Science

Vaporizing a gravitationally bound body (moon or planet for example) takes far less energy than actually destroying it.

If the Earth were to be vaporized, the vapor would still have the same mass as the original matter of the earth, and gravity would pull it back together. The gas giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn are made of gas (vapor) and they hold together just fine. To destroy a gravitationally bound body you have to scatter its mass in all directions to the point where gravity cannot pull it back together again. This takes far more energy.

If you claim otherwise you are scientifically ignorant.

Originally posted by Endless Mike
Vaporizing a gravitationally bound body (moon or planet for example) takes far less energy than actually destroying it.

If the Earth were to be vaporized, the vapor would still have the same mass as the original matter of the earth, and gravity would pull it back together. The gas giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn are made of gas (vapor) and they hold together just fine. To destroy a gravitationally bound body you have to scatter its mass in all directions to the point where gravity cannot pull it back together again. This takes far more energy.

If you claim otherwise you are scientifically ignorant.

You are correct, however, this has nothing to do with science. It is science fiction.

Gravity is science fiction?

Originally posted by Endless Mike
Gravity is science fiction?

No, vaporizing a planet is science fiction. 🙄

Originally posted by Endless Mike
Vaporizing a gravitationally bound body (moon or planet for example) takes far less energy than actually destroying it.

If the Earth were to be vaporized, the vapor would still have the same mass as the original matter of the earth, and gravity would pull it back together. The gas giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn are made of gas (vapor) and they hold together just fine. To destroy a gravitationally bound body you have to scatter its mass in all directions to the point where gravity cannot pull it back together again. This takes far more energy.

If you claim otherwise you are scientifically ignorant.

In all probablity, both Jupiter and Saturn have a solid core, but don't let that get in your way.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, vaporizing a planet is science fiction. 🙄

It's a situation that can be modeled by science, so it's science.

Gas giant planets are already made of vapor.

Supernova explosions would vaporize any planets in the system.

Originally posted by Robtard
In all probablity, both Jupiter and Saturn have a solid core, but don't let that get in your way.

That's due to the pressure of the outer layers. The gas at the center of a vaporized planet would be subject to this too.

Originally posted by Endless Mike
Vaporizing a gravitationally bound body (moon or planet for example) takes far less energy than actually destroying it.

If the Earth were to be vaporized, the vapor would still have the same mass as the original matter of the earth, and gravity would pull it back together. The gas giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn are made of gas (vapor) and they hold together just fine. To destroy a gravitationally bound body you have to scatter its mass in all directions to the point where gravity cannot pull it back together again. This takes far more energy.

If you claim otherwise you are scientifically ignorant.

Also, the heat of vaporization could conceivably imbue some molecules with enough kinetic energy, such that, some molecules would be flung out beyond gravity's reach (similar to the explanation as to why black hole activity at galactic centers is sometimes cold, sometimes hot).

But, may I ask, what is the purpose of this thread?

Originally posted by Mindship
I'm just guessing, but seems to me that the energy required to vaporize the Earth would be enough to trigger some chemical reactions in the process, wherein some mass of the Earth would be converted into energy which would not be recovered (albiet, a tiny fraction).

Also, the heat of vaporization could conceivably imbue some molecules with enough kinetic energy, such that, some molecules would be flung out beyond gravity's reach (similar to the explanation as to why black hole activity at galactic centers is sometimes cold, sometimes hot).

But, may I ask, what is the purpose of this thread?

Scattering a tiny bit of the mass is not the same as scattering all of it (which is what I'm talking about).

Someone called me stupid when I told this to them, just because they didn't believe it.

Originally posted by Endless Mike
It's a situation that can be modeled by science, so it's science.

Gas giant planets are already made of vapor.

Supernova explosions would vaporize any planets in the system.

However, a supernova would not only vaporize a planet, it would destroy it.

If you could magically tune a planet, like Earth, into vapor, the planet would expand to the point where the gravity of the planet would not be able to hold the gas together. The solar wind would blow the planet away.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, a supernova would not only vaporize a planet, it would destroy it.

If you could magically tune a planet, like Earth, into vapor, the planet would expand to the point where the gravity of the planet would not be able to hold the gas together. The solar wind would blow the planet away.

The vapor of the earth would have the same mass as the earth did originally. Gravity would hold it together.

If one should venture into an umbrella emporium with the requisite number of coins, procuring an umbrella is theoretically possible.

The coins, however, will not stop precipitation enwettening one's clothing, skin and hair.

i love how everyone is touting theory as fact.

i think there's enough hot air in this thread to vaporise the solar system entirely.

:edit: yes i know that its impossible for hot air to vaporise it, so stfu poindexter

Originally posted by Endless Mike
The vapor of the earth would have the same mass as the earth did originally. Gravity would hold it together.

No, look at what happens to a star the forms a planetary nebula.

http://seds.org/messier/planetar.html

The mass of the star does not change, but the internal pressure expands the star to the point where the outside gasses are no longer bound by gravity.

The same thing would happen to a planet if it was vaporized.

Originally posted by Schecter
i love how everyone is touting theory as fact.

i think there's enough hot air in this thread to vaporise the solar system entirely.

Do you know the difference between a scientific theory and the common use of the word "theory" (which just means hypothesis)?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, look at what happens to a star the forms a planetary nebula.

http://seds.org/messier/planetar.html

The mass of the star does not change, but the internal pressure expands the star to the point where the outside gasses are no longer bound by gravity.

The same thing would happen to a planet if it was vaporized.

That's not vaporization, that's a nuclear reaction. Planets aren't massive enough to create nuclear fusion at their cores.

Originally posted by Endless Mike
That's not vaporization, that's a nuclear reaction. Planets aren't massive enough to create nuclear fusion at their cores.

What would happen if you took a rock and vaporized it?

Originally posted by Mindship
But, may I ask, what is the purpose of this thread?

Well one of the problems that you would have if you vaporized the Moon is that many of the particles on the outer edge of the cloud would be pulled to the stronger body of mass which would be the Earth and thus adding to the mass of the Earth. While much of the cloud would merge back together some mass would be lost if not already converted to energy.

ok, so, "vaporizing" a planet is not a scientific theory. The process by which the planet is vaporized would be a theory, as would the further actions of the atoms.

There are also many problems with the "theories". 1) Initially there is no cause of the vaporization, making it impossible to say what would happen after 2) in a super nova, and vapor released from the earth would be propelled out of the solar system or could be consumed by the star. 3) In instance 1, solar winds and competing gravity from other bodies would certainly push the "vapor" around, as would any energy that was put into it to vaporize the planet. 4) Gas giants did not form from the vaporization of solid matter. 5) Diffusion would probably play a role. 6) vaporization is not defined 7) we have never witnessed anything close to vaporization anyways...

😉 Its nice when people use the word science, but lets make sure we aren't just doing so to make what we are saying sound impressive?