Remember me
▼ Content

How does atmospheric thermal equilibration happen?


How does atmospheric thermal equilibration happen?29-09-2013 23:04
redpillminded
☆☆☆☆☆
(1)
Could someone with the expertise please explain how increased global atmospheric temperatures would equilibrate with the cold of space? My understanding is that increased heat (trapped from higher levels of GHGs), in the form of infrared light, should result in a feedback to reequilibrate earth temperature with that of space, maintaining a relatively homogenous temperature.
Does the infrared equilibration with space slow because of GHG troposphere insulation? Would the stratophere not conduct the heat away from earth at an increased pace in such a scenario?
09-10-2013 15:35
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
It's all radiative heat loss as there can be no conductive loss into a vacuum.

The hotter the body, in this case the earth, the faster it radiates heat.

The greenhouse theory has it that CO2 traps heat to some extent and allows less of the infrared to be released into space.

To get back to in equilibrium the ground would have to be hotter.

The Royal society quoted a thermal forcing (heating effect) of 3.2watts per square metre for a doubling of CO2 last time I looked. That would result in an increase in temperature of about 3 degrees c. Sounds nice to me.
06-10-2017 23:17
ChristianC123
☆☆☆☆☆
(6)
Radiative convective equilibrium of the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity is computed as the asymptotic state of an initial value problem.
The results show that it takes almost twice as long to reach the state of radiative convective equilibrium for the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity than for the atmosphere with a given distribution of absolute humidity.
Also, the surface equilibrium temperature of the former is almost twice as sensitive to change of various factors such as solar constant, CO2 content, O3 content, and cloudiness, than that of the latter, due to the adjustment of water vapor content to the temperature variation of the atmosphere

Regards,
Christian
https://www.clouddesktoponline.com/
07-10-2017 00:21
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9226)
ChristianC123 wrote:
Radiative convective equilibrium of the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity is computed as the asymptotic state of an initial value problem.
The results show that it takes almost twice as long to reach the state of radiative convective equilibrium for the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity than for the atmosphere with a given distribution of absolute humidity.
Also, the surface equilibrium temperature of the former is almost twice as sensitive to change of various factors such as solar constant, CO2 content, O3 content, and cloudiness, than that of the latter, due to the adjustment of water vapor content to the temperature variation of the atmosphere

Regards,
Christian
...deleted spam...


Nothing but buzzwords.


The Parrot Killer
28-02-2018 16:57
yuno44907
☆☆☆☆☆
(14)
Scientists are stupid. Heat and light can become magnetic energy and humans collect magnetism for generating electricity. Basicly sun gives us energy and if we consume too much energy; Earth start to die. Basicly we have to kill all humans and destroy technology because technology destroying this planet. http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/climate-socrat-d10-e1704.php
Edited on 28-02-2018 16:59
28-02-2018 21:32
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9226)
Tim the plumber wrote:
It's all radiative heat loss as there can be no conductive loss into a vacuum.

The hotter the body, in this case the earth, the faster it radiates heat.

The greenhouse theory has it that CO2 traps heat to some extent and allows less of the infrared to be released into space.

To get back to in equilibrium the ground would have to be hotter.

The Royal society quoted a thermal forcing (heating effect) of 3.2watts per square metre for a doubling of CO2 last time I looked. That would result in an increase in temperature of about 3 degrees c. Sounds nice to me.


WRONG. The Stefan-Boltzmann law states that if radiance is reduced, temperature is also reduced.

CO2 does not change emissivity.

The emissivity of Earth is unknown. It is not possible to determine.

You cannot reduce radiance and increase temperature.


The Parrot Killer
28-02-2018 21:38
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9226)
yuno44907 wrote:
Scientists are stupid. Heat and light can become magnetic energy and humans collect magnetism for generating electricity. Basicly sun gives us energy and if we consume too much energy; Earth start to die. Basicly we have to kill all humans and destroy technology because technology destroying this planet. http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/climate-socrat-d10-e1704.php


Heat is not energy. Light is electromagnetic energy. There is no such thing as 'magnetic' energy. Magnetism is one manifestation of the electrostatic force, a fundamental force of nature.

We do not 'consume' energy. Energy can neither be created or destroyed. When we use energy, we dissipate it.

The Sun is our primary source of energy. What you feel as temperature is not heat, but is called thermal energy. Heat is the movement of thermal energy, not the energy itself.


The Parrot Killer
28-02-2018 21:46
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9226)
redpillminded wrote:
Could someone with the expertise please explain how increased global atmospheric temperatures would equilibrate with the cold of space? My understanding is that increased heat (trapped from higher levels of GHGs), in the form of infrared light, should result in a feedback to reequilibrate earth temperature with that of space, maintaining a relatively homogenous temperature.
Does the infrared equilibration with space slow because of GHG troposphere insulation? Would the stratophere not conduct the heat away from earth at an increased pace in such a scenario?


If, for some reason, the Earth warmed up, there would be increased radiance into space. The only way for Earth to warm up is for the Sun to emit more energy.

So...Sun is more powerful, Earth receives increased energy, more is absorbed and converted into thermal energy, temperatures go up, and more is radiated away into space.

Earth is never at equilibrium with the cold of space. It is always radiating heat.

It is not possible to slow or trap heat. If a temperature difference exists, heat is proportional to that temperature difference. No gas acts as an insulator. The effect of something like CO2 is to absorb certain radiated frequencies of light coming from the surface, and in turn radiating it's energy on into space just like the rest of the atmosphere around it.

All heating of space is by radiance (conversion into electromagnetic energy, or light). This light is emitted on many frequencies, not just a narrow band that happens to be absorbed by CO2 or any other vapor or gas.

Temperature on the surface of the Earth is determined entirely by the output of the Sun, the spin of the Earth, and the fact that the atmosphere has mass.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 28-02-2018 21:46
28-02-2018 23:05
yuno44907
☆☆☆☆☆
(14)
Heat, light, magnetism, electric all same thing; all of them energy and scientists are stupid. Rich people are evil. If we kill rich people and destroy government; everything will be okey.
01-03-2018 04:11
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1392)
yuno44907 wrote:
Heat, light, magnetism, electric all same thing;

Sounds like my freezer. It has a frost free heater, a light, magnets in the compressor motor and on the door holding some great pictures, and it runs on electricity. I guess my freezer is REALLY evil!
all of them energy

Still trying to figure out how magnets are energy.
and scientists are stupid.

I think some of them are stupid. Can you explain what you think makes a scientist stupid?
Rich people are evil.

Having money is evil? How?
If we kill rich people

Oh crap!! Define rich. How many people we talkin about here? I also want to know if I'm on your kill list.
and destroy government;

What rules will all the poor people of the world follow? (all the rich people are now dead I assume) Or will everyone just do what they want? Sounds like a scary world. Did you know there are plenty of poor people that do bad things? What happens to them? Will you kill them too?
everything will be okey.

Okey Dokey.

Edited on 01-03-2018 04:13
01-03-2018 11:46
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
yuno44907 wrote:
Heat, light, magnetism, electric all same thing; all of them energy and scientists are stupid. Rich people are evil. If we kill rich people and destroy government; everything will be okey.


You are just taking the piss arn't you?
Edited on 01-03-2018 11:46




Join the debate How does atmospheric thermal equilibration happen?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Max Planck and Pierre Prevost on Net Thermal Radiation and Net Heat115-09-2019 06:44
NET THERMAL RADIATION : You in a room as a reference.20113-09-2019 05:53
411.66 PPM: Scientists Alarmed by Early Rise in Atmospheric CO2209-03-2019 16:55
What would happen to global temperature if the US stopped all CO2 emissions for the next 50 years?1517-09-2018 09:12
equatorial Ozone depletion atmospheric sluff due to heating1514-05-2018 08:07
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact