4.1 Article

Hydrogen Cyanide Production due to Mid-Size Impacts in a Redox-Neutral N2-Rich Atmosphere

期刊

ORIGINS OF LIFE AND EVOLUTION OF BIOSPHERES
卷 43, 期 3, 页码 221-245

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11084-013-9339-0

关键词

Hydrogen cyanide; Redox-neutral atmosphere; Hypervelocity impacts; Aerodynamic ablation; Mass spectrometry; Emission spectroscopy

类别

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion Science
  2. Institute of Space and Astronautical Science of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, as a collaborative program of the Space Plasma Experiment.
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23340168, 25871212, 23103003, 23403015] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cyanide compounds are amongst the most important molecules of the origin of life. Here, we demonstrate the importance of mid-size (0.1-1 km in diameter) hence frequent meteoritic impacts to the cyanide inventory on the early Earth. Subsequent aerodynamic ablation and chemical reactions with the ambient atmosphere after oblique impacts were investigated by both impact and laser experiments. A polycarbonate projectile and graphite were used as laboratory analogs of meteoritic organic matter. Spectroscopic observations of impact-generated ablation vapors show that laser irradiation to graphite within an N-2-rich gas can produce a thermodynamic environment similar to that produced by oblique impacts. Thus, laser ablation was used to investigate the final chemical products after this aerodynamic process. We found that a significant fraction (> 0.1 mol%) of the vaporized carbon is converted to HCN and cyanide condensates, even when the ambient gas contains as much as a few hundred mbar of CO2. As such, the column density of cyanides after carbon-rich meteoritic impacts with diameters of 600 m would reach similar to 10 mol/m(2) over similar to 10(2) km(2) under early Earth conditions. Such a temporally and spatially concentrated supply of cyanides may have played an important role in the origin of life.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据