Talk:Volatile (astrogeology)

Hydrogen an ice?

The article claims Uranus and Neptune are classified as ice giants because they contain a substantial amount of ice, and also states that hydrogen is an ice. If H is an ice then why aren't Saturn and Jupiter classified as ice giants? Qemist (talk) 03:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Hot ice?

Why they come up with the term ice when it's 1000s of deg. C in Uranus and Neptune's interior? Why is fluid interior called ice when it's almost as hot as the surface of the sun? Uranus and Neptune has no solid surface period. No place to land, it's that simple.--Freewayguy ^{What's up?} 22:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Can anybody answer this question? For many years I have been wondering about this.--Freewayguy ^{What's up?} 02:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

The talk page is for discussion of how to improve the article (see WP:TPG). Qemist (talk) 21:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

The article somewhat tries to explain that these volatile chemicals have different boiling points, and relative to those boiling points (high or low) they are classified as either ice or gases. The term ice in this context does not strictly describe ice that we get from freezing water, but it merely describes a chemical that sort of stays "frozen" or unchanged in higher temperatures. All this then correlates to how the planet functions. Very important stuff in geology. I did not get this information on the web, I am a geology student. The article should elaborate on how ice and gases are classified in planets like Neptune and Jupiter, respectively. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.127.241 (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Confusion about what is a volatile compound

Compounds such as titanium nitride (melting point 2930 Celsius), tungsten carbide(melting point 2870 Celsius), and aluminum oxide (melting point 2072 Celsius) are not volatile compounds. So, the statement: "Examples include...all compounds of C,H,O and/or N..." is highly misleading. QuantumShadow recently put a near quote of these examples into the Colonization of the Moon article leading to the possible interpretation that Oxygen is scarce on the Moon when it is in fact more plentiful than any other single element by weight. Using only C,H,O, and N as building blocks can yield a practically infinite variety of volatile compounds, but there is still graphite consisting solely of carbon that sublimes or breaks down at some temperature over 3000 Celsius in a vacuum or inert atmosphere. Still Carbon should be considered as volatile because most atmospheres will cause it to chemically break down and dissipate as a gas at reasonably low temperatures. Oxygen and hydrogen in particular will react with carbon to form volatiles. We should think of some wording that does not promote false interpretations. - Fartherred (talk) 00:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

removed. Serendi^podous 07:24, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Volatiles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060904053400/http://yesserver.space.swri.edu/yes2000/glossary.html to http://yesserver.space.swri.edu/yes2000/glossary.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022141934/http://sio.ucsd.edu/volcano/about/volatiles.html to http://sio.ucsd.edu/volcano/about/volatiles.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

? A help request is open: http://yesserver.space.swri.edu has archived as a blank page. Replace the reason with "helped" to mark as answered.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:02, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Two substantially different topics?

I am wondering if this article is trying to cover two different subjects?

I am not sufficiently informed about planetary science to comment meaningfully about the definition of volatiles, their chemistry or physics, but in the field of geology, volatiles are central to the formation of metamorphic terranes, as well as extrusive and intrusive igneous petrology, and especially vulcanology.

On face value, the two topics, volatiles in planetary science / geology versus volatiles in metamorphic petrology, igneous petrology, volcanism and geochemistry might share some common concepts. But wouldn’t someone seeking information on the topic volatiles almost certainly be interested in one context or the other?

Can the two contexts (planetary geology and earth sciences) be split as separate articles? Or would it be more appropriate to add an introduction that outlines the nature of volatiles without contextualisation of their specific application to planetary geology or earth sciences? Are there sufficient similarities that such an introduction could be meaningful?

Needless to say, an external (ie Google) search for volatiles returns the first part of the article, which is strictly the planetary geology context. Prime Lemur (talk) 20:34, 27 June 2018 (UTC)