-
I am researching something for fan fiction.
-
In the movie "Sunshine" the sun is shutting down. The proposed reason is that a "Q-ball", which in theoretical physics is a non-topologic soliton has entered the sun.
-
Here is Dr. Brian Cox's explanation: (According to the Sloan Science and Film website)
First posited some 20 years ago by Harvard physicist Sidney Coleman, a Q-Ball is a super-heavy object that could have formed during the Big Bang and would have the ability to break down ordinary matter made of protons and neutrons. Normally, protons are stable because they are the lightest particles to carry a conserved quantum number called the baryon number, and there is no way for them to get rid of this number and decay. But Q-balls, made from tightly packed supersymmetric particles that can accommodate a baryon number at lesser energetic cost than a proton, allow the proton to disintegrate, while the baryon number of the Q-ball increases. Q-Balls, says Dr. Cox, "can be pictured as giant agglomerations of supersymmetric particles that could, if they drifted into the heart of a star, eat away like a cancer, eventually destroying the star from within."
So protons, one of the building blocks of atoms, have a stable baryon number that cannot go any lower. They are stable and cannot be broken down further, unless they are brought into contact, theoretically, with a q-ball, which is a structure that is capable of having a lower baryon number than a proton. Think of how positive and negative numbers work. If you have a +1 and a -1, and you bring them together, you get a 0, right? Imagine that the proton has a baryon number of +1. And the q-ball is made of particles that each have a -.5. That q-ball begins to break down the protons, which in turn break down the atoms that are being fused inside the star. This would result in the star's fusion process slowing, losing energy, and eventually stopping altogether.
-
If q-balls exist at all, they were created during the Big Bang, and have existed as part of the universe ever since."
-
I need to know - How much was the solar energy reaching earth's surface reduced by the Q-ball in the sun? Reject the idea that the q-ball would create massive radiation.
-
Life on earth was possible, but most of the earth was snowed in, but plants were still able to grown in greenhouses to feed humanity.
-
Give me a range of answers with plenty of math and diagrams.
To calculate the reduction in solar energy reaching Earth's surface due to the Q-ball in the Sun, I need to clarify a few assumptions:
- Do you want to assume a specific timescale over which the Sun's energy output declines (e.g., decades, centuries)?
- Should we assume the Sun's total luminosity is reduced evenly, or do you prefer a specific reduction curve (e.g., linear, exponential)?
- What is the approximate equilibrium temperature you envision for Earth under this scenario?
- Do you have a target solar constant (energy per square meter per second at Earth’s distance) you’d like to reach?
Let me know these details, and I will provide calculations, ranges, and diagrams accordingly!
no timescale, luminosity is reduced evenly,
research and see at what temperature would
allow a percentage of normal winter survivable
animals and plants to exist. if it is too
hard to figure out lets assume 30 degrees
farenheit over the surface and no target solar constant
ChatGPT
- I’m gathering info on how a Q-ball in the Sun, causing steady luminosity decrease, would affect Earth's global temperature and ecosystems.
Searched for Sun luminosity and Earth temperature ChatGPT
-
I determined that reducing the Sun's luminosity to achieve a global average temperature of -1°C involves using the Stefan-Boltzmann law to calculate the required reduction in solar constant.
-
I determined that a 0.795 reduction in solar luminosity equates to a 20.5% decrease, potentially leading to severe climate effects like expanded ice coverage and further cooling.
Favicon
- Read scied.ucar.edu
ChatGPT
-
Starting with a rough idea of cooling, aiming for an average -1°C. Highlighting key reductions and their effects, considering solar dimming and feedback.
-
Mapping out the effects of drastic solar dimming, likely triggering worldwide glaciation and ecosystem upheaval. Winter-hardy plants might endure in controlled conditions, with equatorial regions exhibiting milder conditions.
-
Searched for reduction in Sun luminosity and Earth temperature ChatGPT
-
I’m pulling together the sun's luminosity, which is approximately 3.828 x 10^26 W.
Favicon
- Read en.wikipedia.org
ChatGPT
- Considering Wikipedia or NASA for solar luminosity.
Favicon
- Read reddit.com
ChatGPT
-
I'm calculating the relationship between changes in luminosity and temperature, noting that a 4% reduction in luminosity causes about a 1% decrease in temperature.
-
Searched for Earth temperature drop and solar luminosity reduction ChatGPT
-
I’m working through a NASA GSFC document on "Global Warming and Sun's Evolving Luminosity," suspecting it might contain essential numbers or formulas.
Favicon
- Read spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov
ChatGPT
-
I'm trying to estimate how a 20% drop in solar luminosity might lower Earth's temperature to around 241K, considering Venus-like greenhouse effects.
-
I'm exploring the impact of a 20% decrease in solar luminosity to achieve a stable -1°C Earth temperature, suggesting extensive ice coverage, reduced water vapor, and potential greenhouse agriculture.
-
Considering the impacts of a 20% drop in solar luminosity, I’m examining how Earth's equator might stay above freezing, preserving moisture and some species, while other regions face significant climate shifts.
-
I’m working through mathematical methods like Stefan-Boltzmann for energy balance and considering actual data and calculations to estimate the solar luminosity reduction needed to achieve a stable global temperature.
-
Searched for last glacial maximum temperature drop and survival Favicon
-
Read news.ucar.edu
ChatGPT
- Thinking through how reducing the Sun's total luminosity to achieve ~30°F would mimic glacial conditions, considering climate and ecosystem impacts, and referencing the last glacial maximum for adaptation insights.
Favicon
- Read climate.gov
ChatGPT
- I'm thinking about whether to include NOAA data or skip it. Reddit and Wikipedia seem sufficient for the formula and luminosity values. This approach might streamline the process.
Favicon
- Read en.wikipedia.org
ChatGPT
-
I’m looking at how a 30% dimmer Sun with high greenhouse gases historically kept Earth warm. This makes me think about how a 20% drop could affect current global temperatures.
-
Searched for faint young sun and 70% luminosity ChatGPT
-
OK, let's see. When the sun was 30% dimmer, Earth would freeze, but life might exist because of this dimness, according to new research.
Favicon
- Read quantamagazine.org
ChatGPT
-
I'm noting how solar dimming, particularly a 20% reduction, could lead to Earth cooling to about -1°C, preventing the complete freeze seen in more extreme scenarios. This aligns with Stefan-Boltzmann law and energy balance calculations.
-
I'm focusing on selecting two or three significant points, urging us to proceed with writing the explanation.
I will determine the reduction in solar energy reaching Earth's surface due to the Q-ball in the Sun, ensuring that Earth's temperature stabilizes around 30°F (-1°C). This includes calculations on the necessary reduction in solar luminosity and its effects on Earth's climate, along with a range of possible values. I will also analyze the survivability of winter-resilient plants and animals under these conditions. I'll provide math and diagrams once the analysis is complete.
Scenario Overview: We consider a hypothetical situation where a Q-ball (an exotic hypothetical object) embedded in the Sun causes a steady decline in the Sun’s energy output. The goal is to cool Earth’s average surface temperature to around 30 °F (≈ –1 °C), down from its current ~59 °F (~15 °C), while still allowing survival of winter-hardy plants and animals. Below we calculate how much the Sun’s luminosity must decrease to achieve this temperature, explore a range of possible reductions (with equivalent energy outputs), and assess the climate and ecological impacts of such a dimmed Sun. All calculations assume a roughly steady state (equilibrium) after the luminosity change, and we use basic physics (Stefan–Boltzmann law and Earth’s energy balance) to estimate the effects.
Earth’s global temperature is maintained by a balance between incoming solar energy and outgoing heat (infrared) radiation. In equilibrium, Earth’s temperature (T) is related to the Sun’s luminosity (L) approximately by the Stefan–Boltzmann law:
-
Current Earth conditions: The Sun’s present total luminosity is about
$L_{\odot} = 3.828 \times 10^{26}$ watts (Solar luminosity - Wikipedia). Earth’s average surface temperature is roughly 288 K (15 °C or 59 °F). - Target conditions: We want Earth’s average temperature about 272 K (–1 °C or ~30 °F), which is ~16 K lower than today. This is roughly a 5.5% decrease in absolute temperature (since 16/288 ≈ 0.0555).
Using the
Solving for the new luminosity fraction:
Plugging in
This suggests Earth would need only ~80% of the Sun’s current luminosity to reach an average temperature around –1 °C. In other words, about a 20% reduction in total solar output is required. Mathematically:
-
$L_{\text{new}} \approx 0.80,L_{\odot} \approx 0.80 \times 3.828\times10^{26},\text{W} \approx 3.06\times10^{26}$ W. -
Reduction in luminosity
$\Delta L \approx 0.20,L_{\odot} \approx 7.7\times10^{25}$ W.
To double-check: a 4% drop in luminosity would cool Earth by only ~1% (≈3 K) (Earth's temperature change if the sun were to lose 1% of its mass. : r/AskPhysics). Achieving a ~16 K drop (≈5.5%) in temperature indeed needs on the order of 4–5 times that luminosity decrease (around 20% total), consistent with our calculation above.
Impact on solar irradiance: The Sun’s brightness at Earth (solar constant) is about 1361 W/m² currently. With a 20% dimming, it would fall to roughly 1,089 W/m², significantly reducing the energy Earth receives. After accounting for Earth’s spherical geometry and average reflectivity (albedo ~0.30), the globally averaged absorbed solar flux would drop from ~238 W/m² to around 190 W/m². Such a large energy deficit would cool the planet until outgoing infrared radiation matches this lower input. In equilibrium, Earth’s effective radiating temperature (the temperature needed to emit 190 W/m² to space) would be on the order of 240–245 K (about –30 °C). The surface, with some greenhouse effect, could stabilize near 272 K (–1 °C) as intended, though this assumes the atmosphere still provides a moderate warming effect.
Because of uncertainties in how factors like cloud cover, ice extent, and greenhouse gases respond, the exact luminosity reduction needed could vary. We can consider a range of solar dimming scenarios and their effects:
-
Slight Dimming (10% reduction): Luminosity
90% of current (3.45×10^26 W). Earth’s average temperature might drop to roughly 280–281 K (~7 °C or 45 °F). This ~8 °C cooling is comparable to a severe ice age. (For comparison, during the last glacial maximum the global average was about 46 °F (8 °C), ~6 °C colder than today (Scientists nail down average temperature of last ice age | NCAR & UCAR News).) A 10% drop is large enough to expand polar ice and cool mid-latitudes, but many regions would remain above freezing part of the year. -
Moderate Dimming (15–20% reduction): Luminosity
80–85% of current (3.1–3.25×10^26 W). This is the range required to hit ~30 °F globally. At 15% dimming, predicted average ~276–277 K (~3 °C or 37 °F). At 20% dimming, as calculated, ~272 K (–1 °C) becomes the global mean. This is a severe cooling (~15 °C drop) that would make Earth barely above freezing on average. Large ice sheets would likely cover much of the surface, but the goal scenario assumes the cooling stabilizes here (avoiding a full runaway freeze). -
Extreme Dimming (25–30% reduction): Luminosity
70–75% of current (2.7–2.9×10^26 W). Earth’s average temperature could plummet to 260–268 K (–13 °C to –5 °C) under these conditions. For example, a 30% drop (to 70% brightness) might yield a global mean around 266–268 K (≈ –7 °C) (The Sun Was Dimmer When Earth Formed. How Did Life Emerge? | Quanta Magazine). This is colder than any recent ice age – likely an icebound Earth. (In fact, research on the “faint young Sun” ~4 billion years ago indicates that if the Sun were ~30% dimmer, modern Earth would average around –7 °C and be completely frozen over (The Sun Was Dimmer When Earth Formed. How Did Life Emerge? | Quanta Magazine).) Such a large reduction would probably trigger a “Snowball Earth” scenario where oceans freeze over globally. Only extreme measures (like very high greenhouse gas levels or geothermal heating) could prevent an ice-covered planet in that case.
Energy scale: Each percentage drop in solar luminosity corresponds to a huge energy decrease. For context, a 1% luminosity decrease is about
Achieving –1 °C global average means fundamentally altering Earth’s climate into a much colder state. Even if done gradually, a ~15 °C drop would have sweeping impacts:
-
Glacial Expansion: Expect a dramatic increase in ice and snow cover. Polar ice caps and mountain glaciers would expand toward lower latitudes. Year-round snowpack could extend well into what are currently temperate regions. With more of Earth’s surface covered in bright snow/ice, global albedo would rise, reflecting even more sunlight and reinforcing the cooling (a positive feedback loop). This feedback means the climate could overshoot the cooling if not carefully stabilized – a risk for runaway glaciation. The target of –1 °C suggests a fine line: enough cooling to approach global freezing, but not so much that Earth becomes a permanent snowball.
-
Temperature Distribution: A ~–1 °C global mean implies most regions are colder than freezing for much of the year. The tropics might remain just warm enough to avoid permanent ice. For instance, equatorial areas could average perhaps 10–15 °C (50–59 °F) in this scenario (down from ~25 °C now), while high latitudes could average far below freezing (–30 °C or lower). Seasonal swings would still occur, but even summers would be cooler than today’s, and winters in mid/high latitudes would be extremely harsh (colder than present polar winters in many places).
-
Atmospheric Changes: Colder air holds less moisture, so the water cycle would slow. Expect more arid conditions in many areas (cold deserts), and less rainfall overall. Lower humidity and increased ice cover could reduce cloud cover in some regions but increase it in others (e.g. more low cloud/fog over ice). Greenhouse gas levels might also adjust – e.g. colder oceans absorb more CO₂ – potentially reducing the atmospheric CO₂ and weakening the greenhouse effect further. The reduced water vapor (a powerful greenhouse gas) would significantly weaken the atmospheric warming effect. Overall, Earth’s greenhouse blanket thins out in the cold, meaning the 33 K gap between surface temperature and effective radiation temperature would shrink. (This is why a dimmer Sun leads to such a big surface cooling – the atmosphere’s heat-trapping ability diminishes as water vapor and clouds decrease.)
-
Climate Patterns: With a smaller equator-to-pole temperature gradient (if the whole planet is cold), global wind and weather patterns would shift. The jet streams could become stronger and more southerly as polar air masses expand. Extreme weather might lessen in some ways (fewer thunderstorms or hurricanes in the weakly heated tropics), but winter storms could be more intense across mid-latitudes. The ocean circulation might slow down under extensive ice cover, and deep ocean water could become isolated beneath surface ice.
-
Ecosystem Impacts: Such a cold Earth would resemble an extreme Ice Age. Most ecosystems we know would collapse or drastically shift toward cold-tolerant forms. Habitable areas shrink mainly to lower latitudes and perhaps some coastal refuges. Large portions of continents would be under ice sheets or permafrost, eliminating current forests, grasslands, and agriculture in those regions. Only tundra and boreal-steppe type ecosystems could persist in subpolar zones that remain ice-free. Many plant species would not survive the perennial frost; winter-hardy plants would dominate the landscape. For example, hardy conifers, mosses, lichens, and alpine shrubs could survive in regions that have short, cool summers. Deciduous trees and tropical plants would largely die out except possibly in small equatorial pockets or human-maintained greenhouses.
-
Surviving Flora: The plants most likely to survive outdoors would be those adapted to present-day taiga and tundra climates. Think of species that endure long, freezing winters and brief summers: spruce, pine, and fir trees, arctic poppies, dwarf birches, and hardy grasses/sedges. Even these would struggle if soil is frozen year-round (permafrost), so only areas with some summer thaw (e.g. near the equator or geothermal hotspots) could support active plant growth. With much of the sun’s energy gone, photosynthesis rates would be lower, slowing plant growth. Some cold-adapted algae might persist in the oceans (even under seasonal sea ice) and in meltwater pools, providing a minimal base for the food web.
-
Surviving Fauna: Animals would face extreme challenges. Many species would go extinct as their habitats disappear. The survivors would be those adapted to cold climates, similar to today’s polar or high-mountain fauna. For instance, polar bears, Arctic foxes, penguins, seals, cold-water fish, and reindeer/caribou are examples of animals with traits suited to freezing conditions. These species (and analogous ones across the world) could extend their range as formerly temperate areas turn cold. However, they’d also need food – which depends on the diminished plant and marine life. Large herbivores like musk oxen or deer could graze on tundra vegetation in areas that still produce seasonal plant growth. Predators would follow the herbivores. In the oceans, species like krill, cod, and icefish that thrive in polar seas might spread. Biodiversity would drop significantly, with ecosystems simplified into short food chains mostly based on detritus, cold-tolerant algae, and lichens.
-
Human Adaptation: Humans and large animals could only survive with technology and planning. Agriculture in the open would fail in most regions (short growing seasons, frequent frosts). To feed populations, greenhouses and controlled-environment farms would be crucial. These would likely cluster in areas with the most sunlight (the tropics) or near geothermal/volcanic regions providing extra heat. For example, farming could continue in climate-controlled domes or underground facilities, using artificial lighting or the limited sunlight. Energy demands for heating shelters and greenhouses would skyrocket in this colder world. (Ironically, the reduced solar input means less renewable solar energy available, so societies might turn to geothermal, nuclear, or other power sources to make up the difference.) Ensuring at least pockets of habitable land would be key – likely near the equator or coastal areas where ocean water (if not fully frozen) moderates the climate slightly.
-
Comparison to past ice ages: The closest natural analog would be the Last Glacial Maximum (~20,000 years ago). At that time, global temperatures were about 6 °C below today and ice sheets covered much of North America, Europe, and Asia (Scientists nail down average temperature of last ice age | NCAR & UCAR News). Yet, even in that frigid climate (global average ~8 °C (Scientists nail down average temperature of last ice age | NCAR & UCAR News)), many cold-adapted plants and animals survived – for example, woolly mammoths and steppe bison roamed ice-free parts of Eurasia, and hardy shrublands spread over tundra. Our scenario is roughly 2–3 times colder than the last ice age, but it suggests that some life would persist: mainly species that can handle persistent cold, along with whatever organisms humans actively support. The fact that life survived past glaciations – and even the extreme “Snowball Earth” episodes hundreds of millions of years ago – indicates that life can endure prolonged global cold, albeit in a much-reduced, precarious state.
To ensure winter-hardy plants and animals can survive in a –1 °C average world, careful management and selection would be needed:
-
Greenhouse Agriculture: As mentioned, cultivating crops in greenhouses (or indoor farms) would be vital. These structures can trap what little solar heat is available and protect plants from frost. Some sunlight would still come through (even a 80% dim Sun is still a significant light source), and supplemental artificial lighting could help. Crops would likely be cold-tolerant varieties: for example, certain grains like rye or barley, root vegetables (potatoes, turnips), brassicas (kale, cabbage), etc., known to handle cold. These might be grown in climate-controlled settings with heat provided by fuel or geothermal sources. Hydroponics and vertical farming under LED lights (powered by other energy sources) could produce food as well, making human survival possible despite the harsh conditions outside.
-
Biodomes and Sheltered Ecosystems: For preserving some fauna and flora, humans might create refuges – e.g. biodomes or fenced reserves in milder microclimates – where an artificial spring/summer is maintained. This could allow some mid-latitude species to survive in captivity or semi-wild in pockets. Otherwise, wildlife would largely consist of species that can live on tundra and in cold oceans. Managed relocation might move certain hardy animals to the remaining habitable zones. For example, one could imagine reindeer herds in Central America’s highlands (turned cold), or polar bears hunting along the ice edges much further south than today. Such ecological reshuffling would be drastic, and many interdependent species would be lost, but a selection of hardy life forms could persist.
-
Maintaining Biodiversity: In the long term, to prevent total collapse of ecosystems, humans may need to intervene to support food chains. This might include feeding wildlife through winter, breeding programs for endangered cold-tolerant species, and possibly genetic engineering to improve cold resistance. The ocean’s role is crucial too: if equatorial oceans remain partly unfrozen, marine life could continue and provide food (fishing of cold-water species). Life in ice-covered oceans can survive under the ice (as occurs in today’s Antarctic Ocean), so ensuring some ocean areas don’t freeze solid year-round would be important for global oxygen and food production by plankton.
In summary, reducing the Sun’s luminosity by on the order of 20% would likely achieve the desired ~30 °F global temperature (Earth's temperature change if the sun were to lose 1% of its mass. : r/AskPhysics). This corresponds to the Sun emitting about
Such a cooled Earth would experience Ice-Age-like conditions worldwide, severely challenging ecosystems. Only winter-hardy and cold-adapted species would naturally survive, predominantly in the equatorial band or marine refuges. Many plants and animals would require human help (greenhouses, shelters, artificial heat) to persist. The climate would stabilize cooler, but at the expense of biodiversity and comfort – a planet of ice and cold steppes rather than today’s diverse, warm Earth. This thought experiment underscores the delicate balance of Earth’s energy budget: even a few tens of percent change in solar input can mean the difference between a temperate habitable planet and a frozen world.
References:
- Stefan–Boltzmann law and climate sensitivity (showing ∆T ∝ ¼ ∆L): A 4% drop in Sun’s luminosity yields about a 3 K decrease in Earth’s surface temperature (Earth's temperature change if the sun were to lose 1% of its mass. : r/AskPhysics).
- Sun’s current luminosity (~3.828×10^26 W) and variability (~0.1% in 11-year cycle) (Solar luminosity - Wikipedia).
- Quanta Magazine – “The Sun Was Dimmer When Earth Formed. How Did Life Emerge?” (faint young Sun at 70% brightness would give Earth ~–7 °C and a completely frozen surface) (The Sun Was Dimmer When Earth Formed. How Did Life Emerge? | Quanta Magazine).
- NCAR/UCAR News – “Scientists nail down average temperature of last ice age” (Last Glacial Maximum was ~8 °C global, ~6 °C colder than today, and cold-adapted plants/animals thrived in that climate) (Scientists nail down average temperature of last ice age | NCAR & UCAR News).