I am not an astronomer. I'm an engineer, but I do have a general interest in space because I like physics and all that. I'll assume your questions are in good faith and try to provide answers.
I am not a chemist and don't work with ozone, but the conventional science claims about ozone, how it is produced, and the so called "layer" where it has a significant concentration in the stratosphere are well known. I have no reason to doubt those claims, but would look into anything someone offered that was disputing them. Otherwise, as far as I know, ozone (O3) exists, can be made from ordinary oxygen (O2), and there is a layer with a lot of it in the stratosphere.
I am not familiar with the oxygen phase diagram, but I took thermodynamics as a part of engineering school so I am aware of the fact that pretty much everything can exist as a solid, liquid, and gas (and even plasma), although the conditions may be extreme. The video you linked shows that the triple point of O2 is around 54.4 K and 0.0015 bar. Further, you can get some data on solid oxygen at Wiki. I have no reason to doubt these numbers, but would not vouch for them.
The "temperature of space" is dependent upon where you are. The temperature you are quoting is the background temperature that would be expected far from anything. Near the earth, there is tremendous variation from the day side to the night side. The day side sees sun no different than we would see in the tropics, but even stronger since there is no atmospheric filtration. The night side can get closer to the background temperature of space, but still substantially higher because the warm earth radiates up at you. If you move far enough away from the earth that this is negligible, then the notion of "the night side" goes away because the earth gets smaller and smaller the farther away you get. For example, a full solar eclipse is what "the night side" of the moon looks like from earth, if that makes sense.
I don't want to attribute something to you that you are not saying, but it kind of sounds like you are asking a firmament sort of question. I am not sure if this "wall of oxygen ice" you are referring to is supposed to be a dome over a flat earth or a bubble surrounding a spherical earth. In either case, it seems rather doubtful to me. This question need not even apply to oxygen. That just makes it seems more mysterious (and therefore plausible). But your question could just be in regards to ordinary water ice, since water will be frozen at the background temperature of space. So in that case, why is there no wall of water ice in the sky?
We all know why, of course. Ice is too heavy and not strong enough hold itself up like this. Igloos are limited in size, and such a wall needs to hold together during the sunshine on the day side of the earth which will warm and soften it. Using the density quoted at the Wikipedia article I linked, oxygen ice is also too dense to form such a giant sky wall, although it does seem to be less dense than water ice.
If you are asking about a firmament, it does not bother me if people believe these things but I'll tell you that it is not too difficult to understand how the atmosphere remains attached to the earth and does not just evacuate into space.
I'm not trying to avoid anything. You referred to the common "temperature of space" that is often seen quoted. This is the background temperature of deep space, and is really the equivalent blackbody temperature of the electromagnetic radiation profile in space far from any other objects. Obviously if you are 200 miles above the earth (or even 1000 miles or whatever) in the sunshine, it is not 2.7 K there. You will measure a much higher value since there is sun blazing on you worse than would be at the equator. On the night side of the earth, the temperature drops rapidly due to the cold background temperature of space you referred to.
I am not sure why this would be confusing, but I am not making it up or avoiding anything. This is the conventional view of space in the vicinity of earth. At the radius of earth's orbit (i.e. ~ 93 million miles), a reasonable estimate of the temperature will likely be around that day side figure, i.e. ~60 Celsius which is about 140 Fahrenheit (a value that makes sense since maximum temperatures on earth are about 120 F and the atmosphere provides some shielding down here).
As you can see, it is hard to imagine a wall of oxygen ice in space near earth unless it is in earth's shadow. Even then, I am not sure how such a wall could hold up its own weight.
LMAO. Every "alternate cosmology" person always ends up being exactly the same. As I said, I don't mind what people believe, so believe what you want. I will point out, though, that if you had read the entire article you linked in your third question, you would have seen exactly what I have been saying to you (please take the time to read this and think about what the words mean before responding):
The temperature of outer space is measured in terms of the kinetic activity of the gas, as it is on Earth. The radiation of outer space has a different temperature than the kinetic temperature of the gas, meaning that the gas and radiation are not in thermodynamic equilibrium. All of the observable universe is filled with photons that were created during the Big Bang, which is known as the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB). (There is quite likely a correspondingly large number of neutrinos called the cosmic neutrino background.) The current black body temperature of the background radiation is about 2.7 K (−270 °C; −455 °F). The gas temperatures in outer space can vary widely. For example, the temperature in the Boomerang Nebula is 1 K (−272 °C; −458 °F), while the solar corona reaches temperatures of 1,200,000–2,600,000 K (2,200,000–4,700,000 °F).
Like I said, I am not making anything up. You are welcome to not accept this and substitute your own beliefs, I was just telling you what the conventional science answer is. But your idea is relying on "the temperature of space" being 2.7 K. That is not your own figure, it is the "conventional science" figure. Your understanding of what it means to say "space is 2.7 K" is not quite right, and I was just letting you know. If you want to tell yourself that I am avoiding the question because I don't have a factual answer, then that is fine.
This is not a hard question.
Agreed. The answer is quoted right here. The temperature is dependent upon what you are near. Where the earth is, due to the proximity to the sun the ambient radiation temperature is about 140 degrees F, unless you are in the earth's shadow, where it can be a couple hundred degrees less than that. The temperature of the rarefied gases can be all over the place. Just look at the thermosphere to see how extreme it can be. It may seem like I am dodging the question, but this is the right answer.
I am not an astronomer. I'm an engineer, but I do have a general interest in space because I like physics and all that. I'll assume your questions are in good faith and try to provide answers.
I am not a chemist and don't work with ozone, but the conventional science claims about ozone, how it is produced, and the so called "layer" where it has a significant concentration in the stratosphere are well known. I have no reason to doubt those claims, but would look into anything someone offered that was disputing them. Otherwise, as far as I know, ozone (O3) exists, can be made from ordinary oxygen (O2), and there is a layer with a lot of it in the stratosphere.
I am not familiar with the oxygen phase diagram, but I took thermodynamics as a part of engineering school so I am aware of the fact that pretty much everything can exist as a solid, liquid, and gas (and even plasma), although the conditions may be extreme. The video you linked shows that the triple point of O2 is around 54.4 K and 0.0015 bar. Further, you can get some data on solid oxygen at Wiki. I have no reason to doubt these numbers, but would not vouch for them.
The "temperature of space" is dependent upon where you are. The temperature you are quoting is the background temperature that would be expected far from anything. Near the earth, there is tremendous variation from the day side to the night side. The day side sees sun no different than we would see in the tropics, but even stronger since there is no atmospheric filtration. The night side can get closer to the background temperature of space, but still substantially higher because the warm earth radiates up at you. If you move far enough away from the earth that this is negligible, then the notion of "the night side" goes away because the earth gets smaller and smaller the farther away you get. For example, a full solar eclipse is what "the night side" of the moon looks like from earth, if that makes sense.
I don't want to attribute something to you that you are not saying, but it kind of sounds like you are asking a firmament sort of question. I am not sure if this "wall of oxygen ice" you are referring to is supposed to be a dome over a flat earth or a bubble surrounding a spherical earth. In either case, it seems rather doubtful to me. This question need not even apply to oxygen. That just makes it seems more mysterious (and therefore plausible). But your question could just be in regards to ordinary water ice, since water will be frozen at the background temperature of space. So in that case, why is there no wall of water ice in the sky?
We all know why, of course. Ice is too heavy and not strong enough hold itself up like this. Igloos are limited in size, and such a wall needs to hold together during the sunshine on the day side of the earth which will warm and soften it. Using the density quoted at the Wikipedia article I linked, oxygen ice is also too dense to form such a giant sky wall, although it does seem to be less dense than water ice.
If you are asking about a firmament, it does not bother me if people believe these things but I'll tell you that it is not too difficult to understand how the atmosphere remains attached to the earth and does not just evacuate into space.
Sorry, I didn't understand why you avoid answering the temperature around the Earth in Kelvin...
I'm not trying to avoid anything. You referred to the common "temperature of space" that is often seen quoted. This is the background temperature of deep space, and is really the equivalent blackbody temperature of the electromagnetic radiation profile in space far from any other objects. Obviously if you are 200 miles above the earth (or even 1000 miles or whatever) in the sunshine, it is not 2.7 K there. You will measure a much higher value since there is sun blazing on you worse than would be at the equator. On the night side of the earth, the temperature drops rapidly due to the cold background temperature of space you referred to.
I am not sure why this would be confusing, but I am not making it up or avoiding anything. This is the conventional view of space in the vicinity of earth. At the radius of earth's orbit (i.e. ~ 93 million miles), a reasonable estimate of the temperature will likely be around that day side figure, i.e. ~60 Celsius which is about 140 Fahrenheit (a value that makes sense since maximum temperatures on earth are about 120 F and the atmosphere provides some shielding down here).
As you can see, it is hard to imagine a wall of oxygen ice in space near earth unless it is in earth's shadow. Even then, I am not sure how such a wall could hold up its own weight.
I didn't ask you to imagine, I am asking about the factual temperature of space beyond the Earth in Kelvin.
Can you please give an answer, or just say you don't have an answer? So far you haven't given an answer... This is not a hard question.
LMAO. Every "alternate cosmology" person always ends up being exactly the same. As I said, I don't mind what people believe, so believe what you want. I will point out, though, that if you had read the entire article you linked in your third question, you would have seen exactly what I have been saying to you (please take the time to read this and think about what the words mean before responding):
Like I said, I am not making anything up. You are welcome to not accept this and substitute your own beliefs, I was just telling you what the conventional science answer is. But your idea is relying on "the temperature of space" being 2.7 K. That is not your own figure, it is the "conventional science" figure. Your understanding of what it means to say "space is 2.7 K" is not quite right, and I was just letting you know. If you want to tell yourself that I am avoiding the question because I don't have a factual answer, then that is fine.
Agreed. The answer is quoted right here. The temperature is dependent upon what you are near. Where the earth is, due to the proximity to the sun the ambient radiation temperature is about 140 degrees F, unless you are in the earth's shadow, where it can be a couple hundred degrees less than that. The temperature of the rarefied gases can be all over the place. Just look at the thermosphere to see how extreme it can be. It may seem like I am dodging the question, but this is the right answer.