earth, it would cause the ozone an...<i>If a GRB nailed Earth, it would cause the ozone and diatomic nitrogen in our atmosphere to disassociate , reforming into nitrogen dioxide. This blocks out visible light, but lets through deadly UV light, and leads to acid rain as well. Not exactly fun. But nor is it exactly something to worry about.</i><br><br>I hadn't heard about this. I knew Gamma Ray Bursts were something that happened every so often in the universe, and that they posed a threat (if rather remote) to life on Earth, but I didn't know the mechanism.<br><br>I have little knowledge of chemistry, so I could be way out to lunch with my assumptions here. However, I thought that the reason we have so much diatomic Nitrogen is that it's ridiculously stable and that going from any other form of Nitrogen to N2 is basically going to release lots of energy, energy that would have to be put in to those diatomic molecules in order to break them up.<br><br>So, suppose a GRB smacks Earth and splits lots of diatomic Nitrogen (and Oxygen, too). What fraction of the resulting (ionized?) mix of atomic Nitrogen and Oxygen would simply collapse back into N2 and O2? I imagine that reaction would release lots of heat, which would cause interesting effects down here on the surface, but how much NO2 would we really get? Would there be enough to cause a significant shift in incident light at the surface? Would the acid rain that results make any difference in global ocean pH? (I expect even a little acid rain would impact fresh water like lakes). <br><br>Thanks for putting this up. I don't spend much time thinking about atmospheric chemistry or deep cosmology.TheBrummellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08973380652057861796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post-32667183916180130392011-01-28T23:57:34.719-06:002011-01-28T23:57:34.719-06:00Richard: I don't have the History Channel, but...Richard: I don't have the History Channel, but I'll see if I can't find a copy online somewhere.Jon Voiseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11550625188837528980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post-32381229663524848042011-01-28T22:46:39.931-06:002011-01-28T22:46:39.931-06:00OMG did you see "Earth's Black Hole"...OMG did you see "Earth's Black Hole" on the History Channel? Pls pls pls watch then rip it apart it will make my day.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10796394792986119849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post-58876036412931293962008-02-04T18:27:00.000-06:002008-02-04T18:27:00.000-06:00Ah, thanks Jon. As usual, there's more going on t...Ah, thanks Jon. As usual, there's more going on than I thought - in this case, stability is less immediately important than formation frequency. Cool.TheBrummellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08973380652057861796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post-42265807131017811782008-01-23T10:02:00.000-06:002008-01-23T10:02:00.000-06:00Life After People was one that I wanted to catch, ...<I>Life After People</I> was one that I wanted to catch, but sadly, homework kept me from it.<BR/><BR/>Brummel: While N2 and O2 are very stable, they're not the easiest to form. Statistically, they form less frequently than NO2, but once they do, are more stable. Thus, NO and NO2 would form quickly after a disrupting event and slowly reform into N2 and NO2.Jon Voiseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11550625188837528980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post-4979684218932347882008-01-23T03:45:00.000-06:002008-01-23T03:45:00.000-06:00Eh, did you see Life After People?It was pretty in...Eh, did you see <I>Life After People</I>?<BR/><BR/>It was pretty interesting but they made some pretty blatant assertions and extrapolations without much to back them up other than the fact that they sounded good. <BR/><BR/>The CGI was absolutely terrible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25327006.post-5760565749359747742008-01-21T20:28:00.000-06:002008-01-21T20:28:00.000-06:00If a GRB nailed Earth, it would cause the ozone an...<I>If a GRB nailed Earth, it would cause the ozone and diatomic nitrogen in our atmosphere to disassociate , reforming into nitrogen dioxide. This blocks out visible light, but lets through deadly UV light, and leads to acid rain as well. Not exactly fun. But nor is it exactly something to worry about.</I><BR/><BR/>I hadn't heard about this. I knew Gamma Ray Bursts were something that happened every so often in the universe, and that they posed a threat (if rather remote) to life on Earth, but I didn't know the mechanism.<BR/><BR/>I have little knowledge of chemistry, so I could be way out to lunch with my assumptions here. However, I thought that the reason we have so much diatomic Nitrogen is that it's ridiculously stable and that going from any other form of Nitrogen to N2 is basically going to release lots of energy, energy that would have to be put in to those diatomic molecules in order to break them up.<BR/><BR/>So, suppose a GRB smacks Earth and splits lots of diatomic Nitrogen (and Oxygen, too). What fraction of the resulting (ionized?) mix of atomic Nitrogen and Oxygen would simply collapse back into N2 and O2? I imagine that reaction would release lots of heat, which would cause interesting effects down here on the surface, but how much NO2 would we really get? Would there be enough to cause a significant shift in incident light at the surface? Would the acid rain that results make any difference in global ocean pH? (I expect even a little acid rain would impact fresh water like lakes). <BR/><BR/>Thanks for putting this up. I don't spend much time thinking about atmospheric chemistry or deep cosmology.TheBrummellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08973380652057861796noreply@blogger.com