What is the thickness of the atmosphere?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The thickness of Earth's atmosphere can be estimated using diffusive equilibrium principles, leading to a rough estimate of approximately 10^5 meters, although the actual thickness is closer to 10^4 meters. The calculations involve setting the difference in chemical potential to zero, incorporating gravitational and internal potentials, and using the ideal gas law. A significant factor in the discrepancy is the underestimation of the mass of air molecules by a factor of six. Various methods, including kinetic energy calculations and pressure balance assessments, yield consistent estimates around 9 km for atmospheric height.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermal equilibrium concepts
  • Familiarity with diffusive equilibrium principles
  • Knowledge of chemical potential in thermodynamics
  • Basic grasp of ideal gas law and molecular mass
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the concept of gravitational potential in thermodynamics
  • Learn about the ideal gas law and its applications in atmospheric science
  • Investigate kinetic energy calculations for gas molecules
  • Research the relationship between pressure differences and atmospheric stability
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in atmospheric science, physicists interested in thermodynamics, and anyone studying the principles of gas behavior in relation to gravity.

Shing
Messages
141
Reaction score
1
I was thinking of a Fermi-question: the thickness of atmosphere with diffusive equilibrium. And I estimated roughly 10^{5}m (where it should be ~10^{4}m). The difference of order of magnitude to real thickness is 1 (from Wiki).

I had a lot of fun, and I am looking for interesting ways other than chemical potential to estimate the thickness of Earth's atmosphere.

---

Basically, I started with assumptions:

- thermal equilibrium
- diffusive equilibrium

such that I can set up the difference in chemical potential is zero, that is equal to the difference in external chemical potential (gravitational potential) plus the difference in internal potential (assuming air molecular just ideal gas); mathematically:

$$\Delta\mu=0=\Delta\mu_{ext}+\Delta\mu_{int}$$

which is

$$0=\Delta\mu_{gra}+\Delta\mu_{indeal}$$

$$0=-GM_{earth}m\Big( \frac{1}{R+\Delta h} - \frac{1}{R} \Big)+k_BT\ln\Big(\frac{n_2}{n_1}\Big)$$

Setting the ratio of n_2, n_1 to be 0.1 (so I defined the height where density of air goes from unity - ground - to 0.1 as "thickness"), and m the mass of air molecular to be 10^{-26}kg, T to be 300K, then we will eventually obtain: $$\Delta h \approx 10^5m$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
You underestimate the mass of a molecule in the air by a factor 6, that leads to most of the difference.
There are many ways to get the same expression, but they all lead to good estimates.
 
mfb said:
You underestimate the mass of a molecule in the air by a factor 6
Thanks for telling me!

mfb said:
There are many ways to get the same expression, but they all lead to good estimates.
I am all ears :)
 
You can calculate the kinetic energy of a gas molecule, and see how high it can get if it moves straight up with this energy.
You can calculate the ratio of pressure difference to pressure needed to balance a pocket of gas against gravity.
And probably a few more.

They all boil down to ##h=\frac{kT}{mg} \approx 9\,km## with additional prefactors of ln(2) or similar depending on what you do.
 
I would tend to think that the atmosphere ends in the same way the heliosphere ends - i.e., where the particles in intersolar space are in equilibrium with the particles escaping Earth. Of course, Von Karman had a great definition in which a standard aircraft body would need to be going so fast to maintain altitude that it would be in orbit.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K