Active Users:1127 Time:22/11/2024 09:25:06 PM
Re: More strange answers Nate Send a noteboard - 14/02/2013 09:19:31 PM
Distance is always a factor in visibility if the light is able to spread out or is passing through an obstructing medium. So is relative brightness. Your eye is sensitive in a very exponential way, everyone knows the sun is brighter than the inside of house lit by light bulbs but they typically don't realize that if you're reading a book at picnic table on a sunny day it is being hit by hundreds of times more photons then if you're reading it while sitting on your couch near a lamp. Nevertheless your theoretical digital clock tower is still transmitting the same number of photons day or night. From a practical standpoint there are several factors that would limit its ability to be read though, and the backlit one at night would be visible further off but not infinitely far away.


I think that gives me enough information to work with. I don't need infinite, but between size, brightness, flat plane, and air density, I think I can give my idea a rough go at realism.

Well an Edersphere comes to mind. There's also no reason you couldn't build a domed colony on some methane-ridden rogue planet and torch the stuff for power, assuming you didn't have fusion. Stars and sunlight are probably necessary for complex life to develop but one doesn't actually need a star to live. I don't know why one would do this but one could drag earth out into the void, stop it spinning (easier than moving it out there) and mount a huge light on the moon, or an artificial one designed to orbit once a day up at geo-synch.


I Googled Edersphere and found some strange and interesting corners of the Internet.

The problem with saying 'anything weird' is that weirdness is going to depend on the things used to do this. Trying to figure out the actual weirdness is really tricky, unless one of the effects grossly overrides others. You'd still have weather, if the planet wasn't spinning but was being orbited by its light source, even if that light source had minimal mass, because it would be heating the air as it turned about the planet and this should still cause a general direction to the air, I think. There will still be weather patterns of some sort though, any time something isn't subjected to constant unchanging effects it becomes dynamic. If nothing else the air would flow away from the equator during the day and back toward it at night. We have some other phys/eng guys on the site who might feel more comfortable answering this one, or over on physicsforum. Non rotating planet receiving earth level light from an artificial moon/lamp orbiting it every 24 hours would be the way to phrase it. Keep in mind for this world to be unlit the light source would have to produce no significant tidal forces itself. There are several ways that might be accomplished, but it would also make for a geologically dead world, and eventually whatever weather did exist would erode it into a flat perfect sphere. If it were essentially an unmoving sphere nested inside a bigger shell that provided light in every direction at the same time, powering up then back down again, you'd still have some weather, with the air expanding during the day and water evaporating, then contracting and raining in the evening.


I like the point about erosion. I had considered that geological activity might be null, but you're absolutely right that it would lead over long periods of time to a uniform landmass. For the idea that air would move away from the equator during the day and come back at night, is that because the heated air closer to the light source gains higher pressure and moves away into cooler areas of lower pressure? Water retains heat better during the night; does that mean that air would also tend to flow from above water onto land during the night, and perhaps vice-versa during the day (or at least during the morning, when the land heats up faster than the water)? Or am I completely off on that?

Hope it helps.


It is definitely helpful, and I thank you again.
Warder to starry_nite

Chapterfish — Nate's Writing Blog
http://chapterfish.wordpress.com
Reply to message
I have some strange questions. - 14/02/2013 04:45:04 PM 890 Views
Some strange answers - 14/02/2013 05:14:36 PM 627 Views
Re: Some strange answers - 14/02/2013 06:16:59 PM 561 Views
...goddammit Nate quit stealing my writing ideas. - 14/02/2013 07:11:53 PM 446 Views
Nuh uh. Can't make me. - 14/02/2013 08:11:16 PM 412 Views
More strange answers - 14/02/2013 08:28:39 PM 522 Views
Re: More strange answers - 14/02/2013 09:19:31 PM 494 Views
Re: More strange answers - 14/02/2013 10:24:10 PM 521 Views
A tidally locked world would be horrifying. I'm pretty sure you'd get more than a breeze. *NM* - 14/02/2013 07:07:41 PM 195 Views
I never run the numbers but I wouldn't expect it to gust - 14/02/2013 08:51:21 PM 427 Views
I remember a series of books about a planet that was almost tidal locked - 14/02/2013 11:45:43 PM 420 Views
I haven't read it, but that sounds like what I've heard of West of January. - 15/02/2013 08:20:57 PM 480 Views
that is it - 16/02/2013 01:11:30 PM 382 Views
the magnetic field won't collapse but it might go whacky - 14/02/2013 11:41:33 PM 522 Views
So THAT'S your book's twist in the final act! *NM* - 15/02/2013 08:20:32 AM 183 Views
- 15/02/2013 03:29:35 PM 416 Views
Re: - 15/02/2013 03:38:34 PM 396 Views

Reply to Message