Paper detail

A Closer Earth and the Faint Young Sun Paradox: Modification of the Laws of Gravitation, or Sun/Earth Mass Losses?

Given a solar luminosity L_Ar = 0.75 L_0 at the beginning of the Archean 3.8 Gyr ago, where L_0 is the present-day one, if the heliocentric distance r of the Earth was r_Ar = 0.956 r_0, the solar irradiance would have been as large as I_Ar = 0.82 I_0. It would allowed for a liquid ocean on the terrestrial surface which, otherwise, would have been frozen, contrary to the empirical evidence. By further assuming that some physical mechanism subsequently displaced the Earth towards its current distance in such a way that the irradiance stayed substantially constant over the entire Archean from 3.8 Gyr to 2.5 Gyr ago, a relative recession rate as large as \dot r/r \simeq 3.4 x 10^-11 yr^-1 would have been required. Although such a figure is roughly of the same order of magnitude of the value of the Hubble parameter 3.8 Gyr ago H_Ar = 1.192 H_0 = 8.2 x 10^-11 yr^-1, standard general relativity rules out cosmological explanations for the hypothesized Earth' s recession rate. Instead, a class of modified theories of gravitation with nonminimal coupling between the matter and the metric naturally predicts a secular variation of the relative distance of a localized two-body system, thus yielding a potentially viable candidate to explain the putative recession of the Earth' s orbit. Another competing mechanism of classical origin which could, in principle, allow for the desired effect is the mass loss which either the Sun or the Earth itself may have experienced during the Archean. On the one hand, this implies that our planet should have lost 2% of its present mass in the form of eroded/evaporated hydrosphere which, thus, should have been two orders of magnitude larger than now. On the other hand, it is widely believed that the Sun could have lost mass at an enhanced rate due to a stronger solar wind in the past for not more than \sim 0.2-0.3 Gyr.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.