space atmosphere

[timejump]

what is the atomosphere in space made of

 

[derekmcd]

Space doesn't really have an atmosphere if you use the technical definition. Atmosphere is defined as the gaseous layers surrounding a celestial body.<br /><br />If you are inquiring what the 'fabric" of space is consisted of... i'd like to know the answer, too. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>

 

[weeman]

Whatever the "atmosphere" of space is, it's not a vacuum, it's not empty of all matter. Atoms still exist within the blackness of space, along with photons, and other electromagnetic fields and particles. <br /><br />In response to Derek's post, no one knows what the fabric of space consists of. According to the theory of inflation, the very dimensions of space are always expanding. So, aside from all the atoms and particles, this expanding fabric has to consist of something; there has to be something that gives it structure so that it is something from nothing. <br /><br />If you compare space to the atmosphere of Earth, Venus, or Neptune, then I would say that space has no atmosphere. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Techies: We do it in the dark. </font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>"Put your hand on a stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with that special girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. That's relativity.</strong><strong>" -Albert Einstein </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[logicize]

The definition of space is<br /><br />"big… bluish-black… thing"<br /><br />According to Timon.<br /><br />http://semne.wordpress.com/2006/11/18/milky-way/<br /><br />Though he doesn't go in to specifics as to what it is made of.

 

[qso1]

weeman:<br />Whatever the "atmosphere" of space is, it's not a vacuum, it's not empty of all matter. Atoms still exist within the blackness of space, along with photons, and other electromagnetic fields and particles.<br /><br />Me:<br />By that definition, space contains all matter up to and including galaxies. Space if defined as a separate entity, is the void or absence of anything right down to molecules. Molecules that are present are part of other objects, even if its just a wisp of an object floating between galaxies. By this definition, space has no atmosphere. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[lohtse101]

The "atmosphere" (or matter) of space would be the same matter that you find in planetary atmospheres. Or in planets themselves. It is the matter that gets ejected from the stars as they go nova (my astronomy is a little weak so someone correct me if I get off track) -- hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, et cetera. All the same stuff is there, it's just spread out a great deal more.<br />

 

[qso1]

Not quite.<br /><br />A star goes nova or supernova in the confines or expanse if you will of the nothingness called space. This material may coalesce into something else one day but whatever it coalesces into, it will occupy a certain location within the vast expanse of nothing called space.<br /><br />The planet and an atmosphere surrounding the planet also occupy and move relative to other bodies, thru the nothingness called space.<br /><br />Put another way...a stable star system with planets has an awful lot of space in between the planets and the host star. There may be trace molecules left from formation of the planets, or even the star. But it all occupies space. The space between galaxies for example. Probably the least occupied regions of space there is. One molecule for every million miles or something like that. Molecules left behind from the formation of galaxies.<br /><br />When I refer to space...I'm refering to the areas where there are no molecules of any kind present or the space between them is so vast...nothing occupies that space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[derekmcd]

I suppose much of it would depend on where you take your sample. Interstellar space would turn up atoms of various sort, molecules, ions, dust and so on. Intergalactic space, however, is quite thin. You would be lucky to find 100 hydrogen atoms per square meter on average. Finding anything other than the random hydrogen atom would be a crap shoot. I believe the average density of the Universe (including galaxies and such) is 1 atom per centimeter (or meter, can't remember). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>

 

[qso1]

I don't recall the densities either but my point is that if you could remove any and all molecules of gasses, objects whatever...your left with empty space as its been called.<br /><br />I sometimes refer to space itself as simply a void. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[the_gooch]

You're right. I'd say it is a void, or vaccuum. That being said, though, doesn't quantum physics state that even in a vaccuum virtual particles are popping into/out of existence all the time? So a vaccuum is not really always a vaccuum?

 

[qso1]

I'm not really all that up on quantum physics so I can't really give a definitive answer on that. I would say that even if virtual particles are popping in and out, they are still popping into and out of empty space.<br /><br />Space, the void, vacuum or whatever...is that empty area (for lack of a better term) that all matter occupies at one time or place or another. At least thats what I came to understand as space, BTW welcome to SDC and look forward to more posts and debate with you. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[heyscottie]

Yes. Uncertainty dictates that a time-energy product is probabalistic, so virtual particles are allowed to pop into and out of existence. This effect has been measured, for example, in the Casimir effect. So even "empty" space is a seething ocean of short-lived virtual particles spontaneously being created and destroyed.<br /><br />This effect is unimportant in classical physics, however. A spacecraft will not (as far as we know) exhibit any behavior that would indicate it is travelling in anything but a vacuum. Or, at least, a nearly perfect vacuum, as there are always a few atoms floating here and there...

 

[nexium]

The solar wind streams out from our Sun at about 500 kilometers per second, So a space craft out bound at 250 kilometers per second might hit only one proton per second, but be hit from the rear by 100 ions per second = 1/2 as many as a stationary space craft. At 500 kilometers per second outbound, perhaps as few as 10 partical impacts would occur uniformly distributed over all parts of the space craft. At 1000 kilometers per second, the space craft would hit about 200 times per second in front and about one particle per second from the rear. At 50,000 kilometers per second, we can expect to hit about 20,000 particles per second. Because of the very high speed, large amounts of energy is released at each impact, including secondary radiation and gamma rays similar to those produced by galactic cosmic rays. Faster than 50,000 kilometers per second = 1/6 c may be impractical due to erosion of the front of the space craft and the shielding problems. Please comment, refute and/or agree. Neil