It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Who told you it wasn't? It is, though mostly what we are losing is hydrogen (about 3kg/s) and helium (about 50g per second), and a physicist wouldn't phrase it that way; they refer to "atmospheric escape".
originally posted by: zatara
How is it possible that the vacuum of space is not sucking our atmosphere away.
There's a bit of a language barrier between physicists and laypeople in using terms like "force" which to a physicist has a very specific meaning, and using that meaning the vacuum doesn't have any force at all (or if it does, it has a very small force that pushes things apart, which we refer to as dark energy. That force is so small it can be considered negligible for the purposes of atmospheric escape.)
The vacumm of space is such a powerful force that it is hard to believe earth's gravity is pulling harder than this force.
originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Got a question on magnetism, please. Do all magnetic fields have a toroidal/torus structure? Can they come in any other shapes, aside from distorted toroids?
That depends on context and how you define magnetic field. Take for example the moon, which doesn't have a dipole magnetic field like the Earth does through even the toroid of the Earth's magnetic field is distorted by solar wind. Since the moon's magnetic field is not a dipole it can't be said to have a toroidal configuration but somewhat like the images link I posted showing the effects of combining magnetic fields, I suspect the moon's overall magnetic field is composed of smaller fragmented areas which would tend to be dipole and thus toroidal. For example one idea is that an impact can create a magnetic field antipodal to the impact site, so you might have had a toroidal field around that site, except you might not because of other antipodal sites have their own field, so the magnetic structure of the moon gets a little messy.
originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
Hence my question: Do all magnetic fields naturally take the shape of a toroid?
Microcrystalline grains within a piece of NdFeB (the alloy used in neodymium magnets) with magnetic domains made visible with a Kerr microscope. The domains are the light and dark stripes visible within each grain.
I'm not exactly sure what they mean by "compressed ambient fields in a surface boundary layer" and if that field would map as a toroid, but I think the rest would be fairly consistent with such a description. I don't think the moon's magnetic field is fully understood and this might only explain parts of it.
Significant crustal magnetization anomalies antipodal to lunar impact basins are therefore expected, consistent with orbital mapping results. Weaker magnetization observed peripheral to the Imbrium basin may also be explained by shock effects together with compressed ambient fields in a surface boundary layer. Although other processes such as cometary impacts and a former core dynamo may have contributed significantly to the observed paleomagnetism, meteoroid impact plasmas appear capable of explaining a major part of the large-scale magnetization detected thus far from lunar orbit.
No quantum tunneling isn't needed for that but it is needed for the sun to work, so we literally wouldn't be here without quantum tunneling.
originally posted by: Peeple
It's probably a stupid question, it's Saturday and late where I am. What I'd like to know is,
Can it be considered quantum tunneling at work when light moves through glass? Just wondering because it's a particle and a solid barrier.