Ophiolite

Nonsense. As a social animal we have developed numerous cultural practices that promote the smooth working of society. Clothing is a key aspect of these practices. In the West suit and tie reflect a serious, business like attitude to interactions. Stress is not involved. Indeed, quite the reverse. I routinely work from home. For particular types of work, that require a formal, report style of writing, I will dress in suit and tie in order to help create the appropriate mental attitude.

I suppose modesty is another of your particular strengths.

You could guess, or you could do some research on the matter. I look forward to your amended posts.

I don't think I am being pedantic to point out that the core is a molten iron-nickel-minor element mix. It is not a magma. The slightly smaller Earth, without a collision, would still have a molten core and a magnetic field and a retained atmosphere. And Theia is generally described as Mars sized. And Mars has 1/10th the mass of the Earth. And some mass was lost in the collision. So any mass increase is minimal and unlikely to have had any major influence on subsequent planetary geology. Can you demonstrate a major influence from theoretical considerations?

Can you confirm that this accurately reflects the interchanges with your doctors, or would concede you have used a degree of hyperbole? Do you understand that if your brain was "firing 100% all of the time" you would not be able to provide sufficient cooling, nor obtain sufficient oxygen?

I noted with interest in the Cruz victory speech he spoke repeatedly of uniting the party, but not once of uniting the nation. That told me all I need to know about Cruz.

Most models have a substantial mass lost to the system. The net gain in mass is likely less than 10%. The postulated high mass collisions also involve, I think, glancing blows and thus not a conventional accretion event.

I don't believe I suggested only carrying out a literature search. If that seemed to be implied that was not my intention. My intention was to suggest beginning ones investigation with a literature search. If that was not clear I hope it is now.

The oil industry is not endangered it is ultimately doomed, as are most current industries. In fifty years at most mobile phones will be a museum pieces.

Studiot, with almost 5,000 posts you are going to screw up occasionally. The elegant thing to do is to concede you were caught up in the moment and withdraw gracefully.

The OPs question is "Where is the CO2?" The CO2 present in the attenuated atmosphere beyond 100km is a tiny percentage of the CO2 present in what any reasonable person would consider to be the atmosphere for any reasonable discussion. Regardless of how CO2 may be distributed in the extended atmosphere it would have no meaningful significance. #I suggest you do the simple calculations involved and satisfy yourself of that fact, or present the numbers that will show I am mistaken.

@John and Sensei Alternatively you could begin with a literature search, as Phi did.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Stating where the atmosphere ends is an arbitrary decision. The atmosphere fades into the vacuum of interplanetary space, which is not a true vacuum. When we talk about the atmosphere we generally are talking of the stratosphere down. John made that clear in his post, restricting his comments to an even more limited height - no more than 30,000'. Your article is exploring the the greatly extended and extremely attenuated atmosphere out to 1,000km. I suggest if you took any 100 research papers on atmospheric science you would be unlikely to find more than one or two that dealt with the science of the atmosphere at that altitude.

You are assuming an intellectual capacity and social empathy comparable to your own and that of many other members. Sometimes people just do dumb things.

Do you have no belief in the possibility that we can learn from past mistakes, that we can do better tomorrow that we did yesterday, that we should accept defeat from the outset? That doesn't square with how I have read your philosophy over the years of reading your posts, so I ask you to revisit the possibility with the benefit of your positive beliefs.

Yes, that is so. From your own reference: Up to around 100?km the composition is fairly “normal”, in that it’s what we surface-dwellers would expect: mostly molecular nitrogen (N2 rather than N) and molecular oxygen (O2) with a small amount (0.93%) of argon and traces of some other gases (carbon dioxide, neon, etc.). Now space is generally agreed to begin at 100km altitude and - according to your own source - the composition is fairly "normal" within that 100km. So, as John says, the stratification is small.

Petrushka, you need to do one of two things: 1. Concede that a mistake is a mistake no matter how often it is made. In many cases making the mistake repeatedly raises the severity of the mistake. This is so blindingly obvious to the members posting here that your persistent refusal to understand and accept it makes it a classic example of a repeated mistake not becoming correct through repetition. 2. Give a very thorough yet concise explanation and justification for your argument. This needs to be complete, not your usual loose statements, sidetracks and irrelevancies. Any other action and I shall be inclined to Report your post and recommend a suspension. That is not a threat, but a heads-up to help you make contributions that are of more value to the forum and yourself than your current efforts.

Do you completely reject the possibility of tapping the resources without damaging the ecosystem? (Talking of destroying it is clear hyperbole.)

I don't follow your logic here. The proto-Earth had a mass not dissimilar to that of today's Earth. The gain in mass following the collision with Theia was minimal. Had the proto-Earth remained with its mass that would have been entirely sufficient to retain an atmosphere. As a secondary point I'm not sure what you mean by the core energy contributing to sustaining the atmosphere. Perhaps you could clarify both points.

There is nothing wrong with saying vodka, especially if you are in a bar and the bartender asks what you want. But you are in Warsaw, so you already know this.

That's true. I agree. Here are examples. If someone routinely steps into the roadway without looking for approaching traffic they will eventually die, or be seriously injured. They and the mistake will cease to be. If someone routinely makes mistakes in their work, quite soon they will no longer have work in which to make mistakes. The mistakes will cease to be. Not quite what you meant, but then what you meant was seriously devoid of thought.

I believe psychiatrists could take a good stab at it. It puzzles me that, for the most part, adherents of the Abrahamic religions and atheists alike seem to perceive the nature of God (real or imagined, as appropriate) as being necessarily benevolent. The theists take it as read, the atheists attack the strawman by pointing to the "unfairness" in the world. If God, or gods, happen to be bitter, twisted, psychopaths, well - why not?

Read what I wrote and don't patronise me by using personal anecdote as a substitute for logical argument!

Having survived multiple downdips in the oil price and hoping to cling on through this one, I can assure you with 100% confidence that barring bolide impact or divine intervention the oil price will soar again and encourage the search for alternatives.

Here is the abstract of the paper. Dehydrated Antarctic cryptoendolithic communities and colonies of the rock inhabitant black fungi Cryomyces antarcticus (CCFEE 515) and Cryomyces minteri (CCFEE 5187) were exposed as part of the Lichens and Fungi Experiment (LIFE) for 18 months in the European Space Agency's EXPOSE-E facility to simulated martian conditions aboard the International Space Station (ISS). Upon sample retrieval, survival was proved by testing colony-forming ability, and viability of cells (as integrity of cell membrane) was determined by the propidium monoazide (PMA) assay coupled with quantitative PCR tests. Although less than 10% of the samples exposed to simulated martian conditions were able to proliferate and form colonies, the PMA assay indicated that more than 60% of the cells and rock communities had remained intact after the “Mars exposure.” Furthermore, a high stability of the DNA in the cells was demonstrated. The results contribute to assessing the stability of resistant microorganisms and biosignatures on the surface of Mars, data that are valuable information for further search-for-life experiments on Mars. Key Words: Endoliths—Eukaryotes—Extremophilic microorganisms—Mars—Radiation resistance. Onofri Silvano, de Vera Jean-Pierre, Zucconi Laura, Selbmann Laura, Scalzi Giuliano, Venkateswaran Kasthuri J., Rabbow Elke, de la Torre Rosa, and Horneck Gerda. Astrobiology. December 2015, 15(12): 1052-1059. doi:10.1089/ast.2015.1324.