questions about planets 1. why are there no liquid planets?

File: 20160528_095728.jpg (1MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1440px

>>8815885
Blah blah blah, tell me what you think?
Smiley glad hands with they're hidden agendas. Go fuck a goat and watch bubbles in spacewalks. Maybe that will wake you up tard.

neptune could have water but it could be in a gas form similar to steam

>>8815885
Liquid planets exist. There are just none in our system.

>>8815885

Neptune is an ice giant, a subset of gas giants, because it's composed primarily of substances that are usually in the gaseous state (hydrogen, helium), but also have a significant amount of a set of substances called 'ices' (even though they aren't usually frozen), like methane, water, ammonia, etc. Hydrogen compounds essentially.

Whether a planet is called a gas planet or a terrestrial planet is more to do with bulk composition than what phase the material is actually in. If that were the case, most of the planets would be classified as liquid, including all of the gas giants as well as Venus and Earth, as well as Mars (probably). All of these worlds are mostly molten/liquid if you consider their entire volume. Water worlds for example are theorized to exist, which would have oceans hundreds of kilometers deep, the bottom of which would be the start of an ice sheet kept solid by compression, which could extend down even further. Hypothetically, a planet could be made of any material, except fro very radioactive elements that would actually cause the planet to either overheat, vaporize, and slowly puff itself apart, or cause the planet to detonate like a massive nuclear bomb, depending on the element and the isotope.

Now, there is no liquid water on Mars except for a very small amount that only appear seasonally and in very few locations, so you couldn't swim in it. Mercury has no liquid water, period. However, if you were to go to Mars and build a swimming pool in your habitat and jump in, you'd feel less pressure as the water would be lighter, and splashes would be much bigger, again because there's less gravity to slow the water down. A swimming pool on Mercury would be almost exactly the same because Mercury's gravity is almost exactly the same strength as Mars' gravity, because of Mercury's higher density compensating for its smaller size.

File: 1482399278529.jpg (29KB, 352x376px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 352x376px

>why are there no liquid planets?
>Liquid planets exist. There are just none in our system.
The fuck? who melted the water on earth then?
Seriously, why dont brainlets count their own planet when talking about space?

>>8815885
>why are there no liquid planets?
Because you need a thick atmosphere or else the liquid will evaporate. Thick atmospheres generally require vulcanism, which means you need rock in there somewhere.

>>8816067
very interesting, thanks familia

>1. why are there no liquid planets?
It's just a physics thing,

>The mass of the Earth is approximately 5.98×10 24 kg. In bulk, by mass, it is composed mostly of iron (32.1%), oxygen (30.1%), silicon (15.1%), magnesium (13.9%), sulfur (2.9%), nickel (1.8%), calcium (1.5%), and aluminium (1.4%); with the remaining 1.2% consisting of trace amounts of other elements.

So you gotta assume all planets are various combinations of iron, oxygen, silicon, magnesium, + some other shit.
How do you get a liquid world out of that?

Hydrogen naturally forms a gas giant, or a star
Hypothetically you could, I assume, but it would require really contrived circumstances.

>>8816079
I think he means liquid planets as in a planet that's just a big ball of water instead of rock with water on top.

Our planet is technically liquid. The mantle and core are essentially all "liquid" just like most of the gas Giants are essentially "liquid".

>>8816089

If Earth were 100% water it would have an atmosphere of water vapor and oxygen (as UV light split the hydrogen from the water vapor in the upper atmosphere, the hydrogen would escape into space and the oxygen atoms would sink back down and form oxygen molecules). The atmosphere would be stable because of the gravity of the planet, the bigger the planet the slower the atmospheric erosion.

bump cause /sci/ is shit and this is a good thread topic

>>8818410
edit: OP is retarded tho