Sentences with phrase «lighter oxygen and nitrogen»

Phytoplankton prefer to consume nitrate with lighter oxygen and nitrogen isotopes, so they leave behind heavier isotopes; measuring these can reveal microbial activity in the environment.

Not exact matches

They become caught in powerful magnetic fields and are channeled into the upper atmosphere, where their interactions with gas particles, such as oxygen or nitrogen, set off spectacular bursts of light.

Now a report in the 26 January Physical Review Letters suggests that searing hot temperatures generated inside the bubbles drive out nitrogen and oxygen, leaving behind a stunning light show produced by the trace gas argon.

By the way, this effect is most prevalent when the particles that do the scattering are smaller than the wavelength of light, as is the case for the nitrogen and oxygen molecules in the atmosphere.

These, in turn, triggered reactions in the upper atmosphere in which oxygen and nitrogen molecules released photons of light.

With the icy planets in our solar system, «ice» refers to hydrogen molecules connected to lighter elements, such as carbon, oxygen and / or nitrogen.

«Lighter stuff like carbon and oxygen and nitrogen will get out,» says Bromm.

Also, the supernova's light spectrum shows the presence of forms of carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen atoms that are considered unprecedented.

They are particularly good at identifying the position of light atoms such as hydrogen, oxygen, carbon and nitrogen in samples.

In this sense, these particles scatter light much the same as do oxygen and nitrogen molecules.

Some of these light - element nuclei also might be produced by cosmic rays shattering atoms of carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and other elements in the interstellar medium.

Light emitted by oxygen is shown as blue, hydrogen emission is shown as green, and nitrogen emission as red lLight emitted by oxygen is shown as blue, hydrogen emission is shown as green, and nitrogen emission as red lightlight.

Light from oxygen atoms is rendered blue in this image; hydrogen is shown as green, and nitrogen as red.

Once in the atmosphere, the charged particles interact with gas particles, including nitrogen and oxygen, which triggers bursts of light.

Take a container that's transparent to infrared light and fill it with 80 % nitrogen and 20 % oxygen.

Auroral emissions typically occur at altitudes of about 100 km (60 miles) and are often green, white, or reddish in colour depending on what species (atomic oxygen, molecular oxygen, or nitrogen, respectively) is primarily emitting light.

Compare with electronic transition absorption of visible light by the electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen in the atmosphere, the real gas Air, which is what gives us our blue sky, reflection / scattering.

The example I've given is of visible light in the atmosphere being bounced around the sky, actually reflected / scattered, by the electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen which comprise c98 % of our fluid gas atmosphere.

Because AGWSF fisics is fake there is no internal coherence in it, for example: if «all electromagnetic energy is the same and all creates heat when absorbed» then AGWSF fisics doesn't have any answer to the real world physics understanding of how visible light is reflected / scattered in the atmosphere which is by real technical absorption of visible light by the electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen, hence our blue sky.

Bounced around like balls in a pinball machine by the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen when their electrons absorb the tiny bits of light and spit them back out again.

Tiny visible light is not a powerful energy, it is so weak it gets bounced around all over our sky by the electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen as they absorb and spit it out again.

But of course, when it's pointed out that not all absorption of electromagnetic radiation creates heat, for example in photosynthesis when it converts to chemical energy and not heat energy and in the atmosphere where absorption of visible light by the electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen which spit out the same non-thermal energy that went in, this is ignored.

Visible light gets absorbed by the electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen, and reflected / scattered by this.

Because the molecules in a gas are constantly moving about and colliding with each other, it is very likely that some nearby nitrogen or oxygen molecule will collide with our excited infrared - active gas molecule before it has a chance to emit its light.

Since the infrared - inactive gases don't emit infrared light, if enough absorbed energy is transferred to the nitrogen and oxygen molecules through collisions, that could theoretically increase the average energy of the air molecules, i.e., it could «heat up» the air.

pdf available here) showed that nitrogen (N2) and oxygen (O2) are totally transparent to infrared light.

I had earlier posted on refraction and reflection / scattering, what these mean, visible light gets reflected / scattered by being absorbed by the electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen in our real world atmosphere [it is therefore not «transparent» to visible as claimed in the TGE AGW energy budget..]

Water vapour, as Stephen Wilde pointed out above, is anyway lighter than air, but heated will expand more in volume becoming even less dense and rise faster, as will air itself, nitrogen and oxygen.

So, deal gas with no actual volume has nothing to expand and condense which which is how we get convection as heated real gases mainly nitrogen and oxygen and water expand becoming lighter than air and so rise which spontaneously makes colder heavier real gases sink — in the fluid medium they comprise.

Because water vapor is lighter than dry air (mostly nitrogen and oxygen), that layer of air can move upward in the attic.

The water molecules replace others, mainly nitrogen (76 %) and oxygen (23 %), which makes moist air lighter than dry air; the replaced molecules have to go somewhere else (up).