Yahoo 知識+ 將於 2021 年 5 月 4 日 (美國東岸時間) 停止服務,而 Yahoo 知識+ 網站現已轉為僅限瀏覽模式。其他 Yahoo 資產或服務,或你的 Yahoo 帳戶將不會有任何變更。你可以在此服務中心網頁進一步了解 Yahoo 知識+ 停止服務的事宜,以及了解如何下載你的資料。

Do you agree with this "geologist" that a " vapor generally is a gas that above boiling point"?

It makes me wonder how there's any water vapor in the atmosphere at all, and I think it violates one or two of the laws of thermodynamics.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20150...

2 個解答

相關度
  • ?
    Lv 7
    6 年前
    最愛解答

    A water surface has approximate Maxwell distribution

    of velocity. In other words, many H2O(l) molecules have more

    than enough escape velocity (Ve) to leave said surface and

    enter the atmosphere notwithstanding boiling point, but it is a

    true fact that, as temperature increases, a greater fraction

    of molecules under the distribution curve have E=f(V) >= bond

    breaking escape energy. H2O(g) molecules once in the

    atmosphere, much like carbon dioxide CO2(g), will absorb and

    release allowed QM energy packets. What this is telling me is that

    there is a delay in transmission of electromagnetic energy through

    earth's atmosphere as is the case with many planets and stars.

    Nitrogen N2(g), Oxygen O2(g) molecules, to name two, play a part

    in repopulating quantum states of those molecules that are predisposed

    to decay to lower quantum states of vibration and/or rotation. N2(g)

    and O2(g), for the greater part, remain in their ground states at

    temperatures typically found in the troposphere although Oxygen does

    play a small roll quantum mechanically.

    Having studied statistical thermodynamics and quantum mechanics for

    some time now, I have an educated opinion, without prejudice, regarding

    such matters. The idea of molecules being above their boiling point

    is silly. Maybe they meant vaporization, but scientists usually do

    not make such mistakes. Never mind breaking laws of thermodynamics.

    The laws are fine. The human mind has a tendency to engage in

    unsupported prejudicial thinking. When this happens, something

    is broken, but it is not the Laws of Physics.

  • ?
    Lv 7
    6 年前

    It looks like he might think that you only get vapor from vaporization – as opposed to the “evapor” you get from evaporation.

    I cannot believe that WUWT has not already jumped all over this. It means that all this time climate scientists have ignored atmospheric ‘water evapor’ --- which, no doubt, is what we have that Mars and Venus did not have (a magical damping variable)– and the reason those planets are all fcked up while we have no worries.

    I don’t about you, but I’m sure going to rest a lot easier now that I understand how the climate system really works.

還有問題嗎?立即提問即可得到解答。