A Difficult Question / ChiroVette's Question Time - Page 11

quote Pauliepoos

So, whats the next question? Any takers? (Apart from Braden)

quote Randome

quote The next question

How many different cells are there in the human body, approximately?

Braden, if you're not gonna admit you're wrong, then I'm gonna take this on 1 planet at a time.

Today's lesson: Why there's no life on Pluto.

Structure:

Observations by the Hubble Space Telescope place Pluto's density at between 1.8 and 2.1 g/cm³, suggesting its internal composition consists of roughly 50–70 percent rock and 30–50 percent ice by mass. Because decay of radioactive minerals would eventually heat the ices enough for the rock to separate from them, scientists expect that Pluto's internal structure is differentiated, with the rocky material having settled into a dense core surrounded by a mantle of ice. The diameter of the core should be around 1,700 km, 70% of Pluto's diameter. It is possible that such heating continues today, creating a subsurface ocean layer of liquid water some 100 to 180 km thick at the core–mantle boundary. The DLR Institute of Planetary Research calculated that Pluto's density-to-radius ratio lies in a transition zone, along with Neptune's moon Triton, between icy satellites like the mid-sized moons of Uranus and Saturn, and rocky satellites such as Jupiter's Europa.

Average surface temperature: 44 °K = -229.15 °C

Atmosphere:
Current studies show the Pluto's atmosphere is composed mostly of nitrogen, with some methane, carbon monoxide, and ethane, at a pressure of about 6.5 to 24 microbar (0.65 to 2.4 pascals (Pa)) at the surface.

The atmospheric pressure of the surface of Pluto is approximately 100'000th that of Earth, or about 0.015 millibar (mbar). One study in 2009 estimates the pressure in the 6.5-24 μbar range.

It undergoes temperature inversion in that Pluto's upper atmosphere is about 50 degrees warmer (103K or -170 °C) than the surface (53K or -220 °C) while Pluto's lower atmosphere is 40 degrees warmer.

Pluto's upper atmosphere consists mostly of nitrogen, with traces of methane, and carbon monoxide derived from the ices on its surface, while the lower atmosphere is methane rich.

As Pluto moves away from the Sun, its atmosphere gradually freezes and falls to the ground. As it edges closer to the Sun, the temperature of Pluto's solid surface increases, causing the ices to sublimate into gas. This creates an anti-greenhouse effect; much like sweat cools the body as it evaporates from the surface of the skin, this sublimation has a cooling effect on the surface of Pluto. Scientists using the Submillimeter Array have recently discovered that Pluto's temperature is about 43 K (−230 °C), 10 K colder than expected.

Conclusion:

List of reasons, why there's no life on Pluto:

1: Pluto is made up of the least reactive chemical elements and -compounds, in such a cold area that there's no way for any chemical reactions to occur.

2: The chemical elements available on Pluto are insufficient to form any independently working system. Especially one which could extract energy by chemical means.

3 (Not stated above): Pluto has no magnetic field and as such it has no way to protect itself from cosmic radiation. Radiation is a matter of nuclear physics, which means that there's no way to develop chemical means to protect from it. The Cockroaches, which have limited means to protect themselves from even gamma radiation, developed those shells in a radiation free environment, as protection from mechanical damage and it's a pure coincidence that it's also able to protect from small amounts of radiation.

4: There are tens of more reasons, but not being a space-scientest, I would not know them. I'll probably think of more reasons later tho.

quote Braden

could be... ...unknown substance smaller than a quark

In science we need evidence

"Could be" does not calculate.

quote Braden

I was talking about life on planets

Pluto is a planet you weirdo. It's just smaller

quote Braden

so you still have lots more writing to do

I can see this is becoming an argument of science vs. religion, the religion of "Could be" that is. And the trouble whit religious people (totally insane *Bleep*'s) is that even after having presented whit undeniable absolute evidence, you'll still have to kill them to convince them that they're wrong. So I'm not gonna continue this any further.

I'm considering this matter resolved.

quote Randome

quote Pauliepoos

So, whats the next question? Any takers? (Apart from Braden)

quote Randome

quote The next question

How many different cells are there in the human body, approximately?

quote Randome

quote Braden

could be... ...unknown substance smaller than a quark

In science we need evidence

"Could be" does not calculate.

quote Braden

I was talking about life on planets

Pluto is a planet you weirdo. It's just smaller

quote Braden

so you still have lots more writing to do

I can see this is becoming an argument of science vs. religion, the religion of "Could be" that is. And the trouble whit religious people (totally insane *Bleep*'s) is that even after having presented whit undeniable absolute evidence, you'll still have to kill them to convince them that they're wrong. So I'm not gonna continue this any further.

I'm considering this matter resolved.

We have the same exact view. You just don't understand me.

• In science we need evidence for when one states that something is positive. I never said there is life on Pluto; I said there could be, which doesn't require proof.

• Pluto is technically a dwarf planet. And dwarf is not an adjective in this case, it is part of a two-word noun. So it's not a planet, it's a dwarf planet. When I said that, I was being humorous to state the fact that in order to fully disprove me, you need to write the equivalent for the seven planets of our solar system. I was trying to be funny, you didn't get it and called me a "wierdo" in a way which made it seem you were frustrated for some reason.

• You assumed I was religious and called me a retard (or something like that). I find that offensive, even though I am strongly atheistic. I don't believe in god, however he could exist, but the odds for that are so low it's virtually impossible. Everything in the church and the Bible is full of holes and contradictions to which religious people try to make irrational excuses for, but that is another subject all together.

As for your question, the answer is 210.

Read this article.

I'm going to break my own rules here and ask you, are these "Creationist" scientists worthy of any sort of respect? Answering depends on you reading that article. I ask because beliefs can be tolerated and respected to a very large extent, but in certain places they actually teach these theories as fact.

Can someone sum up what these creationist scientists are?

quote Braden

Can someone sum up what these creationist scientists are?

They have basically tried to make the creation story in the Bible into an actual science. They insist that the world is only 6000 years old, and "Evolutionists" have no way of proving otherwise. They also believe dinosaurs lived about 6000 years ago, too, alongside man.

They actually teach this stuff in museums and schools.

I've got a question. A question i've got.....

Can dogs look up?

(I've been watching Shaun of the Dead)

Actually, I have a dog and whenever I get too close to him and he wants to look up to me he always sits. My dog cannot look upwards more than 20^oC when on four legs.

About the creationist scientists... pathetic.