Remember me
▼ Content

Radiation saturation


Radiation saturation09-08-2019 18:05
olyz
★☆☆☆☆
(72)
Came across interesting concept which I pass on.

If a particular concentration of CO2 absorbs all the black body radiation of the earth at its absorption wavelength, increasing the concentration of CO2 won't make any difference.

It doesn't seem likely since there is so little CO2, but on the other hand the absorption bands are very narrow (only a very small fraction of the earths radiated energy can heat CO2).

Be nice to know what that concentration and the calculation is. What is the effective cross section of a molecule that absorbs radiation given per area.

I should add I came across the concept at clivebest.com.
I would make it an url if I knew how to select on iPad.
Edited on 09-08-2019 18:49
09-08-2019 19:54
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
olyz wrote:If a particular concentration of CO2 absorbs all the black body radiation of the earth at its absorption wavelength, increasing the concentration of CO2 won't make any difference.

I saw "CO2" and "wavelength" in the same sentence. DISMISSED.

From The MANUAL:

Saturation: noun
In the Global Warming mythology, the mysterious belief that an atom can somehow be "filled to capacity" with photons. At such a point all other photons will apparently find no room at the inn and must look elsewhere to be absorbed. Since this seems to violate Planck's Law and other classical physics, this belief falls within Settled Science.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
09-08-2019 20:09
olyz
★☆☆☆☆
(72)
It's not that the CO2 molecule itself gets saturated absorbing energy, it's that the existing molecules absorb all the energy there is at their absorption wave lengths and adding more molecules won't make a difference.

I suspect that's what's behind the latest "it's too late" views.
Edited on 09-08-2019 20:15
09-08-2019 20:21
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
olyz wrote: It's not that the CO2 molecule itself gets saturated absorbing energy, it's that the existing molecules absorb all the energy there is and adding more molecules won't make a difference.

What you are saying is both incorrect and meaningless.

Let's say that you were to coat the entire surface of the earth with a layer of CO2, one molecule thick. That would be enough to absorb all the thermal radiation of whatever wavelength (that is absorbed) radiated from the earth.

Then all of the CO2 will radiate the abosrbed energy.

If you add another layer of CO2, the first layer will radiate into the second layer, and this will happen even though there was "enough" CO2 in the first layer.

So what's the point?

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-08-2019 02:39
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1329)
IBdaMann wrote:
If you add another layer of CO2, the first layer will radiate into the second layer, and this will happen even though there was "enough" CO2 in the first layer.

So what's the point?

.


So you can have a particle acts as a radiation valve:
CO2 is non-reactive (invisible) to a high frequency of solar radiation,
That radiation strikes the surface which is reactive to it
The surface converts it into low frequency radiation and emits it
The CO2 is now reactive to that.

So energy in the form of high frequency light from the sun hits the earth and sails right in unimpeded. Hits the surface, thermal energy is generated, and when the earth goes to re-emit it the CO2 is in the way (temporary hold up, but a delay).

So you effectively have a "blanket" of CO2. It is slowing the exit of thermal energy just like a blanket on a person.

Did I nail it? ha ha (I'm gonna guess not)
10-08-2019 07:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9635)
olyz wrote:
It's not that the CO2 molecule itself gets saturated absorbing energy, it's that the existing molecules absorb all the energy there is at their absorption wave lengths and adding more molecules won't make a difference.

I suspect that's what's behind the latest "it's too late" views.


You are now locked in paradox. Which is it, dude?


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate Radiation saturation:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Max Planck and Pierre Prevost on Net Thermal Radiation and Net Heat3227-09-2019 02:43
NET THERMAL RADIATION : You in a room as a reference.20113-09-2019 05:53
Black body radiation2919-08-2019 09:11
How does radiation heat CO2615-08-2019 05:38
Considering O2, N2, O3 absorb more than 99% of incoming shortwave radiation, which is far more powerful118-04-2019 19:31
▲ 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