Is Space Cold or Hot?

Such a simple question, and yet not the simplest answer. In order to better understand this question, we must first understand the difference between heat and temperature. That’s right…they are not the same thing! But why?

It may seem counter-intuitive that temperature and heat are different things. After all, if we heat something up, its temperature increases, right? Things put into a flame feel hotter…things in a refrigerator get cold…so how could these be separate? To tease out the difference, we need to understand the definitions of temperature and heat, and how these definitions turn into physical meaning.

First up: heat. Heat is a measure of energy (in energy units) in a substance: the greater the total energy, the greater the heat. Remember that there are different types of energy, such as kinetic energy (energy of motion), internal energy (e.g. energy in molecular bonds, energy of the mass making up matter), and potential energy (the energy available to do work).

Next: temperature. Temperature is a number that is proportional to the average kinetic energy of the molecules in a substance. When molecules (or even individual particles) have a high temperature, then they are moving faster than at a lower temperature. This is why water at high temperatures cannot solidify—the particles have too much energy to get locked into a crystal state.

So here’s the crux of the issue: when particles have heat transferred to them, their temperature increases. So lets take a quick look at how heat can be transferred between particles, atoms, and molecules. The first way is through radiation. Radiation is essentially a source of energy giving off its heat in the form of light. Think light bulbs, stars, and even humans–we radiate off some of our heat in the infrared, which is why you can see us with “night goggles” (an infrared radiation detector). The hotter something is, the more it radiates. The second method is called convection. This method of heat transfer involves patterns of rising and falling gasses of different temperatures, and is very important in the transfer of heat near the surface of the sun! (And in your house—we all remember learning about hot air rising and cool air falling, right?) Inside the sun’s upper layers, the hot plasma rises up to the surface, releasing its energy and cooling down. Then, it sinks to the bottom and where it can absorb more energy and heat up again (see the picture below). For those of you who like computers, convection is what we use to cool down our computer chips when they heat up–the fan blows cool air over the chips, and the air absorbs some of the heat from the chips.

The most important heat transfer mechanism that we need to consider for this question is the one we experience most often on Earth, the mechanism of conduction. This is essentially heat transfer through particle collisions. Remember, we said that when a substance’s temperature is high, the particles that make it up have a lot of kinetic energy, so they bounce around a lot. It makes sense then that as those particles collide with other particles, some of the heat gets transferred from the hotter particles to the colder ones. Think about when you stick the end of a metal spoon in a fire. What happens? At first, the tip of the spoon heats up (energy from the fire is transferred to the particles in the metal spoon’s tip). Then, over time, even though you are holding the spoon at the other end, you burn your hand. That’s because the particles in the hot tip of the spoon smack into the colder particles adjacent to them, and the heat begins to move along the spoon to the tip–eventually, the other end of the spoon gets hot, and you burn your hand (and feel really stupid for having done that).

"Feelin' hot, hot, hot!"

On Earth, conduction plays a huge role in energy transfer because we live in a high density environment. Air is everywhere, so if you start heating up air in a room, it spreads out quickly–heat is easily transferred between air molecules. But what about in space?

If you’ve followed me so far, you are now ready to answer the question posed in the title of this post. In the environment of our solar system, particles are moving very fast, that is to say, they have a very high temperature! Most of these particles are from the sun’s solar wind—the sun doesn’t just send out light energy, but also a constant stream of energetic, charged particles. These particles move at close to 900 miles per hour! That’s freakin’ fast…and corresponds to a temperature of hundred thousands to millions of degrees! Soak that in a moment.

But what about heat? These particles may have a very, very high temperature, but there are very few of them. Space is almost a complete vacuum, with very few particles. If you were to sample a space of 1 cubic centimeter, you’d find about 5 particles in it. So heat isn’t able to transfer effectively. Conduction is essentially impossible—you can only transfer heat through radiation.

This has some really interesting consequences. If you cannot conduct heat effectively, temperatures stay roughly the same for long periods of time–so things that are cold stay cold, and things that are hot stay hot. So when you are directly in the sun, you will actually feel pretty hot–temperatures on the dayside of Earth outside the International Space Station can get into the 100s of degrees Fahrenheit! But then, on the night side, when not in sunlight, it gets really cold, into the negative hundreds of degrees. And once you are at a certain temperature, you aren’t able to effectively transfer it away, so you’ll stay that way–so in space, if you had a hot cup of coffee, it would stay hot for longer than it would on Earth! Yeah…space is the ultimate thermos.

What happens if you are not near the sun at all, like the temperature between galaxies? When not in the presence of a heat source in space, you will only feel the Cosmic Background Radiation on you, which is a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (-455 degrees Fahrenheit)! So…you’ll freeze (though that’d be only one of the problems you’d face). That concludes our lesson on heat and temperature! Now go out and enjoy Groundhog Day with a little Ryan Gosling:

I feel my temperature rising!

Posted in Astronomy, Physics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Hubble Female Reproductive System

While discussing the penchant astronomers often have of using dirty-sounding terminology to describe phenomenon (see: violent relaxation, bulge mass, tidal friction, mass ejection, etc.), I had a thought, which turned into the Hubble Female Reproductive System:

Male organs would be too difficult.

I guess it’s time we astronomers ramped up the subtleties in our educational approach, and just accept ourselves for who we are. I also had a thought that this is the perfect tool for educating our politicians, since it’s the perfect blend of two things they seem to have trouble understanding: science, and female reproduction.

Posted in Astronomy, Comics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Crookes Radiometer, Part II

Sorry for the extremely long delay in this post—I just finished up my first semester of graduate school, and I felt clobbered. But now I am on break, and while we take a refresher and celebrate the New Year, let’s learn some science!

Since you’ve probably forgotten by now, I recommend you re-read my first post about the Crookes Radiometer, which is a bulb with a vane on the inside. Recall the problem: radiation pressure from light comes in two forms, reflection and absorption—though absorption is twice as weak, when light shines on the radiometer, it moves the wrong way, as if absorption is actually stronger. So what’s going on?

Well, I posed a challenge to readers of this blog to figure it out, and fellow reader/blogger Alexandra Greenbaum of comic writing fame came up with a partially correct answer! It was initially believed that this conundrum was caused by a temperature difference between the dark and light side of the vanes. Do you know how it’s bad to wear a dark colored shirt out on a very hot day? That’s because dark color shirts absorb light and heat up more quickly than light colors do, and so dark clothes will heat up more than light clothes. The same happens here—the dark part of the vane absorbs light while the light side reflects light, so the dark side becomes hotter than the light side! Inside the bulb, while it is a partial vacuum, it’s not a complete vacuum…there’s still some air in there. Therefore, when molecules of air hit the dark side, it absorbs some of the heat energy and pushes off with greater speed, causing a net force on the dark side. This solves the paradox, right?

Well, there’s a problem (womp womp). Even though the air molecules are producing this force on the dark side, they are also stopping the other molecules from hitting the vane! This ends up causing a balance that cancels out the force caused by the temperature difference, or so the scientists believed, so they threw this explanation out. It took none other than Albert Einstein to prove that scientists shouldn’t overlook this effect. While this balance occurs over most of the pane’s surface, it does not cancel out at the edges. This second order effect does indeed provide a force to push the vanes in the light-side-forward direction, but it is not large enough to fully explain this motion.

Ok, so we have a partial answer. What are we missing? A neat piece of physics called thermal transpiration. Though James Clerk Maxwell (see: Maxwell’s equations) published the answer in 1879 (the last paper prior to his death), he didn’t come up with it…it was actually an idea of Osbourne Reynolds (of “Reynold’s Number” science fame). The idea is that if you have a porous plate surrounded by a rarified (very small density) gas, and you have one side hotter than the other, then the gas interacting with the hot side will actually flow through to the cold side! This will create a pressure difference between the two sides of the plate, and when there’s a pressure difference, there’s a force. “But Dan,” you may be thinking, “the vanes are not porous. So why are you teaching me about thermal transpiration?” Great question! Well, if the temperature (and therefore pressure) difference is great enough, the air molecules will flow around the edges to the cool side, and will create this additional force.

If you combine the forces from each of these explanations, you can fully explain the Crookes Radiometer! In very sensitive radiometers, with near-vacuums much better than that of the Crookes Radiometer, you can actually detect the radiation pressure we discussed in the Part I. Pretty neat.

That’s all folks! Sorry again for taking so long. Stay tuned for more cool stuff!

Posted in Physics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Crookes Radiometer, Part 1

Happy October, friends! I apologize for my lack of posts recently…graduate school has started for me, and it’s been very tough for me to find any free time. I’m going to attempt to quickly write up this post about an awesome apparatus that puzzled many great minds (including my own)—the Crookes Radiometer.

A Crookes radiometer, known to some as a light mill, is a pretty low-tech apparatus consisting of a light bulb with a partial vacuum inside (very few air particles inside the bulb compared to normal air we breathe) and a bunch of vanes attached to a spindle. It was designed by Sir William Crookes in 1873—he was doing chemistry experiments in a partial vacuum and noticed the effect he later built this apparatus to measure. That guy had an awesome beard. Despite the age of this contraption, you can still easily find one for your own (typically these are just items used for novelty and to stimulate the minds of young graduate students like me).

To understand what the radiometer is supposed to measure, we must examine some properties of light. Light has always been, and still is, a confusing phenomenon. Scientists don’t really understand what light is…sometimes it acts like a wave, sometimes it acts like a particle. This has led to what we call the “wave-particle” duality of light, and it’s really just a representation of the fact that we have more than one model of how light works, and they both explain certain phenomena and can’t explain others. Indeed, this concept is so important that it helped pave the way for the formulation of quantum mechanics. The specific property of light I want to tell you about is light radiation pressure.

Imagine holding a piece of black construction paper in mid-air (you’re so awesome that you can hold it completely still), and shining light on it. Remember that if something is black, it is absorbing light that hits it, and so you see an absence of color. So here you have light shining on the construction paper, and the light is completely absorbed. Because light has momentum associated with it (like when you are running down a hill and have a hard time slowing down), the absorption creates a force over the area of the paper being illuminated (i.e. a pressure!). This is called radiation pressure.

Now imagine you’re holding white construction paper instead of black. Here, the paper is reflecting the light off of it, rather than absorbing. In this case, light also creates a radiation pressure, but due to how we’ve observed (and modelled) how light works, we know it creates twice as much pressure when reflecting than it does when being absorbed!

So now, armed with knowledge, let’s go back to our radiometer. The vanes on the spindle have two sides, one black, one white. Crookes observed this effect and wanted to measure it—he wanted to shine light (in his day, with the sun, in ours, perhaps with a flashlight or laser) on the vanes and see how they moved. The white side should reflect the light, and the black side absorb it…so the spindle should spin, with the white side trailing the black. But he instantly noticed a problem…the black side was trailing the white…it moves backwards!

Don’t believe me? Try it out for yourself. The great physicists of the time pondered this puzzle, and it took some time for them to figure out the answer. I will explain the answer to this conundrum in my next entry…for now, I challenge you all to think about this puzzle and try to come up with an answer!

Posted in Physics | Tagged , , | 7 Comments