Chef RatApr 29, 2024

If we took material like rock from space and got it back to Earth enough times, would Earth grow as a planet?

https://sh.itjust.works/post/18544812

If we took material like rock from space and got it back to Earth enough times, would Earth grow as a planet? - sh.itjust.works

As the title says. I’m actually thinking about this hard with my friends because everything that’s produced on Earth stays on Earth so it doesn’t change size, but what if it’s not from Earth but it stays on Earth? [https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/4b10eeca-d3fc-4aca-beff-8d9cb61b303a.png]

Show threadtobogganablazeApr 29, 2024

I mean yeah. If you add stuff to a ball of stuff it get’s bigger.

Currently Earth is actually losing mass around 55.000 tones of mass per year. (100.000 tons loss due to air escaping to space but we gaing around 45.000 tons in dust and meteorties falling on earth).

Show threadccunningApr 29, 2024
If “energy equals mass”, shouldn’t we be gaining mass from the sun too 🤔
Show threadrockerface 🇺🇦Apr 29, 2024

We do. The sun’s energy is locked in plants via photosynthesis, which is then processed by herbivores and passed further down the food chain. That energy exists in form of chemical compounds which are then broken down to release it during digestion.

In terms of numbers tho, it’s probably a negligible fraction of the Earth’s mass

Show threadccunning
I thought plant biomass was obtained from the air (CO2/carbon sequestration?) and water.
Apr 29, 2024 at 2:26pmWeb
Show threadNoIWontPickANameApr 29, 2024
You need photosynthesis to do that
Show threadccunningApr 29, 2024

Sure, but the implication was that plant mass comes from the sun. Maybe some negligible fraction of percent is but nowhere near the majority.

The sun’s energy also goes into heat all over the planet. I’m just trying to understand how any of that energy might manifest as mass in a tangible way.

Or maybe it’s just the case that the amount of energy needed to create mass is astronomically minuscule.

🤔 I suppose that’s the principle behind atomic bombs 🤔

Show threadtobogganablazeApr 29, 2024

Or maybe it’s just the case that the amount of energy needed to create mass is astronomically minuscule.

It would actually an astronomically large amount. An atomic bomb will turn a very tiny amount of mass into a tremendous amount of energy. And that’s with a nuclear process that is way more efficent then a chemical one like photosynthesis.

But from pure physics standpoint a carbon atom and an O2 molecule will have a teeny-tiny bit less mass then an CO2 molecule (which is why combining or burning them together will release some energy). So doing the reverse and splitting up a CO2 molecule into it’s parts will generate a little bit of mass.

Show threadccunningApr 29, 2024

Wow - that’s what I meant. Not sure how I managed to get it backwards.

And to think I fretted so much over using “astronomically” and “minuscule” together 🤪