Is the Earth heated from within?

we won't have plate tectonics and magnetosphere

>>8591648
>Would the Earth be different if it had a cold core?
Yes, because we would all die of radiation. The moving iron/metal creates the magnetic field.

>>8591649
>>8591650
Ouch. Why? Would the big block of iron-nickel at the core not still be magnetic if cold? I know Mars isn't.

>>8591648
Of course, most of the heat radiated into space billions of years ago, but the fact the mantle is still hot enough to boil your skin off in a second shows the earth is still heated.

>>8591648
>YFW earth is a sun of fire inside a sun of ice.

>>8591666
Yes, I assumed this was the case, but wondered if there is still an appreciable heat radiation happening and if so how much; is it making a difference to us/life on the planet?

>>8591648
>He still believes the Earth is a sphere with a molten core orbiting the sun

>>8591719
this, the Earth is hollow

>>8591648
Earth's surface heat flux comes from radioactive disintegration in the mantle (66%) and from the core cooling (33%). (Percentages are raw estimates and widely discussed.)

On the magnetic field thingy, a magnetic field comes from the movement of an electric charge (that's what an electromagnet does). So, if the core was fully solid, it couldn't convect enough to maintain such a magnetic field.
Btw, the reason of mars' lack of magnetic field isn't a fully solidified core as most think, but rather the lack of plate tectonics, which "keeps the heat in", and so doesn't make a temperature difference in the core high enough for it to convect. Mars' core is believed to be fully molten.
(Sory if badly explained, english isn't my mothertongue.)

> drill hole super deep
> stick conductive material in there
> generate infinite energy with the heat
I know tectonics and all that, but maybe a liquid conductor?

>>8591810
That's a revolutionary idea! Well, except it already exists and it's called geothermy, dude.
Still wouldn't really be infinite. Just quite long enough on himan scale.

File: IMG_3087.jpg (47KB, 278x268px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 278x268px

>>8591656
No. The core is not a permanent magnet.

>convection currents of fluid metal in the Earth's outer core, driven by heat flow from the inner core, organized into rolls by the Coriolis force, create circulating electric currents, which generate the magnetic field

From Wikipedia

>>8591821
>driven by heat flow from the inner core
Nope. Core convection is mostly driven by compositionnal and not thermal gradients. The thermal conductivity of iron would require a very high temperature difference for convection to start. That's why Mars' core, where there is no inner core cristallisation can't convect.

>>8591821
Not blaming you. Blaming the wikipedia shitheads that didn't even pass geodynamics 101

>>8591821
Is this caused or partially caused by earth's rotation around itself?

>>8591859
The supposed form of the rolls is indeed caused by the Coriolis effect due to earth's rotation.

>>8591862
So earth would not have a magnetuc field if it didnt rotate?

>>8591648
This is a very interesting thread :)

>>8591865
It probably still would. Rotation isn't what drives core convection
Read >>8591804
And >>8591827

Still, the magnetic field wouldn't probably be shaped the same way.

>>8591874
It would be diffuse and not longitudinal? And weaker?

>>8591891
I actually have no idea. I think it might have more than two poles, but not sure. I could run a simulation without earth rotation, but i would have problems explaining my thesis director why I used the calc for such thing. And still, the simulation result would probably not be very accurate to the reality.

>>8591899
>i would have problems explaining my thesis director why I used the calc for such thing
JUST DO IT, and I'll explain it to him.

>>8591904
Yeaaaaaaah, you got the slightest idea of all the fucking time needed to get a calc time grant? We got only 10 000 cores and we fucking need them

>>8591910
This is an important question. Someone asked a scientiest a question and then he's obliged to answer it. That's the rules of the game.

>>8591916
Ok, let's be honest one second. I could argue afterward that I messed up and wrote the wrong parameters, but considering the calculations take at least up to three days to finish he will discover it before and stop it. Plus we have a very tight schedule on the use of the supercalc, so, I'll have problems inserting it without disturbing the actual work.

Now, if we think it through, what would the convection look like:
-free slip (friction on CMB can be considred of no importance)
-high raleigh
Would probably look like a two polar cells convection. Which actually would create a toroidal only magnetic field, which would be screened by the mantle.
Which would then mean anon might right, no rotation, no outer magnetic field.

>>8591916
Fuck, I'm gonna talk to him to see if we can add a simulation without rotation.

>>8591804
how can the Earth's 'core cooling' generate heat to the surface, or am i misunderstanding?

>>8591973
To explain it better than what I did, the mantle convection "pumps" heat at the core-mantle boundary and bring it to the surface where it is evacuated into oceans and atmosphere.
So it is more like the dissipation of heat at surface that maintains convection that cools the core.

That's why on venus or mars where, due to the lack of water, there are no plate tectonics, i.e. no ridges, i.e. Very little heat dissipation through surface, there is very little mantle convection.

>>8591996
Okay, I understand now. It's the mechanics of the heat being dissipated from the core to the surface via plate tectonics that provides that "33%" heat flux at the surface.

So, the radioactive disintegration in the mantle (the 66%) provides direct heat from the core to the surface via thermal radiation, correct?

>>8592010
still not totally exact.
thermal radiationsdon't go through the mantle, they are absorbed almost instantly and as such heat the material just around the atom that disintegrate.

In the heat the mantle convection dissipate at the surface, 33% originate from the core, and 66% from INTERNAL heating by radioactivity. (radioactuivity in the core is negligible)
It's a bit like you're boiling water, so you heat it from under, but also your water is auto-heating because there is uranium inside it.

And once again, I have to insist, those numbers are raw estimates and amongst the more controversed values in intern geophysics.

>>8591648
It would most likely collapse in on itself, since the reacting core is the only thing counteracting gravity with the pressure from fusion.

>>8592036


what exactly do you mean by reacting core?
how does it "counteract gravity"?
what fusion are you talking about?

>>8592029
Okay, I understand now. The water analogy helped a lot, reminds me of self-heating coal.

>>8592044
always my pleasure to explain.
Plus it helps me also a lot. I should remember tio use more analogies.

File: a45.png (115KB, 488x228px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 488x228px

>>8592029
that's the most brutal water I ever heard of!

>>8592041
>>8592036
I think the anon is mixing up the Earth's core with the sun's core. Or maybe he's a meemstar.

>>8592066
Indeed. Thanks.
I was a bit too focused on earth in this thread to understand that.

>>8592057
Yeah . The only way to increase your speed comprehension is to use analogies that are familiar to you.

I almost have no problems at understanding any class, no matter how late I am. I always know a way to explain something to someone.

Good luck.

>>8591910
What the fuck, you need grants to run a few jobs? We just have a cluster that you can ssh to and do whatever the fuck we want. Worst thing that can happen is that some grumpy sys admin holds your jobs and writes you an e-mail. But seriously, grants to compute something, that sounds fucking counterproductive and retarded man.

>>8592390
Well, the lab cluster ain't 10 000 cores

>>8592444
What do you mean?

>>8592511
The lab got a supercalc, but it's kinda small and not powerful enough for us. We use Cines' OCCIGEN supercalc, but to be allowed to used those, you have to fill an application and you are granted only a limited number of cores for a limited time.

>>8592539
Ah, now I get it. The cluster we are using has >100 000 cores, we still can just ssh to it and do whatever we feel like. Sure, for big stuff with more than a few days runtime (which is actually pretty rare for a single job) you probably need to write an e-mail or two, but you can basically take whatever it allows you to, which is usually a few hundred jobs in parallel. I imagine it's obstructive to write a fucking grant if I just want to run some data.

>>8592556
Yeah, of course if we want to just process some data, we don't have to have a grant. God that would be hell!

>>8591648
For a somewhat accurate simulation, please refer to Mars

>>8591648

Nobody knows what the interior of the planet looks like, or if there is an interior.

Nobody.

>>8591828

Then do something and fucking edit it with sources.

>>8591648
Given there is an earth, as most see it:

1) Yes, of course it has an effect (noun, not verb affect). Appreciable is subjective and has no place in science: All data must be considered to be a conscientious truth seeker.

2) Yes, of course the earth would be different. (probably barren, dead).

>>8591973
The solid innercore slowly grows by crystallization of the molten outercore. Crystallization is a phase change that releases heat.

File: level up.png (327KB, 810x595px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 810x595px

>>8591786
how can it be hollow if its flat?
>Agatha is a red herring

>>8592625
Unless this is supposed to be some philosophical bullshit about we can't know nothing, we do know pretty fucking well about the interior of the planet.

File: ray_paths[1].gif (8KB, 380x355px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 380x355px

>>8593040
We know that sound waves pass through it in a certain manner, suggesting a liquid outer core and a solid inner core

File: enhanced-23578-1400066276-3.jpg (124KB, 625x939px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 625x939px

>>8591668

>>8592596
Nope. Mars' core is molten

>>8591821
>circulating electric currents
dude wtf

why aren't we plugging that into our power grids?!?!

>>8591786
>>8591719
Explain lava?

>>8594262
Dude, wtf?

Mainly because it's 2800 km deep?

>>8594262
The scientific reasoning is that magnetic energy is not unlimited and if we siphon it for personal use and deplete the magnosphere significantly we'd expose future generations to radiation poisoning. Similar to how you can depolarize a magnet over time by using its fields to generate electricity.
The economic reasoning probably lies with a mutual opposition from science and the current power giants who want to retain power with the sources they are currently selling.

>>8594561
Guy, it's also fucking impossible to do, and very low in energy

>>8594595
>fucking impossible
Well you won't do anything with that attitude

>>8594262
because a bunch of oil barons fucked over tesla

>>8591648
>Does any of that heat inside the Earth have an appreciable affect on the surface?
On average I believe surface heating is of the order of milliwatts. if on the other hand you live on Iceland the ground can in places be so hot that you cannot grow potato.

Also hot mantle and tectonics also provide important functions in the geological CO2 cycle.

Simply put it would probaly have a slower rotation.

>>8595283
tesla would have fucked up our magnetosphere and left us dead like Mars

Thanks for all the replies, very interesting.

>>8596913
Thanks anon, it is noted that you are the first poster to actually answer my first question, at 62 posts in...