编辑-地球科学江南体育网页版堆栈交换江南电子竞技平台

你不是登录。你的编辑将被放置在一个队列,直到同行评议。

我们欢迎编辑,使读者更容易理解和更有价值。因为社区成员审查编辑,请尽量使文章更好比你怎么发现,例如,通过修正语法或添加额外的资源和超链接。

Paleocene-Eocene热最大可能是由智能生命形式?

我最近学习很感兴趣的Paleocene-Eocene热最大从约翰·贝兹的这个博客。对于那些还没有看到,飙升贴上“古”这个图(从维基百科)的全球气温在过去的6500万年里:

它让我一下子想到这个事件有点平行于现代气候改变观察维基百科的文章中也提到过。显然,推测,Paleocene-Eocene热最大可能是由火山喷发造成的。

(在问以下问题,我并不是说我相信是这样的情况(事实上,我发现这非常令人难以置信的)。我问简单的科学好奇心。)

有什么方法可以判断Paleocene-Eocene热最大智能生命形式是由一个古老的种族,引起全球变暖的时期以类似的方式,人类在做什么目前,随后灭绝?

我期待的答案是,“不,我们不能排除。但我们希望看到一些化石记录从这样的文明,我们不要。”但I would be happy to be surprised in either direction by someone more knowledgeable. Some food for thought:

这个答案表明,实际上是不确定性导致古新世-始新世极热。
我听人说,只有两件事人类已经完成,将在地质记录留下永久的印记。首先是气候变化。第二个是含铅汽油,将全球的可识别的地层。

回答

答案是否定的,它不可能是。时期。只是一件事,化石燃料的使用,使得这个。化石燃料还没有被取代,因为他们使over-to-around 450 - 400年前。然而,当人类开始使用它们,即使是“唾手可得”在那里,准备采摘。如果一个社会时期通过化石燃料使用阶段,他们会,长在低处的水果会被使用,以及很多很多。是的,构造活动可以搬一些not-then-low-hanging水果如此,但我们观察到当采摘它。也不会取代常用的材料。没有社会会直接从几壁炉核电站驱动的世界里,也没有地热的或风力驱动的。和进一步(逻辑)的证据,怎么这三个来源产生变暖对所需的规模没有大规模使用规模肯定大于我们的(当然如果不是也消耗化石燃料)? Greater than ours because while ANY energy converted from storage to use then becomes part of the planet's heat load, even without greenhouse effects, though a rising temperature from electricity used from geothermal plants, say, has the effect of... rising temperature due to anything, though without the positive feedback element of adding greenhouse gases. In fact, the use of non-replacing fossil fuels is the reason we need to jump up a level and pretty fast. Without doing so, we will reach a point at which no more are available (doesn't matter if that is the "20 years from now" I've heard since I was 10 for oil supplies, or 2600 AD I keep seeing for natural gas, or 3846 AD: the day cometh if their use is not replaced). When that happens, a very harsh situation will develop, akin to hunter-gathers feasting on a positive feedback loop of grain and seeing their populations grow, then the grain is gone, largely, for a generation or six, and their populations fall drastically. Aided probably by fighting along the way, but also just by fewer children being supportable. As we fall from modernity, our chance as a species will then be lost forever. Forever. Because probably no one will ever make the jump from burning wood and replacing it with wind power then developing nuclear technology (or even geothermal). So we won't "rise" again, but rather just fall away, though probably getting our 5-15 million more years before the species dies out. If there had been such a civilization as posited in the question, we'd've run up against a wall (in Europe) hundreds of years ago when we began to actually see deforestation with no little story for ourselves that it was to increase farmland. So WE wouldn't exist as we clearly actually do. Ergo, there was NO such civilization then, or 10,000 years BC, or 20,000 years BC, or whatever quack garbage is spewed forth by people on the fringe. When Edgar Cayce is your main scientist, you have problems. So no, such a civilization did not exist. They did not fall from grace, nor did they reach to the stars and meet Admiral Janeway. If they had, we would not be here, and we are. It is also a sobering thing to think about instead of worrying about our beachfront homes in Colorado and South Dakota being overrun by water someday. Decent chance the lack of alien contact (via radio, not starships) could be due to this degeneration occurring on other planets as well, if they even had a suitably long period of time between trees, bushes, plants, ferns, etc. and the evolution of bacteria that could break down their fibers. Planets with user a species that (like us) did not seem on a path to solving the energy source jump (fusion, really) before they started down the energy/civilization slope and reached a point at which they could never have another chance. Planets that (hopefully, unlike us!) that did not see the user species solve, or even seriously consider the problem itself, and tanked, and so never reached (via radio, not starships... it will NEVER be starships... we are in this system and alone, forever: well, as long as we last) any other star's planetary system's people. No more paradox, eh? No, it could not have given the evidence of us and the ease with which incredible amounts of oil, coal, and gas were easy to obtain in the not so long ago past. Some amount, even moderate amounts could have been tectonic forces at work, but even today, some of all of them are still very easy to obtain. So no.

编辑总结

取消

1

\ begingroup美元化石燃料是方便,但几乎没有成功的最重要的。我们烧煤在蒸汽机之前冰了,甚至有电动汽车上半年的19世纪。可再生能源,以树的形式存在在我们周围。氢作为燃料不难产生冰,和燃料电池变得很好。未来没有化石燃料不是自动命中注定。 \ endgroup美元
- - - - - -麦克
2022年1月26日,0:15
\ begingroup美元同时,别忘了宜耕资源鲸鱼油可能用于柴油的地方,像拒付视频游戏描绘。 \ endgroup美元
- - - - - -麦克
2022年1月26日,在0:17

添加一个评论 |

正确的小错误或错误
澄清的意思,而不更改它
添加相关资源或链接
总是尊重作者的意图
不使用编辑与作者回复

创建代码用引号”或式子~篱笆
' ' '
像这样
' ' '
添加语言标识符来突出显示的代码
”“python
def函数(foo):
打印(foo)
' ' '
把段落之间的回报
在结束linebreak添加2个空间
_italic_或* *的* *
报价将>开始的
做链接(尽量使用https)
< https://example.com >
(例子)(https://example.com)
< a href = " https://example.com " > < / >示例
MathJax方程罪\ \ ^ 2θ美元

格式帮助»
回答帮助»

MathJax帮助»