If the surface temperature of the sun is 5800 K and if we assume that the sun can be regarded
as a black body the radiation energy per unit area can be expressed by modifying (1) to
That hot wire emits what is known
as black body radiation, a very broad spectrum of light that provides a warm look and a faithful rendering of all colors in a scene.
The researchers took care to rule out the possibility of other sources such
as black body radiation and surface polarization as reasons behind the production of visible light.
Not exact matches
First off, an idealised «
black body» (which gives of
radiation in a very uniform and predictable way
as a function of temperature — encapsulated in the Stefan - Boltzmann equation) has a basic sensitivity (at Earth's radiating temperature) of about 0.27 °C / (W / m2).
As far as I know, no one has refuted the black body radiation concept nor the fact that carbon dioxide absorbs in the infare
As far
as I know, no one has refuted the black body radiation concept nor the fact that carbon dioxide absorbs in the infare
as I know, no one has refuted the
black body radiation concept nor the fact that carbon dioxide absorbs in the infared.
To make another comparison, in physics we have various well - established theories, such
as Maxwell's equations or
black -
body radiation or something.
A parameter like Planck's constant is basically just a fudge factor in an attempt to distort the well - understood Maxwell - Boltzmann distribution so
as to match the observed
black body radiation.
For the up / down /» back»
radiation of greenhouse theory's GHG energy loop to function
as advertised earth's «surface» must radiate
as an ideal
black body, i.e. 16 C / 289 K, 1.0 emissivity = 396 W / m ^ 2.
As demonstrated by my modest experiment (1 & 2) the presence of the atmospheric molecules participating in the conductive, convective and latent heat movement processes renders this ideal
black body radiation impossible.
As I understand it, soon after Max Planck developed
black -
body radiation theory, there was an Einstein - Planck formula relating the temperature of
radiation to frequency.
Your conceptual model of the earth
as a
black body dominated everywhere by
radiation is simple and wrong.
Black soot absorbs thermal radiation very well; it has an emissivity as large as 0.97, and hence soot is a fair approximation to an ideal black
Black soot absorbs thermal
radiation very well; it has an emissivity
as large
as 0.97, and hence soot is a fair approximation to an ideal
black black body.
Only now heat can leave the
black body via conduction and convection
as well
as radiation, so I don't want to say the
black body reaches
radiation - rate - equilibrium, rather it reaches energy - rate - equilibrium.
Bryan: The basic law of
radiation heat transfer which denotes that the equilibrium temperature of a
black body surface varies
as the fourth root of the radiative energy it emits?
Certain things come out of it easily, such
as the concept of
black body radiation and balance of energy flux with energy density in a cavity (for example).
This assumption is absurd, the Earth reflects about 30 % of the Sun's
radiation, that is why we can see it at all; the Earth can not reflect 30 % and radiate
as a
black body at the same time.
Can anyone state a plausible account of Earth's
radiation budget that does not treat Earth
as a
black body?
In practice the
radiation into space is pretty much the
black body spectrum you would expect for a
body at about 290K with reductions at particular wavelengths particularly between 5 and 8 micron and between 14 and 18 micron
as you describe in your text.
If the emissivity of the gray
body remains constant during the temperature increase, the % increase in the gray
body radiation is the same
as for a
black body.