If E=MC^2, then is planet earth getting heavier as plants absorb the energy given off by the sun?

Question

If you come to the conclusion that the earth is getting heavier, would the earth's orbit change as a result?

Energy is being converted to mass as the plant grows. We release that energy, when we burn it. I know what E=MC^2 is...do you?

Answer 1

Very interesting.

Yes, it is true that energy from the sun's radiation can be converted into matter, but this process doesn't happen on earth. Instead, the extra energy from the sun shows up as heat trapped in the atmosphere. As a result you see rise in temperatures across the global.

The only process that remotely transforms sun's radiation to matter is photosynthesis. Even that doesn't directly convert sun's energy into matter. It helps transform already existing matter into various different forms.

To answer you're second question, no earth is not getting any heavier because of what I just explained above. But the sun is losing MASS. That would indeed change the orbit of the planet. By how much is anyone's guess.

Answer 2

Energy, is not being converted to matter in this case. On Earth, solar energy is used by organisms like plants to convert pre-existing matter from one form to another, but energy is NOT being converted into mass. Energy stays energy and matter stays matter in this case.

Like was said by someone else, the formula E=mc^2 is used to determine how much energy would be given off if a given amount of matter is annihilated.

Answer 3

I believe the earth is radiating heat /energy at relatively the same rate it is receiving it from the sun.

Also, we do receive some matter from the sun in the form of space dust. Mostly in the form of hydrogen and helium nuclei stripped of their electrons. We also lose some hydrogen atoms to space since they can reach escape velocity on their own due to their small size and speed.

The only observed example I know of of converting energy into matter happens when a very large photon passes close by a very large nucleus (like uranium) and it can create an electron, a positron (anti-matter) and a residual photon. The positron will eventually find another electron and they will annihilate each other creating a very small "black hole" with some residual photons escaping again. The net effect is that no new matter is created and energy is conserved. This event has been observed in nuclear reactors and is the closest I have heard of an energy to matter conversion. (I was a reactor operator in the US Navy.)

Answer 4

Well, consider, we're absorbing EM radiation in the form of IR, x-rays, UV rays, gamma rays and othercosmic rays. BUT we're also re-radiating a lot of that back into space (mostly IR, I'm guessing; as Earth heats up, it can't hold all the energy, and some of it is lost as heat energy). Lately more research has been done on lightning, and we even see large jets of electrical discharge INTO SPACE (Called sprites and blue jets).

So, we're probably exporting about as much as we're importing, thus maintaining equilibrium electrically and kinetically with the environment surrounding earth (which is not a "pure" vacuum as astrophysicists like to deluge themselves, or else there would be no electrical jets into space, at least they wouldn't make sense under an electricall neutral model).

http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Lightning
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040927earth-capacitor.htm

More:
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Plasma+cosmology
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/electric+universe+concept
http://www.thunderbolts.info
http://www.holoscience.com
http://plasmacosmology.net

Long story short, we are most likely maintaining equilibrium through passive processes (external heating produces IR which radiates back into space) and active processes (lightning to space, volcanoes may be from electrical imbalances as well since they're sometimes associated with auroras, "lightning" in the pyroclastic cloud and some other electrical phenomena, etc. etc.).

So, I wouldn't say the Earth is getting heavier, really... Besides which we'd have to have more "mass" not just extra energy.

Answer 5

Plants do not change energy to mass. They take the energy from the sun to create complex molecules from simple ones. Since complex molecules can store more energy, this is efficient for the plants. Nevertheless, the molecules still are of the same mass as its components.

Was it you who asked about whether burning stuff will cause the earth to lose mass? If you are, look at my answer there. The principle would be similar. Other stuff also in there.

Answer 6

Every object in universe emits Energy in form of radiations (Stefan's Law) and even earth does that. More over the light particles do transfer momentum to earth but it doesn't mean that they increase the mass of earth beacuse that energy is used to increase the earth surface temperature instead of getting converted to mass.

Conversion of light energy to mass particle has not been reported yet. It is only used to calculate the mass and hence the momentum that will be transfered due to light.

Answer 7

*chuckles*
1. It takes a LOT of energy to equal a little mass.
2. Earth is re-radiating that captured energy back to the sky -- eventually. So, this isn't the way the Earth would be gaining mass.

Answer 8

Not quite--plants are using light in the process of photosynthesis to make energy for themselves. They're converting energy in the form of light into chemical energy, sugar, that they can use. They produce plant mass from nutrients taken up from the soil. For this reason, total mass never changes--it just changes form.

Answer 9

Are the plants turning into energy?? No...

E = MC^2 is the equation to find out how much energy you get when converted from mass...

Plants are matter, which has mass. It stays matter even when it dies, so you can't apply that equation...

Answer 10

Although the earth absorbs the energy as heat energy, it does not convert it to matter, and is also radiating heat back into space.