Simulations suggest Venus may have once been able to support life

Venus
Venus approaches the Sun in a 2012 transit visible from Earth. Credit: NASA

A team of researchers with NASA, Uppsala University, Columbia University and the Planetary Science Institute has created several simulations of conditions on Venus billions of years ago using Earth climate models and has found some instances that suggest the planet may at one time have been capable of harboring life. In their paper uploaded to the preprint server arXiv, the team describes their simulations and the factors they used in creating them.

Venus is, by all accounts, an extremely hostile planet—at least from the perspective of humans. It is extraordinarily hot, volcanically active and has an atmosphere that is mostly carbon dioxide. But the simulations created by the research team suggest it may not have always been that way. They started with the idea that Venus and Earth were probably similar billions of years ago—a time when Earth's atmosphere was also mostly . From there, they created four possible scenarios for the future of Venus based on climate models developed for studying the history of Earth's climate. The models differed only slightly, with variances in energy received from the sun, or the length of days. They also considered conditions with shallow oceans. They let the models run, creating simulations of the planet as it evolved for approximately two billion years.

The team found that one simulation resulted in a planet with temperatures low enough to support life—one with clouds and sometimes snowfall—and it persisted until 715 million years ago—a period during which life was already present on Earth.

But if such simulations are accurate, what caused the conditions that exist today? The simulations did not advance that far, but the researchers note that the speed at which the planet spun on its axis might have had something to do with it—they noted that speeding up the rotation slightly resulted in rapidly rising temperatures as weather patterns that tended to keep the planet cool were disrupted. Today, it takes 243 Earth days for Venus to spin just once, which is actually longer than the amount of time it takes to circle the sun—225 days.


Explore further

Why is Venus so horrible?

More information: arxiv.org/abs/1608.00706

Abstract

Present-day Venus is an inhospitable place with surface temperatures approaching 750K and an atmosphere over 90 times as thick as present day Earth's. Billions of years ago the picture may have been very different. We have created a suite of 3D climate simulations using topographic data from the Magellan mission, solar spectral irradiance estimates for 2.9 and 0.715 billion years ago, present day Venus orbital parameters, an ocean volume consistent with current theory and measurements, and an atmospheric composition estimated for early Venus. Using these parameters we find that such a world could have had moderate temperatures if Venus had a rotation period slower than about 16 Earth days, despite an incident solar flux 46-70% higher than modern Earth receives. At its current rotation period of 243 days, Venus's climate could have remained habitable until at least 715 million years ago if it hosted a shallow primordial ocean. These results demonstrate the vital role that rotation and topography play in understanding the climatic history of exoplanetary Venus-like worlds being discovered in the present epoch.

Journal information: arXiv

© 2016 Phys.org

Citation: Simulations suggest Venus may have once been able to support life (2016, August 9) retrieved 22 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2016-08-simulations-venus-life.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
5394 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 09, 2016
Sci-fi GIGO. With zero basis in reality they arrive at a conclusion that cannot support the current conditions, yet somehow believe they have created something worthy to publish. Laughable yet also sad to say the least.

Aug 09, 2016
Sci-fi GIGO. With zero basis in reality they arrive at a conclusion that cannot support the current conditions, yet somehow believe they have created something worthy to publish. Laughable yet also sad to say the least.


That is the best descriptor of thunderbolts.info I've read yet.

Aug 09, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Aug 09, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Aug 09, 2016
"They started with the idea that Venus and Earth were probably similar billions of years ago-a time when Earth's atmosphere was also mostly carbon dioxide."

If yet to be sure we determined that, Venus once had an independent rotation, then the, the idea of the existence of life would be a reality. Development (growth) of the body indicates that Earth and Venus have never been similar at the same time.

Aug 09, 2016
Such stories explain why Velikovsky never truly went away
@chris
No, velikovski never went away because there is a willingness in certain people like the eu and yourself to ignore empirical evidence for the sake of a belief you have
like here: http://journals.p....0075637

the simple fact that you and all the eu cult members have demonstrated conspiracist ideation, especially when arguing for the sake of your own eu beliefs, validates the linked study

you choose not to see reality because it doesn't fit with what you want to believe

Aug 09, 2016
"A team of researchers with NASA, Uppsala University, Columbia University and the Planetary Science Institute has created several simulations of conditions on Venus billions of years ago using Earth climate models and has found some instances that suggest the planet may at one time have been capable of harboring life."

I'll believe that when Earth climate models are actually capable of predicting Earth climate. The climate models currently being used are filled with biases that assume the earth is warming due to rising CO2 levels when in fact it is not, and therefore the models incorporate all kinds of feedback loops to reinforce the invalid hypothesis thereby making them totally inaccurate. The proof of any model is its ability to prove past events. Does the model accurately depict what is actually happening and what has already happened? The answer to that is a resounding no. Therefore the current models are of no use for predicting future events on this planet or any other.

Aug 09, 2016
I have no idea why people feel passionate about climate change. Every other science is strictly regulated by statistics and scientific papers; with the facts published and guided by the majority of the evidence. That gave us pretty much every modern invention yet created, but the same system can't be used to predict how significantly altering a planets atmosphere changes overall weather patterns?

Aug 09, 2016

Because part of the purpose of the Venus Pioneer mission was to create evidence which undermined Immanuel Velikovsky's claim that Venus is a new planet. Velikovsky's accurate prediction for Venus' heat based upon mythological scholarship worried the scientific community, and they sought to prove Carl Sagan's Super-Greenhouse Theory was the cause.


Why would they need evidence to undermine Velikovsky? He's never been taken seriously by anybody who is remotely scientifically literate. In either astronomy or archaeology. As somebody on another science forum aptly put it: "Velikovsky wasn't just a common or garden moron; he was a world class moron."
And why quote an article from 1980? There have been more recent studies of Venus, such as ESA's Venus Express mission.

Aug 09, 2016
For anybody interested, it is possible to look at the cratering seen on a planet to estimate the age of the surface. Venus comes out at about 500 ma. (http://onlinelibr...6/full). Now, when did Velikovsky have his interplanetary billiards happening? Couple of weeks ago last Tuesday, wasn't it?
Like I said, nobody takes Velikovsky seriously. For good reason. His belief system has everything to do with (misinterpreted) mythology, and nothing to do with science. Ditto that of his followers.
Here is a scathing piece by C. Leroy Ellenberger, a former Velikovsky insider, who finally saw the light and started applying his grey matter to the subject: http://www69.zipp...ile.html
'An Antidote to Velikovsky' (.rar file; no password).

Aug 09, 2016
Sci-fi GIGO. With zero basis in reality they arrive at a conclusion that cannot support the current conditions, yet somehow believe they have created something worthy to publish. Laughable yet also sad to say the least.


monkey goracle cantdrive sock still can't drive, however trolling he can, i guess everyone has their own unique talents ;)

Aug 09, 2016
@Chris_Reeve
"We'd be wise to go back to basics on Venus and ask from where does the heat come from? The Venus Pioneer mission revealed that it was coming from the surface, not the Venus sky, and that the planet was not in thermal equilibrium. It's releasing 15% more heat than it is taking in."

The heat being taken in is calculated using the solar constant model and sunlight, but there is no sunlight outside of the atmosphere. All light and heat are rather created in the atmosphere by solar radiation, not sunlight, interacting with the constituents of the atmosphere, and most of the heat is created near or at the surface, as experiments on Earth have shown. The heating of the upper atmosphere by sunlight was found to be negligible. Without an atmosphere, the only heat created is within the top few microns of the surface, and is measured by spectra and then using Weins law to arrive at a thermal temperature. The Sun emits no visible light or heat.

Aug 09, 2016
Re: "Why would they need evidence to undermine Velikovsky? He's never been taken seriously by anybody who is remotely scientifically literate."

Perhaps because numerous ancient cultures record the arrival of Venus in a cometary form. Not everybody feels so comfortable with replacing the first stories that mankind ever told -- which were fundamentally about catastrophe -- with computer simulations designed to prove an overly-simplistic narrative about what we imagine happened, based upon a textbook theory for how planets formed which has been repeatedly undermined by observations of foreign planetary systems.

Re: "And why quote an article from 1980? There have been more recent studies of Venus, such as ESA's Venus Express mission."

Because the fact that the data was corrected will still be true in 2016. In fact, it will still be true even in the year 3000.

Aug 09, 2016
@Solon, you've taken what is really a very simple problem and made it more complex.

The problem is this:

Yes, we can perform all sorts of calculations which effectively reverse-engineer what MIGHT have occurred there.

But, just as models are not reality, such calculations are not history.

History is rich, complex, unexpected, probably littered with transient events, and the idea that all of the interesting stuff happens in the distant past is simply an assumption which theory-making benefits from.

At the end of the day, Venus' surface is very much free of craters. It's been resurfaced. Further, analysis of isotopes plainly suggests that Venus can indeed be argued to be young.

We cannot and should not ignore history simply because a calculation can be produced. Anybody who wants to propose that is actually misunderstanding the relationship between theory and history.

Aug 09, 2016
@HA,
Sorry, but take your rubbish to a mythology forum. It is not science. Nobody scientifically literate believes in Velikovsky's nonsense. There are radar maps of Venus' surface on which the craters are bleeding obvious. It is far, far older than would be possible according to the fruit loop Velikovsky. Read the paper I linked. Do you think they just assumed 500 ma from a dreamed up figure? Read the Ellenberger piece on Velikovsky. It is a very good assessment of his total lack of scientific literacy. ALL evidence says he was wrong. Anybody with a brain cell can see he was wrong.

Aug 09, 2016
@HA,
At the end of the day, Venus' surface is very much free of craters. It's been resurfaced. Further, analysis of isotopes plainly suggests that Venus can indeed be argued to be young.


Says who? Link please. To anything in a scientific paper that says Venus surface is younger than ~ 500 ma. Simply stating something as fact is not scientific evidence. Let's see who wrote this, and where they wrote it.


Aug 09, 2016
If as some say, venus was a comet that arrived in the memory of humans as such, then it would have come from the depths of space and be an iceball. If it was 'more than a comet' like a captured planet then where is the hit and run star that lost a planet or two or would we know. Velikovskiy once had a story published in the old Science Digest when it was still the size of Reader's Digest that claimed that the moons of Mars were hollow, manufactured satellites made of aluminum.

Another had a better idea: that Venus arrived in our system about 500 million years ago! About 250 MYA was the 'great dying', probably caused by a huge meteor strike maybe in the Pacific or in ancient Australia of on some continent since subducted under another plate. That rang the planet like a bell, and the contra coup injury to the crust, per Michael Ramfino of City Univ of NYC, gave us the Siberian traps. It also split Pangaea in two. Much more, like our System is a shooting gallery, really.

Aug 09, 2016
Perhaps because numerous ancient cultures record the arrival of Venus in a cometary form. Not everybody feels so comfortable with replacing the first stories that mankind ever told -- which were fundamentally about catastrophe -- with computer simulations designed to prove an overly-simplistic narrative about what we imagine happened, based upon a textbook theory for how planets formed which has been repeatedly undermined by observations of foreign planetary systems.


What a load of tosh! So evidence that can be used to estimate the age of planetary surfaces elsewhere, is not allowed on Venus because a pillock like Velikovsky misinterprets a bunch of ancient stuff, which, frankly, could be interpreted in numerous ways.

Aug 09, 2016
@Osiris,
The Siberian Traps may well have been implicated in the Permian mass extinction. It may even have been precipitated by an impact. Venus, however, was precisely where it is now. It does not need to be invoked for anything that happened on Earth.

Aug 09, 2016
Just for the hard of thinking:
" Magellan has revealed an ensemble of impact craters on Venus that is unique in many important ways. We have compiled a data base describing the 842 craters on 89 % of Venus' surface mapped through orbit 2578"

http://onlinelibr...246/full

So, not exactly crater free, is it?

Aug 09, 2016
500MYA was also given as the time elapsed since Venus resurfaced. A large meteor hit could do that, or a middlin' asteroid. A really BIG one could also slow Venus' rotation to a crawl with the right kind of tangental strike in opposition to its roration. It could even cause retrograde rotation, like Uranus. It gets hit 500MYA...did we get hit as well and we have not discovered the smoking gun yet or maybe we have and the discoverer is afraid to take heat for a mistake on less than slam dunk evidence? WE got hit 250MYA....multiples of the 'Grand Year' when our system completes its rotation about Milky way that our Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy remnant that we are a remnant of orbits with. Something in the galaxy keeps hitting us every 60(10*6) Years. We should find out cuz in a million or so years that something may return. Makes me wonder about the 'Theia' that collided with us to make the moon. That, 4.5GYA is a multiple of 240-250 MYA too!!

Aug 09, 2016

cantdrive85 1.5 /5 (13) 9 hours ago
Sci-fi GIGO


Pretty rich coming from "Data in, Garbage out". You're incapable of generating a veridical statement. Projection, obviously. Reading comments on here is like hearing the group session in a mental hospital.

Aug 09, 2016
A plot of where Hannes' non-existent craters are on Venus, from Magellan radar data:
http://www.imageb...99074058

Aug 09, 2016
Imagine if some 1000 years from now people go to venus and find houses with insects and a woman sitting there (Reload). Biomega style. Seems upsetting.

Aug 09, 2016
the purpose of the Venus Pioneer mission was to create evidence which undermined Immanuel Velikovsky's claim that Venus is a new planet.

That makes no sense at all.


@Phys 1; Why would it? :)

Aug 09, 2016
tmarksur, in 1000 years time, we could have terraformed Venus, or floated a lid in the upper atmosphere and built on top. The surface would take a bit longer, but your argument does not hold.

Aug 09, 2016
Scientists can find evidence of Roman lead smelting in Greenland ice cores. They can find no evidence of Velikovsky's science-free ramblings in those cores. Funny that.

http://www.indepe...572.html

Aug 09, 2016
@nik_2213 nono i didn't mean we will find that. This is how a famous comic called biomega starts. People go to mars after they left it for 300 years and they find some bugs and an immortal woman there, named reload. So i said imagine if we would find something similar at venus. Would be creepy.

Aug 09, 2016
Same models that "created" man-made global warming science fiction.

Aug 10, 2016
With "My grandmother is better because she said," let us return to science.

The temperature on Venus is higher because the effects plinnih force ("binary system") are larger. Earth's more distant and has an independent rotation (along similar mass) and have less of a volcano of Venus bat more than Mars that is smaller mass, and has less effect of tidal forces.

Please, without my grandmother said, your discussion of your knowledge, do not hide from other people's knowledge and ignorance.

Aug 10, 2016
@rrander
"'created'" ? Who are you quoting? Are doing a Dr Evil here?
https://www.youtu...pOrimkMY

Besides, man made global warming is an observed reality.


Indeed. In my opinion, were it possible, every idiot who thinks increased CO2 doesn't cause global warming, should spend 60 seconds in a chamber that simulates Venus' temperature and pressure. Without a spacesuit.

Aug 10, 2016
If Venus was captured wouldn't its orbit be elliptical and inclined somewhat?

Aug 10, 2016
Time. Flow rate of time orbits become less eccentric and more aligned with the equator.

Aug 10, 2016
If Venus was captured wouldn't its orbit be elliptical and inclined somewhat?


Trust me, old chap, there isn't the slightest chance it was captured. Velikovsky was a loon. An amateur mythologist, who has been dismissed out of hand by every field of study on which his nonsense impinges; archaeology, Egyptology, palaeontology, geology and, not least, astronomy.

The fact that some people still give credence to this crankery in the early 21st century is astonishing. Worthy of a scientific study itself, based on the psychology of such people.

Aug 10, 2016
Time. Flow rate of time orbits become less eccentric and more aligned with the equator.


Not in 3500 years, as Velikovsky would have us believe!

Aug 10, 2016
There is more evidence of Velikovsky's claims than there is for the tripe which got published regarding life on Venus.

Aug 10, 2016
Time. Flow rate of time orbits become less eccentric and more aligned with the equator.


I'd believe it after billion years or so... maybe

Trust me, old chap, there isn't the slightest chance it was captured. Velikovsky was a loon. An amateur mythologist, who has been dismissed out of hand by every field of study on which his nonsense impinges; archaeology, Egyptology, palaeontology, geology and, not least, astronomy.

The fact that some people still give credence to this crankery in the early 21st century is astonishing. Worthy of a scientific study itself, based on the psychology of such people.


You don't have to convince me about that one mate. It's common sense, even to a layman like me.

Aug 10, 2016
If you follow the law of attraction of matter, then 10 ^ 9 years is the blink of an eye.
I'm not and not represented by Mr. Velikovsky, the authorities we do not mean nothing, only articles with evidence, logic and universality.

Aug 11, 2016
There is more evidence of Velikovsky's claims than there is for the tripe which got published regarding life on Venus.


There is NO evidence of Velikovsky's claims! End of story. Nor Talbott's rubbish either, for that matter.
And who said there was life on Venus? Would love to read that. Not Ray Bradbury, was it?

Aug 11, 2016
Oh, look, a scientist from my alma mater!


moronic speeches about evidence and the scientific method are nothing more than hilarious examples of runaway cognitive dissonance.


Science isn't a discussion. It took millenniums of efforts from early empiricists to come up with how to use solid evidence and other examples of scientific method.


As to the article, and any simulation, playing with the parameters until a desired result is demonstrated doesn't mean the desired result is possible.


It is exactly what it means, if the model is faithful. And since they started out with Earth climate models, those are faithful in that regime and predictive in the whole regime. Having Venus Earth massed and starting out with a Hadean Earth atmosphere simplifies, and connects with earlier investigations of early Earth and its development to today.

Aug 15, 2016
Much ado about nothing.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more