# Water-Land Ratio of Habitable Planets

Just ran across this interesting article.

I don’t put too much stock into computer simulations of things that are still poorly understood. Indeed, there are plenty of open questions about whether even the basic mechanics of planet formation are understood.

But this caught my eye:

For planets to be habitable, they must orbit stars within the ‘habitable zone’ where it is not too hot or too cold

Yes, we know that, but this next part is less often discussed:

In addition, recent studies on habitability of planets suggest that the water-land ratio must be similar to the Earth. That is, the water mass fraction should not be far from that of the Earth’s (~0.01wt%): planets with too much water (> 1 wt%)-“ocean planets”-lead to an unstable climate and lack of nutrient supply; and water-poor planets like Venus -“dune planets”-become too arid for inhabiting.

## 6 Replies to “Water-Land Ratio of Habitable Planets”

1. 1
Cross says:

Fine tuning deniers, please note. BTW, we still don’t know where that exact amount of water came from.

Cheers

2. 2
bornagain77 says:

Of related interest:

How much water is there on, in, and above the Earth?
Excerpt: Do you notice that “tiny” bubble over Atlanta, Georgia? That one represents fresh water in all the lakes and rivers on the planet, and most of the water people and life of earth need every day comes from these surface-water sources. The volume of this sphere is about 22,339 mi3 (93,113 km3). The diameter of this sphere is about 34.9 miles (56.2 kilometers).
http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html

also of note:

“If the earth were slightly larger, it of course would have slightly larger gravity, which has interesting implications. It’s not just that a person who weighs 150 pounds would weigh more. It’s that if the earth had slightly more gravity than it now has, methane and ammonia gas, which have molecular weights of sixteen and seventeen, respectfully, would remain close to our surface. Since we cannot breathe methane and ammonia, which are toxic, we would die. More to the point, we would have never come into existence in the first place.,,,
On the other hand, if earth were just a tiny bit smaller and had a bit less gravity, water vapor, which has a molecular weight of 18, would not stay down here close to the planet’s surface but would instead dissipate into the planets atmosphere. Obviously, without water we could not exist.”
Eric Metaxas – Miracles – pages 38-39

Rains On Different Worlds – info graphic (sulfuric acid, methane, etc..)
http://tehgeektive.com/wp-cont.....lanets.jpg

The Cold Trap: How It Works – Michael Denton – May 10, 2014
Excerpt: As water vapor ascends in the atmosphere, it cools and condenses out, forming clouds and rain and snow and falling back to the Earth. This process becomes very intense at the so-called tropopause (17-10 km above sea level) where air temperatures reach -80°C and all remaining water in the atmosphere is frozen out. The air in the layer of the atmosphere above the troposphere in the stratosphere (extending up to 50 km above mean sea level) is absolutely dry, containing oxygen, nitrogen, some CO and the other atmospheric gases, but virtually no H2O molecules.,,,
,,,above 80-100 km, atoms and molecules are subject to intense ionizing radiation. If water ascended to this level it would be photo-dissociated into hydrogen and oxygen and, the hydrogen being very light, lost into space. Over a relatively short geological period all the water and oceans would be evaporated and the world uninhabitable.,,,
Oxygen, having a boiling point of -183°C, has no such problems ascending through the tropopause cold trap into the stratosphere. As it does, it becomes subject to more and more intense ionizing radiation. However this leads,, to the formation of ozone (O3). This forms a protective layer in the atmosphere above the tropopause, perfectly placed just above the cold trap and preventing any ionizing radiation in the far UV region from reaching the H2O molecules at the tropopause and in the troposphere below.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....85441.html

A Stable Atmosphere: Another Reason Our Planet Is Special – Daniel Bakken – January 20, 2015
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....92851.html

Multiple ‘Anomalous’ life enabling properties of water
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/anmlies.html

Water’s remarkable capabilities – December 2010 – Peer Reviewed
Excerpt: All these traits are contained in a simple molecule of only three atoms. One of the most difficult tasks for an engineer is to design for multiple criteria at once. … Satisfying all these criteria in one simple design is an engineering marvel. Also, the design process goes very deep since many characteristics would necessarily be changed if one were to alter fundamental physical properties such as the strong nuclear force or the size of the electron.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....42211.html

Water’s quantum weirdness makes life possible – October 2011
Excerpt: WATER’S life-giving properties exist on a knife-edge. It turns out that life as we know it relies on a fortuitous, but incredibly delicate, balance of quantum forces.,,, They found that the hydrogen-oxygen bonds were slightly longer than the deuterium-oxygen ones, which is what you would expect if quantum uncertainty was affecting water’s structure. “No one has ever really measured that before,” says Benmore.
We are used to the idea that the cosmos’s physical constants are fine-tuned for life. Now it seems water’s quantum forces can be added to this “just right” list.
http://www.newscientist.com/ar.....sible.html

Protein Folding: One Picture Per Millisecond Illuminates The Process – 2008
Excerpt: The RUB-chemists initiated the folding process and then monitored the course of events. It turned out that within less than ten milliseconds, the motions of the water network were altered as well as the protein itself being restructured. “These two processes practically take place simultaneously“, Prof. Havenith-Newen states, “they are strongly correlated.“ These observations support the yet controversial suggestion that water plays a fundamental role in protein folding, and thus in protein function, and does not stay passive.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....075610.htm

3. 3
Mung says:

It is simply not possible to overestimate the importance of water to life.

4. 4
bb says:

“It is simply not possible to overestimate the importance of water to life.” – and our planet to be just the way that it is.

Psalm 8 (ESV) This poem/song is still an incredible work after centuries of working out cosmology.

1
O Lord, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!
You have set your glory above the heavens.

2
Out of the mouth of babies and infants,
you have established strength because of your foes,
to still the enemy and the avenger.

3
the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,
4
what is man that you are mindful of him,
and the son of man that you care for him?

5
Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings
and crowned him with glory and honor.
6
You have given him dominion over the works of your hands;
you have put all things under his feet,
7
all sheep and oxen,
and also the beasts of the field,
8
the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea,
whatever passes along the paths of the seas.

9
O Lord, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!

5. 5
Eric Anderson says:

ba77, thanks for the great quotes.

We sure got lucky . . . all those particles bumping into each other for billions of years . . . amazing what it produced! 🙂

6. 6
bornagain77 says:

Yes Eric Anderson, lucky, lucky, us! 🙂

But perhaps I can be forgiven for thinking my existence is attributable to more than just extreme luck?

As Eric Metaxas put the situation in regards to the fine-tuning of so many different parameters in his best selling book ‘Miracles’:

“Reason and science compels us to see what previous generations could not: that our existence is an outrageous and astonishing miracle, one so startlingly and perhaps so disturbingly miraculous that it makes any miracle like the parting of the Red Sea pale in such insignificance that it almost becomes unworthy of our consideration, as though it were something done easily by a child, half-asleep. It is something to which the most truly human response is some combination of terror and wonder, of ancient awe, and childhood joy.”
Eric Metaxas – Miracles – pages 55-56

Of related interest to the Red Sea miracle:

Patterns of Evidence: Exodus
http://www.patternsofevidence.com/en/#

Patterns of Evidence: Exodus – video trailer

The Exodus Case – Dr Lennart Moller & the Caldwell’s Interview

Exodus of Israel from Egypt – REVEALED – Hard Evidence in Red Sea – video (starting at approx. 57 minute mark)
https://youtu.be/UnMwW-GAKvA?t=3463

Jericho Unearthed – Bible Confirmed Once Again – video

There was/is a controversy over the Carbon dating of the destruction of Jericho. Dr. Wood responds to that controversy here:

“My dating of the destruction of Jericho to ca. 1400 B.C. is based on pottery, which, in turn, is based on Egyptian chronology. Jericho is just one example of the discrepancy between historical and C14 dates for the second millennium B.C. C14 dates are consistently 100–150 years earlier than historical dates.,,, Because of the inconsistencies and uncertainties of C14 dating, most archaeologists prefer historical dates over C14 dates.”
http://www.biblearchaeology.or.....px#Article

Here is a gem from a Bible skeptic who thought it unfair for a certain archeologist to use the Bible as a guide in her archeological discovery of King David’s palace since, according to him, “she would certainly find that building”,,,::

Ronny Reich of Haifa University treats archaeologist Eilat Mazar of the Hebrew University “dismissively” and accuses her of acting “unethically.” What did she do? She used the Bible as a guide to where to excavate.
Let me unpack this: As Eilat read the Bible, it seemed to indicate just where King David’s palace might be buried in the City of David—at least, it did to her. On this basis, she decided to dig there.
This was highly improper and unscientific, according to Ronny. When he heard that Eilat was using reasoning like this to find King David’s palace, he knew immediately that, proceeding in this way, “she would certainly find that building”
http://www.uncommondescent.com.....-it-makes/

With such twisted reasoning as that, as to what is fair and unfair in Biblical archeology, I’m sure that Bible skeptic must also be a neo-Darwinist.