User talk:Serendipodous

ro-vibratinal transitions

The are three types of energy that an excited molecule can have:

1. Electronic excitation, when electrons change their state (energy is usually higher than 1 ev);
2. Vibrational excitation, when atoms of the molecule periodically oscillate relative each other (usually 0.05-1 ev, see Molecular vibration);
3. Rotational excitation, when molecule rotates (usually less than 0.01 ev, see Rotational_spectroscopy).

Each type of excitation is quantized: the energy can only assume discrete values characterized by the respective quantum numbers. There can be one or two rotational quantum numbers and 1-3 from one to infinity vibrational numbers.

When a molecule emits or absorbs a photon (or interacts with other particles) the quantum numbers change. Ro-vibrational refers to a transition when only the rotational and vibrational state of the molecule change, but electronic state remains the same. Such transitions usually lie in infrared part of the spectrum. Ruslik (talk) 15:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The simplest explanation is: when the rotation of the molecule slows it emits a photon in the microwave of submillimeter part of the spectrum—this is a purely rotational transition.

If in addition the amplitude of vibrations of the molecule decreases, this is ro-vibrational transitions. Purely vibrational transitions are always prohibited. The wavelength of ro-vibrational transitions lies in mid infrared. In auroras of giant planets this is usually H₃⁺ ion that emits ro-vibrational photons (3-4 microns). Other molecules include hydrocarbons and HD. Ro-vibratinal transitions in molecular hydrogen H₂ (like in any symmetrical two atomic molecule) are prohibited. Ruslik (talk) 09:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

How is your reading? If you want you can read some good review papers here:

• http://www.filefactory.com/file/af59fdb/n/magnetospheres_zip

Ruslik (talk) 09:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

In the above file there are papers that provide overview of all Solar System magnetospheres. They also contain simpler explanations of some things as compared to Jupiter book. Ruslik (talk) 10:06, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I also found this excellent article: http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/hill.html. Ruslik (talk) 13:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I will try to do photoshoping at the weekend. Have you downloaded the file above? (I mean magnetospheres.zip) Ruslik (talk) 19:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I made the image. Ruslik (talk) 14:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you write something about Van Allen and his role in the discovery of the radiation belts? You seem to know more about this than me. Ruslik (talk) 14:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikibreak

I hope your wikibreak will not be very long. I definitely need you! Without you the Solar System project will be seriously impaired. I also had my share of edit-warring on Ganymede. Ruslik (talk) 12:53, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Serendipodous! Please come back soon, I didn't mean for discussion on the Pluto image to be like that. I have had a great time working with you on articles. Fotaun (talk) 18:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I apologize, again, for our discussion about the LPI image. In a few years, hopefully, the New Horizons probe will give us new data (or at least more theories) about Pluto's interior. Fotaun (talk) 02:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

my webpage

I find Wikipedia Discussion pages and disputes and disagreements and whatever else practically impossible to navigate and I don,t know if this is where I' m supposed to send the reply.

Thanks for your message and sorry it has taken me so long but i haven't checked my inbox until recently. There are several points you make that I would like to address. You are confusing planet with major planet as most people do and this point is elaborated on. I do make mention of moons as planets. Also, I do quote Seneca in comets being considered as planets. As well, 1 of the definitions does indeed include dust particles as planets. And I have corrected the error about the year of discovery for Pluto. There were several other errors I noticed which i corrected.

My website has been revamped and a condensed version of Sizing up the Planets has been accepted for publication.

--Bpell (talk) 04:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Who the hell are you to boss people around?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Planetary_habitability&diff=next&oldid=259823040
What business do you have telling people where to edit and where they can't, you sick fuck. 205.200.19.57 (talk)