mercredi 24 décembre 2008

Photosynthesis and a veritable global warming.

Photosynthesis and a veritable global warming.
With a new set of rules for photosynthesis, how will become a global warming, especially the pole ice cap. Let's revise photosynthesis.
Water molecule is split not through a redox reaction but according to the manner of radicals. That is, no electric charge is involved, and all the output is exothermic.
For a water molecule, to be exothermic, here, it signifies that there is a change of the phase. Liquid to gaseous. That increases the pressure in the xylem, which will open the stomata. At full stomata rotation, a compound of root water, and new oxygen, and new water molecules will get out, faster, a lot faster than evaporation; and that stream would be visible, translucent to visible, at the highest altitude (snowflake in winter).
Not only that put some clouds in the sky but it also do a pressure that maintains the structures, say that they are included in a balloon (as there is no name I know). It is as with a balloon with holes. If you do not want your balloon be deflated then you have to put air continually.
There is lost of air molecules, at the poles, in favour of the cosmos, so the planet has to produce continually by photosynthesis the gases that eventually escape to the cosmos.
But not only gases are extracted from the planet, there is the heat.
A planet do lose heat... as for example, the moon next step will be to break apart in pieces; then the moon will form a ring around our planet; Mars too will explode into fragments under the cold of the cosmos, as the sun, as the whole galaxy once the energy is spent. While the planet is losing heat and matter, the clouds are supposed to bring snow to the pole north. The clouds that are pushed by the winds fail to send the precipitations over the ice cap.Vegetation does produce a stream of new molecules of water and oxygen mixed with fresh water, no coined word for that yet; with the rotating planet, there is a reaction called wind. That wind will push away the clouds; and that up to the pole north, as new vegetation will bring heat, and water, and ozone, so generating wind.
3O2, or 2O3, why the oxygen formed as single unit atom, combining in that stream would not form ozone?
In the context of exothermic output, globally the warming of the planet would signify that the output total of the planet photosynthesis is increasing. That signifies more clouds and heat and ozone. The Arctic Ocean will eventually be heated. But for now that ocean is colder than zero Celsius, and as the ice do melt at 0° Celsius, the ice cap will accumulate its precipitations up to that moment; by the time the ocean water temperature reach the critical point, the ice cap would have to be huge. So a huge polar ice cap would be for a real global warming! What is happening everywhere with the glaciers is a lack of snow, drought. Unless there is rain as precipitation, you can't say that a glacier is melting. A glacier is a system, with input-output. There must be snow or rain otherwise it is drought. Rain or drought will have a similar effect. Which one is the responsible of glacier melting? For me, as I am able to do, the ice cap is thin because worldwide 'desertification' is proceeding. It seems that worldwide, they fail with forestry. Otherwise there will be no inundation, or drought or tornado; and the tornadoes and hurricanes, probably, will be higher in altitude. Dwarf trees are the trees of tomorrow.
The Niger and a Jew near the Dead Sea have had some success with the desert. They succeeded where big cash-enterprise had failed. Would they get majestic forest in the future, I doubt.
What is the solution: to prime a forest with thinning, trimming, tree-seed planting and prescribed burning.

The cosmos will continue to get its share of heat without consideration. That! That is sure and certain.