Special qualities of Ganges River

shermangeneral wrote:Well then Sam you have refuted your own argument that the high O2 content is due to the glacial origin.

So back to the original question, why is the O2 level (of the Ganges River) 25 times the average level?

Sherman, let me ask you a question?

Do you know what the average O2 level for rivers is? ...... HUH ...... HUH?

Is it 0.001%, ..... 0.037%, ...... 0.925%, .... 3.06%, ....... 15.69%, ...... WHAT?

Shermmy, you don't have the faintest frigging idea of what it is, ..... do you.

The only thing ...... you think you know ...... is that the Ganges River O2 content is 25 times higher than the average.

Now Sherman, apparently you think I refuted my own argument based on the following statement from my above post, to wit:

The oxygen content of glacial meltwaters should therefore be below saturation with respect for the atmosphere

Shermmy baby, I'll ignore your "refuting statement" out of respect for your ignorance in knowing what "below saturation" means.

Sherm, the "oxygen saturation" of water can range from 0.0% to 100+%(H2O2). And that percentage is DEPENDANT upon the pressure(altitude) on and the temperature of the water.

High pressure + low temperature = high percentage O2 possible.
Low pressure + high temperature = low percentage O2

Thus Sherman, the "average O2 content of river water" is only the "average" for that section ....... of that river ....... itself. Duh, because flowing river water continues to decrease in elevation(pressure) and increase in temperature the farther downstream it flows. Water originating at the "head" of the Elk River starts out "oxygen rich and cold" and the trout love it, ...... but by the time it gets to Charleston it is "oxygen poorer and warmer" and the carp and catfish thrive in it, .... BUT NO TROUT.

So Sherman, you can now "pick" something you think I misstated, but first, .... read the following:

Oxygen concentrations are much higher in air, which is about 21% oxygen, than in water, which is a tiny fraction of 1 percent oxygen. Where the air and water meet, this tremendous difference in concentration causes oxygen molecules in the air to dissolve into the water. More oxygen dissolves into water when wind stirs the water; as the waves create more surface area, more diffusion can occur.

(Sherman, when the "ICE COLD" glacial melt water rushes thousands of feet down a mountainside, creating "white water", more surface area is exposed than even a hurricane could expose.)

Another physical process that affects DO (dissouved oxygen) concentrations is the relationship between water temperature and gas saturation. Cold water can hold more of any gas, in this case oxygen, than warmer water. Warmer water becomes "saturated" (meaning all it can hold) more easily with oxygen. As water becomes warmer it can hold less and less DO. So, during the summer months in the warmer top portion of a lake, the total amount of oxygen present may be limited by temperature. If the water becomes too warm, even if 100% saturated, O2 levels may be suboptimal for many species of trout.

http://waterontheweb.org/under/waterquality/oxygen.html

Well Sam if your goal in this discussion is to convince me I don't know much about the topic you are waging a needless war.

I said in the beginning I don't know why the river has the properties it is purported to have.

I was just curious and wanted to learn more about it.

It does seem like the water from a glacier would be more pure and clean.

Have you ever noticed how clean the air smells when you have a real good snow?

I can even smell the snow approaching sometimes.

It smells blue to me.

And sometimes there is a similar clean smell after a summer thunderstorm.

I am told it could be from ozone.... http://www.lenntech.com/faqozone.htm

It smells blue to me.

Ozone.

Thanks Terry I had heard that about the ozone connection vis-a-vis thunderstorms so I googled and got that link and when I added that link I notice you had already been here and posted.

So Sam now you see why I posted earlier that Terry RC and Keith would have much to add to this discussion.

(However one more thing Terry because you have whetted my appetite. Before when I told people the clean smell of a snow smelled blue they thought I was crazy. You seem to understand that based on your post so what is the connection or correlation between the color blue and the snowsmell? Could it be that somehow my brain is playing a trick on me or is there actually something in the air?)

Also do you believe in pheromones and so-called "body chemistry"?

I have always been super-sensitive that way, so it could be that my sensors sometimes pick up signals that are underneath other people's radar so to speak.

But I can definitely smell snow as well as thunderstorms, and the snow smells more blue.

shermangeneral wrote:

TerryRC wrote:It smells blue to me.

Ozone.

Thanks Terry I had heard that about the ozone connection vis-a-vis thunderstorms so I googled and got that link and when I added that link I notice you had already been here and posted.

(from your link) But ozone is also produced at thunderstorms and waterfalls. The extreme high voltages attended with thunderstorms produce ozone from oxygen. The special “fresh, clean, spring rain” smell is a result from nature-produced ozone.

So Sam now you see why I posted earlier that Terry RC and Keith would have much to add to this discussion.

Well now Sherm, ...... are you sure, ...... really sure, ........ that special “fresh, clean, spring rain” smell is a result of lightning-produced ozone?

I mean like ya don't often get very many "lightning strikes" very close by you, most are 5, 10, 20+ miles far away from you. So how does that ozone get from there to you so you can "smell it"?

And Sherm, can you smell it after a night time thunderstorm, ..... or a day time thunderstorm?

And more important, what about that “fresh, clean, spring rain smell" you can smell after a quick-like heavy rain storm that doesn't have any lightning and thunder associated with it? No lightning, ..... no ozone creation, ..... so whatta ya smelling then?

Oh, by the way Sherman, I did find this NASA report, but I'm not sure I understand it.

During summertime ozone near the Earth's surface forms in most major U.S. cities when sunlight and heat mix with car exhaust and other pollution, causing health officials to issue "ozone alerts." But in other parts of the world, such as the tropical Atlantic, this low level ozone appears to originate naturally in ways that have left scientists puzzled. Now, NASA-funded scientists using four satellites can tell where low level ozone pollution comes from and whether it was manmade or natural.

Atmospheric scientist David Edwards and his colleagues from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and collaborators in Canada and Europe have studied this problem using satellite data from three NASA spacecraft, one from the European Space Agency (ESA), and a computer model from NCAR. They were surprised to find that a greater amount of near-surface ozone over the tropical Atlantic develops as a result of lightning instead of agricultural and fossil fuel burning.

Fires create smoke and carbon monoxide, and lightning creates nitrogen oxides (NOx). All of these come together with other unstable compounds in a chemical soup, and sunlight helps trigger the reaction that helps form ozone.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/0617eyes.html

Those fellows seem to have pretty good credentials .......... so maybe I better study their "findings" a mite more.



.

Well Sam there you go again attributing things to me that I did not say.

shermangeneral wrote:Well Sam there you go again attributing things to me that I did not say.

And what would that have been, ShermanGeneral?

,