Re: Goldilocks Zone vs. Goldilocks Planet?
- From: dlzc <dlzc1@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 07:11:57 -0700 (PDT)
Dear John Park:
On Jul 1, 9:27 pm, af...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (John Park) wrote:
dlzc(dl...@xxxxxxx) writes:...
There is plenty of oxygen there... it is just tied up
in compounds that are much more stable than
ozone, with lots of available states in between
the two.
Which is why I suggested you'd need a surce of
molecular oxygen, which would in turn act as a
continual source of ozone.
Not on Venus, at those temperatures, it wouldn't.
I get the feeling we've been talking past each
other, but I'm not sure how that happened.
Beats talking to ourselves. ;>)
David A. Smith
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Goldilocks Zone vs. Goldilocks Planet?
- From: John Park
- Re: Goldilocks Zone vs. Goldilocks Planet?
- Prev by Date: No geologists can dismiss these ten Martian cell remains as just geological structure of rocks.
- Next by Date: Which geologist dare say this shows geological structure?
- Previous by thread: Venus's atmosphere (was Re: Goldilocks Zone vs. Goldilocks Planet?)
- Next by thread: Re: Goldilocks Zone vs. Goldilocks Planet?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
