The irony of the guy replying to you with PHD in his username not understanding that the Sun blasts the Earth with an absolutely unreal amount of energy
I honestly think you’re forgetting the atmosphere and like, physical ground under our feet. It doesn’t generally drop to 0C overnight unless it’s already pretty close to 0C because of the heat trapped in the atmosphere and emanating from the earth’s core. It’s going to be more like a week for most places.
I honestly think you’re forgetting the atmosphere and like, physical ground under our feet.
no im not, you’re forgetting that the sun exists
Max-Min temps (F) yesterday across 3 different continents:
Lucknow 82-53
Mandalay 90-67
Kisangani 91-76
Porto Velho 85-77
Temps drop by 22 F at night (avg) around the equator. Most tropical land reaches freezing in 1.5 days if the sun vanishes. Forget temperate.
Best case scenario is Tropical rainforest since water holds heat. Middle of Amazon gets “only” an 8 F (4.4 C) drop in 12 hours, so 3.3 days to reach freezing.
keep in mind that these temp drops occur right now, in reality meatspace, despite “the atmosphere and like, physical ground under our feet”. (both of these exist)
Actually, on second thoughts, this comment explicitly proves that you’re a reactionary hiding their lack of investigation behind accusations of immaterialism - just by applying your own logic to real world numbers, you’ve gone from a day to half a week. You have no place opining on this subject.
Yeah, you’ll notice that your “massive” 22°F is the difference between direct sunlight and no sunlight. Do you think there’s another sun to take away after the first one, to get rid of even more sunlight and drop the temperature another 22°?
Why don’t you believe that physical materials are capable of holding heat energy? Why did you latch on to atmosphere and ground instead of the biggest energy store on the planet, the ocean (you don’t need to answer that we know it’s because those are the ones I named)? Why do you think that the temperature difference between day and night - sunlight and no sunlight - is the same as the general rate at which energy is lost from the planet? Have you not ever been outside at night to discover the largest part of the temperature drop happens as soon as the sun disappears?
You’re doing a very good job of the typical liberal application of raw, familiar logic to a new situation, but the only part of it you actually understand is that the sun supplies lots of energy, and haven’t made it any further than that.
And the sun doesn’t generally blink out of existence. Think about how much energy is on the other side of the earth, it’s not like the two sides of earth are separate they are one huge interconnected energy system. What happens on one side impacts the other, and the core doesn’t provide enough energy and the atmosphere is leaking heat constantly
You are also forgetting the atmosphere and ground (and oceans, of course) - It being one huge interconnected energy system is exactly why I’m saying it would take longer. This guy’s calculations reckon we’d lose about 1 degree per 12 hours. January’s global average temperature was around 13°, so that’d be 6 and a half days. July last year it was 17°, so that’d be a whole 8 and a half days. It’s going to be more like a week.
The article is stupid imo. The earth cools down more than 1°F an hour when clouds appear, the sun disappearing is gonna cool down a bit more than a cloudy day. This is why I don’t get my weather forecasts from physicists. At least, that’s what seems right to me. We lose a ton of heat every night why wouldn’t losing the sun be similar lol
that article is the peak of liberal honkey reasoning, just ignores the fact that things are interdependent (sometimes in fucking hilarious ways like ignoring the sun), also casually ignores the culling of like…99.99999% of the global population, and 99.999999999999999% of its biomass
Here he forgets the entire solar system would default to another orbit, around the second biggest thing (with a lot of crashing involved, maybe around Jupiter?). Not that important to the central point though, but this alone could easily split our planet in two lmao
Socially, immediate collapse.
Current installed geothermal capacity of earth supports only 4.2 million people (Iceland makes up 200k of these).
Oil/gas/coal will support a few more but I’m too lazy to do the calcs, and it’s not gonna be anywhere near enough because you’d need so much more oil per person, since:
all your food’s light now has to come from oil
you need to heat your house everyday because weather is colder than antarctica
because no sun, there is almost no rain, almost all your food’s water has to come from desalination
people are still going to want meat, and it’s doubtful if even a single person on the planet would be able to
This would not 10x an individual’s oil needs, it would 1000x or 10,000x them, maybe more
Also the infrastructure needed to even do this would need to be built, which…it’s not, let’s be real. Therefore:
Every single government will genocide 99.99999999999% of their population minimum, except Iceland, because Iceland gets 70% of their energy from geothermal. So that means that Iceland could get away with killing off only 30% of their population, right? WRONG! Because Iceland geotherm supports 200k in a world where THE SUN EXISTS. All the food they eat, 90% of the temperature above -94F that they enjoy, all the water they drink, is basically 95% powered by the sun. So really Iceland would also have to kill off…maybe 99.9% of its population?
This culling will be done within the first week, after a few days of pretending that everything is under control. There would be lies down the chain of command, every higher-up lying to their immediate lower that they’ll make it, even the state governors might be lied to by the feds and end up tapping out right after us. They’ll just cut the heating and everybody dies in a week.
A scramble to immediately start dumping fossil fuels for heat retention and for horticulture lights. All the oil wells set alight
All resources become useless except for geothermal zones, geothermal infrastructure, and desalination infrastructure (and oil/gas/coal). Humans are dumb, and governments would have the huge problem of panicked frenzied people, who would make the situation worse than it has to be. The individuals in charge of the literal nuke buttons may go rogue and try to flee to Iceland or something.
There would be an immediate bargain between Saudi Arabia and other world leaders to allow at least the leaders and their families into the Gulf States, since these hold 55% of global desalination capacity. Same with Iceland for geothermal capacity.
Normal nuclear war is more predictable than this by orders of magnitude
There is a VERY good chance (imo like 90%) that humanity literally goes extinct, because the supply chain intelligence to make plant-grow-lights, and the intel to keep the geotherm/oil/desal gets killed in the process, meaning not a single human can survive. One rogue guy can just bomb the infrastructure in Saudi/UAE/Iceland and other relevant places, and that’s extinction.
Geothermal NOW supports only 4 million people. In a post-sun world it would support a small fraction of that.
that article is the peak of liberal honkey reasoning
Every single government will genocide 99.99999999999% of their population
I’m gonna be real, I started thinking about responding to the tiny relevent bit at the start (it’s got a big picture to help you understand the interdependence you’re talking about), but your histrionics about justifying the hypothetical are pretty funny. Like sib nobody’s talking about how humanity would survive in the ridiculous hypothetical, we’re just talking about the physics of heat loss.
no lol
It goes from 85 to 58 in 12 hours right now in reality world
“A bit” = 1 day, and by the end of that day it’d be freezing (below freezing if you live in whiteistan)
The irony of the guy replying to you with PHD in his username not understanding that the Sun blasts the Earth with an absolutely unreal amount of energy
there’s something about people who use lots of words that makes them particularly…yea
it’s a new level of ignoring material conditions
I honestly think you’re forgetting the atmosphere and like, physical ground under our feet. It doesn’t generally drop to 0C overnight unless it’s already pretty close to 0C because of the heat trapped in the atmosphere and emanating from the earth’s core. It’s going to be more like a week for most places.
no im not, you’re forgetting that the sun exists
Max-Min temps (F) yesterday across 3 different continents:
Lucknow 82-53
Mandalay 90-67
Kisangani 91-76
Porto Velho 85-77
Temps drop by 22 F at night (avg) around the equator. Most tropical land reaches freezing in 1.5 days if the sun vanishes. Forget temperate.
Best case scenario is Tropical rainforest since water holds heat. Middle of Amazon gets “only” an 8 F (4.4 C) drop in 12 hours, so 3.3 days to reach freezing.
keep in mind that these temp drops occur right now, in reality meatspace, despite “the atmosphere and like, physical ground under our feet”. (both of these exist)
Actually, on second thoughts, this comment explicitly proves that you’re a reactionary hiding their lack of investigation behind accusations of immaterialism - just by applying your own logic to real world numbers, you’ve gone from a day to half a week. You have no place opining on this subject.
Yeah, you’ll notice that your “massive” 22°F is the difference between direct sunlight and no sunlight. Do you think there’s another sun to take away after the first one, to get rid of even more sunlight and drop the temperature another 22°?
Why don’t you believe that physical materials are capable of holding heat energy? Why did you latch on to atmosphere and ground instead of the biggest energy store on the planet, the ocean (you don’t need to answer that we know it’s because those are the ones I named)? Why do you think that the temperature difference between day and night - sunlight and no sunlight - is the same as the general rate at which energy is lost from the planet? Have you not ever been outside at night to discover the largest part of the temperature drop happens as soon as the sun disappears?
You’re doing a very good job of the typical liberal application of raw, familiar logic to a new situation, but the only part of it you actually understand is that the sun supplies lots of energy, and haven’t made it any further than that.
And the sun doesn’t generally blink out of existence. Think about how much energy is on the other side of the earth, it’s not like the two sides of earth are separate they are one huge interconnected energy system. What happens on one side impacts the other, and the core doesn’t provide enough energy and the atmosphere is leaking heat constantly
You are also forgetting the atmosphere and ground (and oceans, of course) - It being one huge interconnected energy system is exactly why I’m saying it would take longer. This guy’s calculations reckon we’d lose about 1 degree per 12 hours. January’s global average temperature was around 13°, so that’d be 6 and a half days. July last year it was 17°, so that’d be a whole 8 and a half days. It’s going to be more like a week.
Dig three feet down and tell me how warm the earth is…
Read the article before trying to be a fucking smartarse. It gives specific numbers for geothermal radiation.
The article is stupid imo. The earth cools down more than 1°F an hour when clouds appear, the sun disappearing is gonna cool down a bit more than a cloudy day. This is why I don’t get my weather forecasts from physicists. At least, that’s what seems right to me. We lose a ton of heat every night why wouldn’t losing the sun be similar lol
that article is the peak of liberal honkey reasoning, just ignores the fact that things are interdependent (sometimes in fucking hilarious ways like ignoring the sun), also casually ignores the culling of like…99.99999% of the global population, and 99.999999999999999% of its biomass
Here he forgets the entire solar system would default to another orbit, around the second biggest thing (with a lot of crashing involved, maybe around Jupiter?). Not that important to the central point though, but this alone could easily split our planet in two lmao
Socially, immediate collapse.
Current installed geothermal capacity of earth supports only 4.2 million people (Iceland makes up 200k of these).
Oil/gas/coal will support a few more but I’m too lazy to do the calcs, and it’s not gonna be anywhere near enough because you’d need so much more oil per person, since:
This would not 10x an individual’s oil needs, it would 1000x or 10,000x them, maybe more
Also the infrastructure needed to even do this would need to be built, which…it’s not, let’s be real. Therefore:
Every single government will genocide 99.99999999999% of their population minimum, except Iceland, because Iceland gets 70% of their energy from geothermal. So that means that Iceland could get away with killing off only 30% of their population, right? WRONG! Because Iceland geotherm supports 200k in a world where THE SUN EXISTS. All the food they eat, 90% of the temperature above -94F that they enjoy, all the water they drink, is basically 95% powered by the sun. So really Iceland would also have to kill off…maybe 99.9% of its population?
This culling will be done within the first week, after a few days of pretending that everything is under control. There would be lies down the chain of command, every higher-up lying to their immediate lower that they’ll make it, even the state governors might be lied to by the feds and end up tapping out right after us. They’ll just cut the heating and everybody dies in a week.
A scramble to immediately start dumping fossil fuels for heat retention and for horticulture lights. All the oil wells set alight
All resources become useless except for geothermal zones, geothermal infrastructure, and desalination infrastructure (and oil/gas/coal). Humans are dumb, and governments would have the huge problem of panicked frenzied people, who would make the situation worse than it has to be. The individuals in charge of the literal nuke buttons may go rogue and try to flee to Iceland or something.
There would be an immediate bargain between Saudi Arabia and other world leaders to allow at least the leaders and their families into the Gulf States, since these hold 55% of global desalination capacity. Same with Iceland for geothermal capacity.
Normal nuclear war is more predictable than this by orders of magnitude
There is a VERY good chance (imo like 90%) that humanity literally goes extinct, because the supply chain intelligence to make plant-grow-lights, and the intel to keep the geotherm/oil/desal gets killed in the process, meaning not a single human can survive. One rogue guy can just bomb the infrastructure in Saudi/UAE/Iceland and other relevant places, and that’s extinction.
Geothermal NOW supports only 4 million people. In a post-sun world it would support a small fraction of that.
I’m gonna be real, I started thinking about responding to the tiny relevent bit at the start (it’s got a big picture to help you understand the interdependence you’re talking about), but your histrionics about justifying the hypothetical are pretty funny. Like sib nobody’s talking about how humanity would survive in the ridiculous hypothetical, we’re just talking about the physics of heat loss.