Visitors as of Sept. 3rd, 2025
Note: I am attempted to compile the needed information to establish at least the plausibility that during the early stages of life's development billions of years ago, the fast spinning Earth caused the Sun's three phases/"moments" (dawn- noon- dusk) to irradiate photo-sensitive building blocks of life in a three-patterned strobe-like manner, and thus set the influence as well as constraint for a triplet code to emerge, as well as marking the time for the eventual fusion thereof. One of the problems in collating the information is the differing assessments of how fast the length of a day was 3.5 to 4 billion years ago and how it changed over time so that biological milestones can be accurately correlated with the speed of the Earth's rotation and what effect that would have on the Sun's three different periods of overlapping irradiation (that we label as dawn, noon, dusk.
On this page in order of appearance:
- Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk: [1]
- Opera browser information:
- Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk occurring 3.5 billion years ago: [2]
- Opera browser information claims the rate of rotation 3.5 billion years ago was 12 hours in duration.
- What visual effects might dawn or dusk have had 3.5 billion years ago?: [3]
- This was a question posed by the AI as a supplement to the foregoing query. It too is a narrative of guess work.
- Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk: [4]
- Microsoft Edge Co-pilot:
- Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk occurring 3.5 billion years ago: [5]
- This query was also applied to the Copilot of Microsoft Edge
- How fast was the Earth spinning... (Several time periods are listed): [6]
- Tripartite Aspects of biological, chemical, radiological and nuclear weapons: [7]
[1] Internet query: "Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk"
AI (overview) response from Opera browser:Solar irradiation is highest at noon and significantly lower at dawn and dusk due to the sun's angle relative to the Earth and the amount of atmosphere the sunlight must pass through.
Noon: Maximum irradiationAt solar noon, the sun is at its highest point in the sky.
- Direct angle: The sun's rays strike the Earth's surface at the most direct and perpendicular angle. This concentrates the energy over the smallest possible area, maximizing the intensity.
- Minimal atmospheric interference: The perpendicular angle means sunlight travels through the least amount of the Earth's atmosphere. Less atmosphere means less scattering, reflection, and absorption of the solar energy by molecules, clouds, and dust.
Dawn and Dusk: Lower irradiation
- During sunrise and sunset, the sun is low on the horizon, causing a much lower intensity of irradiation.
- Oblique angle: The sun's rays hit the Earth's surface at a shallow angle. This spreads the same amount of solar energy over a much larger area, which reduces the overall intensity at any single point.
- Increased atmospheric path: Sunlight must travel through a greater thickness of the atmosphere to reach the surface. This prolonged path leads to a high degree of scattering and absorption.
Additional effects of atmospheric scattering
The atmospheric scattering at dawn and dusk also affects the color of sunlight, creating the "golden hour" effect.
- Rayleigh scattering: This process scatters shorter, higher-energy wavelengths, such as blue and violet light, more easily than longer, lower-energy wavelengths.
- Color changes: With more atmosphere to pass through at dawn and dusk, the blue light is scattered away, allowing the longer-wavelength red, orange, and yellow light to pass through more directly.
- At noon: When the sun is high in the sky, less scattering occurs. The full spectrum of light reaches the surface, making the sun appear white.
Deeper Dive option
AI response: Solar irradiation is highest at noon and significantly lower at dawn and dusk due to two main factors: the length of the path that sunlight travels through the atmosphere and the angle at which it strikes Earth's surface.
Summary of effects
- Atmospheric scattering: The longer journey through the atmosphere at dawn and dusk causes more scattering of shorter-wavelength blue light. This reduces the overall intensity of the light that reaches the surface and creates the characteristic red and orange colors seen at sunrise and sunset.
- Direct vs. diffuse radiation: Solar radiation that arrives directly from the sun is called direct beam radiation. Radiation that is scattered by the atmosphere is called diffuse radiation. At noon, direct beam radiation is at its maximum. At dawn and dusk, the light is more diffuse.
- Energy density: The oblique angle at dawn and dusk spreads the same amount of solar energy over a larger area of the surface compared to the concentrated, direct angle at noon. This lower energy density at the beginning and end of the day is why the sun feels less intense during these times
[2] Internet query: "Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk occurring 3.5 billion years ago"
AI (overview) response: Approximately 3.5 billion years ago, the differences in solar irradiation between dawn, noon, and dusk were more significant and harsher than today. The planet experienced a faster rotation, a fainter but more active Sun, and a radically different atmosphere, all of which affected the amount and type of radiation reaching Earth's surface throughout the day.
Summary of irradiation environments
- Dawn and Dusk: Shorter and more rapid transitions between night and day due to a 12-hour day cycle. Harsher UV exposure than today, though somewhat mitigated by the longer atmospheric path.
- Noon: A period of intense and biologically damaging UV irradiation, as the atmosphere provided no effective ozone shielding. While the Sun was less bright overall, the unfiltered high-energy radiation was a major environmental factor.
Deeper Dive option
AI response: Around 3.5 billion years ago, the differences in solar irradiation between dawn, noon, and dusk were more extreme than today due to a shorter day, fainter sun, and distinct atmospheric composition.
Key differencesShorter day
- Day length: Earth's rotation was much faster, making a day roughly 12 hours long. This meant that the transition from darkness to peak sunlight (dawn to noon) and back (noon to dusk) happened in just 6 hours, resulting in more rapid changes in irradiation.
- Faster sun movement: The sun would have appeared to move much faster across the sky. The more rapid apparent movement would have led to a quicker increase and decrease in the solar angle, causing a steeper change in irradiation throughout the day compared to the modern 24-hour cycle.
Fainter sun
- Reduced luminosity: The sun was younger and less luminous, emitting only about 70–80% of its present-day energy.
- Higher UV output: While the overall luminosity was lower, the young, more active sun emitted significantly higher levels of extreme ultraviolet (UV) and X-ray radiation.
Different atmosphere
- No ozone layer: Earth's early atmosphere contained virtually no oxygen and, as a result, no protective ozone layer. This meant that much of the sun's potent, high-energy UV radiation was not filtered and reached the surface, especially at noon.
- High UV exposure: Surface radiation levels, particularly in the highly damaging 200–300 nm wavelength range, were orders of magnitude higher than they are today. Any life near the surface would have been exposed to this radiation, which could have been damaging but also provided energy for early chemical reactions.
- High greenhouse gas levels: To compensate for the faint sun, the atmosphere likely had high concentrations of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane. The specific scattering effects of this atmospheric composition are not as well-documented, but the lack of an ozone layer had the most significant impact on the daily radiation cycle.
Dawn vs. Noon vs. Dusk
The shorter day and different atmosphere would have had a drastic effect on the daily radiation pattern:
- Noon: The intensity of irradiation would have peaked sharply at noon, with extremely high levels of UV radiation reaching the surface. The shorter day length would have also meant the period of peak irradiation was briefer than it is today.
- Dawn and dusk: Similar to today, the sun's rays would have had to pass through more of the atmosphere, reducing total irradiation at dawn and dusk. However, the exact color and scattering effects are speculative due to the vastly different atmospheric composition. The high concentrations of methane or other haze-forming compounds might have created different visual and filtering effects compared to modern sunsets.
[3] Internet query: "What visual effects might dawn or dusk have had 3.5 billion years ago?"
AI (overview) response: During the Archean Eon, around 3.5 billion years ago, the visual effects of dawn and dusk would have been strikingly different from today due to Earth's atmospheric composition. With an atmosphere dominated by methane, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen, the sky would have likely appeared orange or reddish-brown.
Early atmosphere- Methane haze: The high concentration of methane reacting with intense ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun would have created a hydrocarbon haze. This would scatter light differently than today's nitrogen- and oxygen-rich atmosphere, likely giving the sky a thick, orange tint similar to the conditions on Saturn's moon, Titan.
- Reduced Rayleigh scattering: The modern blue sky is a result of Rayleigh scattering, where molecules predominantly scatter blue light. Without significant free oxygen, this effect would have been absent or much less pronounced. Instead, Mie scattering from the larger hydrocarbon particles in the haze would have scattered all wavelengths more equally, contributing to a muted, hazy appearance.
Visual effects at dawn and dusk
The interplay of the short day, fainter sun, and methane haze would have created dramatic and alien visual effects during sunrise and sunset:
- Overall color: Instead of a blue sky transitioning to warm oranges and reds, the sky would have shifted from a murky, reddish-brown haze to a deeper, more intensely orange or reddish hue as the sun dipped toward the horizon.
- Lack of contrast: Due to the thick haze, the colors of dawn and dusk would likely have been less brilliant and distinct than the vivid sunsets we see today. The scattering caused by the haze would have muted the contrast.
- Appearance from space: A visitor from space would have seen Earth shrouded in a reddish-brown haze, making it difficult to see the surface.
- Appearance from the ground: From the ground, the sun would have been filtered by the thick haze, appearing as a more diffused orange or red disk. The colors would have been more consistent across the sky rather than concentrating around the sun.
Other visual factors
- Greenish oceans: The oceans were not yet oxygenated and contained high levels of dissolved iron. This would have given them a greenish hue, creating a striking color contrast against the orange sky.
- Barren landscape: The land would have been rocky and barren, with no plant life. Early continents were forming and volcanic activity would have been frequent, creating a raw, desolate landscape.
- Faster transitions: The shorter 12-hour day meant that dawn and dusk would have occurred over a shorter period than today, with the sky brightening and darkening more rapidly.
[4] Internet query (Microsoft Edge Copilotc): "Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk:"
AI (overview) response: Solar irradiation—the power of sunlight reaching Earth's surface—varies dramatically throughout the day due to the Sun's position in the sky and the atmosphere's filtering effects. Here's how it differs at dawn, noon, and dusk:
[5] Internet query: "Irradiation differences between dawn, noon, and dusk occurring 3.5 billion years ago"
Microsoft Edge Copilot response: Around 3.5 billion years ago, during the Archean Eon, the Sun was about 70–75% as luminous as it is today2. However, the young Earth’s surface still received substantial solar radiation, especially in the ultraviolet (UV) range, due to a thinner and less protective atmosphere. Here's how irradiation likely varied across the day:
[6] Internet query: "How fast was the earth spinning..."
AI and general internet responses for three browsers:
Data collected via browser search on Sept. 19, 2025
| Time period | MS Edge Copilot | Duck Duck Go | Opera AI |
| 4.5 Billion years ago | approx. 6 hours | 6 hours approx | 6 to 10 hours |
| 3.5 billon years ago | About 20.11 hours per day/night cycle | approx. 19 hours | approx. 12 hours |
| 3 billions years ago | 14 to 16 hours | 19 hours | 12 hours |
| 2.5 billion years ago | 17 hours | 19 hours | 17-19 |
| 2 billion years ago | 19.5 hours | 19 | 19.5 |
| 1.5 Billion years ago | 19.5 | 19.5 | 9 to 19 |
| 1 Billion years ago | 19.5 | 18.7 | 19 |
| 750 million years ago | 19.5 | 21 hours | 22 hours long |
| 500 million years ago | 22 | 22 | 20 hours 40 minutes |
| 250 million years ago | 19.5 | 23 | 23 |
| 100 million years ago | 23 | 22 | 22.5 - 23 |
| 50 million years ago | 23.5 | 22.82 | approx. 23 hours |
The value I use is 1 billion years = 6 hours:
| Time period | 1 billion = 6 hours |
| 4.5 Billion years ago | .75 hours |
| 4 Billion years ago | 1.5 hours |
| 3.5 billon years ago | 3 hours |
| 3 billions years ago | 6 hours |
| 2.5 billion years ago | 9 hours |
| 2 billion years ago | 12 hours |
| 1.5 Billion years ago | 15 hours |
| 1 Billion years ago | 18 hours |
| 750 million years ago | 19.5 hours |
| 500 million years ago | 21 hours |
| 250 million years ago | 23.5 hours |
| Present day | 23 hrs 56 min. 4.09 sec |
[7] Internet query: "Tripartite Aspects of biological, chemical, radiological and nuclear weapons"
AI (overview) response: While a standard "tripartite" framework is not a common classification for biological, chemical, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weapons, their nature and impact can be analyzed across three fundamental aspects: their scientific and technical characteristics, their strategic and tactical military applications, and their overarching legal, ethical, and political implications. This tripartite analysis provides a comprehensive understanding of why these weapons are considered distinct and particularly dangerous.
Scientific and technical aspects1. Biological weapons
- Agent and delivery: Biological weapons use living organisms (bacteria, viruses, fungi) or toxins to cause harm. A weapon system consists of a weaponized agent and a delivery mechanism, which can be as complex as a missile warhead or as simple as an aerosol spray.
- Unique characteristics: Unlike other CBRN agents, biological agents can reproduce in a host, leading to potentially contagious, self-propagating epidemics. They have incubation periods, meaning an attack may not be immediately obvious.
- Technological advances: Modern biotechnology, including genetic engineering, has made it possible to create agents with increased virulence, resistance, and stability, further complicating detection and treatment.
2. Chemical weapons
- Types of agents: These are manufactured toxic chemicals that poison or incapacitate people, animals, or plants. Categories include nerve agents (e.g., Sarin, VX), blister agents (e.g., mustard gas), choking agents (e.g., phosgene), and blood agents (e.g., hydrogen cyanide).
- Dual-use dilemma: Many chemicals used in these weapons have legitimate industrial purposes, posing a non-proliferation challenge. Components can be stored separately and combined just before use.
- Dissemination: Chemical agents are most effectively deployed as aerosols, but can also contaminate food and water supplies. Their effects can be either persistent or nonpersistent.
3. Radiological weapons (dirty bombs)
- Principle of operation: A radiological dispersal device (RDD) or "dirty bomb" uses a conventional explosive to spread radioactive material over an area. The goal is to contaminate facilities and instill fear, rather than to cause mass casualties from radiation poisoning.
- Material source: The radioactive materials can be stolen from sources used in industry, medicine, or research. The actual explosive blast would likely cause more immediate harm than the dispersed radiation.
- Radiation types: The health risk depends on the type of radiation emitted. Alpha particles are dangerous if inhaled or ingested, while gamma rays have the greatest penetrating power and pose the most significant external exposure risk.
4. Nuclear weapons
- Core mechanics: Nuclear weapons harness the energy from nuclear reactions, either fission (splitting atoms) or fusion (combining atoms), to create a massive explosion. A fission bomb requires a critical mass of fissile material (e.g., enriched uranium or plutonium).
- Primary effects: A nuclear detonation releases energy in four destructive forms: blast waves, intense heat and light (thermal radiation), initial nuclear radiation, and residual nuclear radiation (fallout).
- Thermonuclear (fusion) weapons: More powerful than simple fission bombs, these use a fission reaction to trigger a fusion reaction, which can produce yields in the megaton range.
Strategic and tactical aspects
1. Military and terrorist use
- Bioweapons: Their long incubation periods and potential for widespread fear make them attractive for assassination, sabotage, and large-scale terror attacks, as seen with historical programs. Their effects can be difficult to differentiate from naturally occurring diseases.
- Chemical weapons: These are effective for area denial and producing mass casualties. Tactical uses include clearing enemy trenches or areas, while terrorist groups have also successfully deployed them, as in the 1995 Tokyo subway attack.
- Radiological weapons: These are primarily psychological weapons designed to cause widespread panic, disrupt society, and contaminate infrastructure, rather than inflict large-scale immediate deaths. They are a "weapon of terror" more than a conventional military weapon.
- Nuclear weapons: These are used as the ultimate deterrent due to their immense destructive power. Nuclear strategy centers on the principle of mutually assured destruction (MAD), making their actual use unlikely for fear of devastating retaliation.
2. Asymmetric warfare
- Proliferation risk: Biological and chemical weapons are relatively cheap and easy to produce compared to nuclear arms, making them more accessible to less powerful states and non-state terrorist groups.
- Difficult detection: Biological agents are particularly hard to detect, as production facilities can be small and mobile, and the initial outbreak may be mistaken for a natural event. This enhances the element of surprise for an attacker.
- Vulnerability of modern society: The use of CBRN agents exploits the vulnerabilities of modern infrastructure, such as interconnected transportation, dense populations, and dependence on uninterrupted food and water supplies.
Legal, ethical, and political aspects
1. Prohibitions and arms control
- Biological Weapons Convention (BWC): Prohibits the development, production, stockpiling, and acquisition of biological weapons. While establishing a strong international norm, it lacks a formal verification regime.
- Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC): Bans the development, production, use, and transfer of chemical weapons and mandates the destruction of stockpiles. It includes a rigorous verification system with international inspections.
- Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): Aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology while promoting cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
2. Ethical dilemmas
- Civilian harm: CBRN weapons, especially biological and nuclear, inevitably target or cause widespread harm to civilian populations. This violates the jus in bello (justice in war) principle of distinguishing between combatants and civilians.
- Dual-use research: Scientific research with potential dual-use applications—serving both peaceful and military purposes—presents a major ethical challenge. This is particularly acute in biodefense, where research intended to develop defenses against bio-agents could also be used to create new weapons.
- Misinformation and fear: Radiological and biological attacks can induce mass panic and psychological trauma that might cause more disruption than the physical effects. Managing the public response and credible communication is therefore a critical ethical and strategic consideration.
3. Accountability and enforcement
Challenges: The relative ease of production and concealment, particularly for biological and chemical agents, makes attribution and enforcement difficult.
- Terrorism: Proliferation to non-state actors, like terrorists, further complicates accountability. The international community has responded with Security Council resolutions, such as UNSC 1540, to compel states to implement controls against such proliferation.
- International pressure: Condemnation and sanctions by the international community represent a key political aspect of deterring the use of CBRN weapons.
>
Page initially created: Tuesday, Sept. 2nd, 2025... 3:51 AM
Initial posting: Sunday, Sept. 21st, 2025... 2:18 PM