Every once in awhile I read a news release and do a facepalm. I note that “simulations” are not “evidence” and chaos (and uncertainty) works backward in time too. – Anthony
From EurekAlert – Venus had Earth-like plate tectonics billions of years ago, study suggests
Simulations produced by a Brown-led research team offer evidence that Venus once had plate tectonics — a finding that opens the door for the possibility of early life on the planet and insights into its history.
PROVIDENCE, R.I. [Brown University] — Venus, a scorching wasteland of a planet according to scientists, may have once had tectonic plate movements similar to those believed to have occurred on early Earth, a new study found. The finding sets up tantalizing scenarios regarding the possibility of early life on Venus, its evolutionary past and the history of the solar system.
Writing in Nature Astronomy, a team of scientists led by Brown University researchers describes using atmospheric data from Venus and computer modeling to show that the composition of the planet’s current atmosphere and surface pressure would only have been possible as a result of an early form of plate tectonics, a process critical to life that involves multiple continental plates pushing, pulling and sliding beneath one another.
On Earth, this process intensified over billions of years, forming new continents and mountains, and leading to chemical reactions that stabilized the planet’s surface temperature, resulting in an environment more conducive to the development of life.
Venus, on the other hand, Earth’s nearest neighbor and sister planet, went in the opposite direction and today has surface temperatures hot enough to melt lead. One explanation is that the planet has always been thought to have what’s known as a “stagnant lid,” meaning its surface has only a single plate with minimal amounts of give, movement and gasses being released into the atmosphere.
The new paper posits that this wasn’t always the case. To account for the abundance of nitrogen and carbon dioxide present in Venus’ atmosphere, the researchers conclude that Venus must have had plate tectonics sometime after the planet formed, about 4.5 billion to 3.5 billion years ago. The paper suggests that this early tectonic movement, like on Earth, would have been limited in terms of the number of plates moving and in how much they shifted. It also would have been happening on Earth and Venus simultaneously.
“One of the big picture takeaways is that we very likely had two planets at the same time in the same solar system operating in a plate tectonic regime — the same mode of tectonics that allowed for the life that we see on Earth today,” said Matt Weller, the study’s lead author who completed the work while he was a postdoctoral researcher at Brown and is now at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston.
This bolsters the possibility of microbial life on ancient Venus and shows that at one point the two planets — which are in the same solar neighborhood, are about the same size, and have the same mass, density and volume — were more alike than previously thought before diverging.
The work also highlights the possibility that plate tectonics on planets might just come down to timing — and therefore, so may life itself.
“We’ve so far thought about tectonic state in terms of a binary: it’s either true or it’s false, and it’s either true or false for the duration of the planet,” said study co-author Alexander Evans, an assistant professor of Earth, environmental and planetary sciences at Brown. “This shows that planets may transition in and out of different tectonic states and that this may actually be fairly common. Earth may be the outlier. This also means we might have planets that transition in and out of habitability rather than just being continuously habitable.”
That concept will be important to consider as scientists look to understand nearby moons — like Jupiter’s Europa, which has shown proof of having Earth-like plate tectonics — and distant exoplanets, according to the paper.
The researchers initially started the work as a way to show that the atmospheres of far-off exoplanets can be powerful markers of their early histories, before deciding to investigate that point closer to home.
They used current data on Venus’ atmosphere as the endpoint for their models and started by assuming Venus has had a stagnant lid through its entire existence. Quickly, they were able to see that simulations recreating the planet’s current atmosphere didn’t match up with where the planet is now in terms of the amount nitrogen and carbon dioxide present in the current atmosphere and its resulting surface pressure.
The researchers then simulated what would have had to happen on the planet to get to where it is today. They eventually matched the numbers almost exactly when they accounted for limited tectonic movement early in Venus’ history followed by the stagnant lid model that exists today.
Overall, the team believes the work serves as a proof of concept regarding atmospheres and their ability to provide insights into the past.
“We’re still in this paradigm where we use the surfaces of planets to understand their history,” Evans said. “We really show for the first time that the atmosphere may actually be the best way to understand some of the very ancient history of planets that is often not preserved on the surface.”
Upcoming NASA DAVINCI missions, which will measure gasses in the Venusian atmosphere, may help solidify the study’s findings. In the meantime, the researchers plan to delve deep into a key question the paper raises: What happened to plate tectonics on Venus? The theory in the paper suggests that the planet ultimately became too hot and its atmosphere too thick, drying up the necessary ingredients for tectonic movement.
“Venus basically ran out of juice to some extent, and that put the brakes on the process,” said Daniel Ibarra, a professor in Brown’s Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences and co-author on the paper.
The researchers say the details of how this happened may hold important implications for Earth.
“That’s going to be the next critical step in understanding Venus, its evolution and ultimately the fate of the Earth,” Weller said. “What conditions will force us to move in a Venus-like trajectory, and what conditions could allow the Earth to remain habitable?”
The study also included Alexandria Johnson from Purdue University. It was supported by NASA’s Solar System Workings program.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What does it really matter whether Venus has (or had in the past) plate tectonics or not? Venus receives about twice the solar radiation as Earth, and is much too hot for water to exist as a liquid, which is necessary for life.
Venus is not really Earth’s “sister planet”, except for its similar size, mass, and gravity. Venus’ proximity to the Sun makes it much too hot for life.
The fact that about 70% of the Earth’s surface is covered by water is essential for life, even on land areas. The oceans reflect sunlight that would otherwise overheat the surface in tropical areas and during summer, and water vapor in the atmosphere absorbs IR radiation at night (far more than that absorbed by CO2) which limits night-time cooling.
This is demonstrated by the comparison of the Earth to its moon, which receives a similar amount of solar radiation, but its lack of an atmosphere or water covering allows much wider fluctuations in temperature between daylight and night-time, which would be intolerable by life on Earth.
Past and present plate tectonics are important on Earth due to where mountains rose up above sea level, allowing land-based plants, animals, and humans to flourish, and fossils of marine creatures at high elevations show that these areas were under the ocean at some time in the past. But these plate-tectonics theories cannot be transplanted to a hot and dry Venus, whose atmospheric pressure could literally crush the bones of earthly animals.
This is what happens when you dumb down education over 3 -4 generations throw out standards and open the doors of universities to the population at large. A retired geology prof friend of mine described the problem about 25 years ago. The new post normal left allowed 30% or so of the population that hadn’t the skills, knowledge nor capabilities into academia. It was bolstered by funding Unies on the basis of enrollment numbers.
My friend recounted the chaos. They had to create an introductory year for remedial english, math and basic science because most couldn’t write a declarative sentence or reduce a fraction to its lowest comon denominator. With still massive failure rates and protests by students, they had to create softball courses that they could pass like environmental geology (civil engineering
had aan enviro program but this was for students who could do math).
The commonly fanciful stuff coming out of astrophysics these days where colorful narratives based on one pixel are common, may be a product of post normality.
well paid mumble rumble, were can I get those kind of jobs?I´m just a poor chem engineer, I promise not to use my reasoning skills no more.
Venus appears to ‘the universe’ as a blob of Nitrogen and CO₂ so that is where it will be radiating from:
Plug that lot into Stefan and I get 1,746 Kelvin
That’ll melt Iron let alone Lead
737K at the surface with 95 bar atmosphere. Won’t melt iron, the sulphuric acid dissolves it first.
Did you take into account Venus’ albedo when working all that out?
Assuming that Venus had tectonic plates eons ago then that raises other questions.
Why doesn’t Venus have tectonic activity now?
What caused any tectonic activity to stop?
Why hasn’t the tectonic activity on Earth stopped?
What effect could our moon have on tectonic activity?
Does Venus’ weird rotation have an effect on tectonic activity or does the lack of tectonic activity cause the weird rotation?
I can’t answer the last question or the Moon question, but the answer to your other questions are probably the presence of water in the crust. Mountains on the Earth slump, but mountains on Venus don’t. It’s been tested with samples of rock. If you dry out the sample, it resists a much greater pressure without deforming. Those not dried out tend to deform under pressure.
Questions one and two are just inverses of each other.
The answer to them is in part Jim M’s answer plus the cooling of Venus’s core. As the core cools, the crust thickens, which makes it harder for any plates to move. Also the energy coming out of the core, which is what drives tectonics, lessens.
This question is closely related to 1/2. And the answer is, because the things that stopped tectonics on Venus aren’t occurring here.
The Moon is theorized to have a slight triggering effect on earthquakes. That is, if an earthquake is about to happen anyway, the Moon’s tugs could set it off. Other than that. None.
Weird rotation, you mean it’s slow rotation? Plate tectonics are caused by movements within the mantle. These movements are driven by heat from the core. The only impact rotation could have on tectonics would be to direct the movements within the mantle to different places. Same amount of movement, just directed slightly differently.
Mark is probably correct. However, I think the moisture is what allows plates to pass by each other. Without that moisture, everything locks up.We know that the surface of Venus is about 300 million years old. That’s very young.
I can’t help but think this is a waste of time and money. Number one Venus is approximately 26 million miles closer to the Sun. Number two a day on Venus lasts 243 Earth days. Number three a year on Venus is 224 Earth days.
Just this week another example of ‘models gone wrong’
Notice the original outcome – based on computer models- was shown to be wrong. So they blamed it on climate change
The hurricane Otis was always going to be what it was , but the alarmist are now saying it metastasized. Scary scary for Halloween
Even worst is the egregious use of “illustrations” or “artist renditions” in the name of simulated “reality” or “gross conjecture” which many call Science today.
https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-blogs/black-hole-files/black-hole-rain/
Black Hole Rain … wait, Noble Prize coming … Black Hole rain correlated to CO2 emissions … thus to Climate Change … how about “Dark Rain” … to go along with Dark Energy, Dark Matter, and yes, you are in the Dark Ages!
Scientific American: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gravitational-observatories-hunt-for-lumpy-neutron-stars/
Or from the Clearing House of all Truth .. NASA ….
https://science.nasa.gov/missions/hubble/hubble-spots-ultra-speedy-jet-blasting-from-star-crash/
Look at the actual Hubble image/data …
I can only imagine during my doctoral dissertation if I had presented images, figures, and possibly plots with the caption below and made the claim as that this was objective truth beyond a shadow of doubt!
“This is an artist’s impression of two neutron stars colliding. The smashup between two dense stellar remnants unleashes the energy of 1,000 standard stellar nova explosions. In the aftermath of the collision a blowtorch jet of radiation is ejected at nearly the speed of light. The jet is directed along a narrow beam confined by powerful magnetic fields. The roaring jet plowed into and swept up material in the surrounding interstellar medium.”
There is another sound, physics based reason for the imagery on Venus’ surface … but then I will become a heretic!
When two sides claim they are the only possible solutions … remember formal logic …
Neither A, nor B, but C. For neither A or B can C.
Doc Elihu
At WUWT a couple decades ago there was a rash of discussion about so-called “post normal science”—-which was invoked when societal consequences of some uncertain theory were so great that normal science could not be waited on. “We have to act now to Save the Planet” was the usual emotion expressed, ie., panic.
The Precautionary Principle was/is a close cousin.
Both Post Normal Science and the Precautionary Principle are generally invoked in a hysterical tone and are political in application most of the time.
Neither abides by proper skepticism found in good science.
Clearly a recurring theme among the climate alarmists is that what happened to Venus could happen to Earth—-so we better shut down fossil fuels, even if modern industrial society requires them.
This article re Venus clearly tickles climate alarmist hysteria—-on purpose.
I am genuinely surprised that WUWT didn’t notice the masterful debunking of climate models by Statistics Norway. It thoroughly dismantles the AGW hypothesis.
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/forurensning-og-klima/artikler/to-what-extent-are-temperature-levels-changing-due-to-greenhouse-gas-emissions
Oops, “story tip.”
Yes right, after global boiling comes global thickening. Probably by 2050. We’re doomed, unless we all buy electric vehicles.
I don’t see what the problem is? Surely a quick research trip to Venus can sort it all out…….
Yup, sure. Have a nice trip.
The fearless leaders wish to advise the proletariat that the next Five Year Plan and Great Leap Forward to change the weather has been added to the pogrom-
Earth has just five years left to avoid ‘catastrophic’ climate fate – NewsFinale
All hail the fearless leaders and their tireless struggle to save the esteemed proletariat from the dooming.
Mao had the great leap forward.
Modern socialists have the great leap sideways, as they try to evade responsibility for the messes they have caused.
For plate tectonics on earth deep oceans are essential.
“The researchers say this could have important implications for the Earth”. Presumably this happened millions, if not billions of years ago. I’ll not worry too much about it.
Is there any reason to rule out the possible recent collision of a planetesimal into Venus giving rise to its present elevated temperature?
(I’m a geologist; ‘recent’ is meant to be in geologic terms, not human.)
There was no such collision with Venus. If there had been, there would be evidence of it on Venus’ surface.
Thank you for that education, MarkW. This is the first sentence in the first article I checked. Would you please inform them that they are wrong, and provide evidence.
“The surface of Venus is dominated by geologic features that include volcanoes, large impact craters, and aeolian erosion and sedimentation landforms.”
I urge you to also read this before offering further expert comment on the impact craters of Venus.
https://www.usgs.gov/centers/astrogeology-science-center/science/venus-magellan-impact-crater-database
In addition, it is presently accepted that earths moon was derived from an impact event. There is no surface expression of that impact on earth that I am aware of.
“Venus, on the other hand, Earth’s nearest neighbor and sister planet, went in the opposite direction and today has surface temperatures hot enough to melt lead. One explanation is that the planet has always been thought to have what’s known as a “stagnant lid,” meaning its surface has only a single plate with minimal amounts of give, movement and gasses being released into the atmosphere.”
Sister planet? Another explanation notes that Venus receives about TWICE the energy earth does.
Venus Solar irradiance (W/m2) 2601
Earth Solar irradiance (W/m2) 1413
But it’s better to simply gloss over simple explanations when you have a story to tell.