Sentences with phrase «atmosphere than at the surface»

They predict greater and more rapid warming in the atmosphere than at the surface when the opposite is happening (see, e.g.,

Not exact matches

Hmm, so you're telling me that a «heat shield» that was made of «special plastic» (as NASA called it back in the day), which was nothing but epoxy smeared over a ss honey comb «protected» the astros barreling into the upper atmosphere at hypersonic 5 miles / sec, or well over 30 times the velocity of a jumbo - jet and thru temperatures *** as quoted by NASA *** that are «10 times hotter than the surface of the sun», and then they «braked» with only a parachute to a safe splashdown?

«Titan's atmosphere is made up mainly of nitrogen and methane, with 50 % higher pressure at its surface than on Earth,» said Andrew Coates (UCL Mullard Space Science Laboratory), who led the study.

Because the Sun produces heat at its core, this runs counter to what one would initially expect: normally the layer closest to a source of heat, the Sun's surface, in this case, would have a higher temperature than the more distant atmosphere.

Whizzing 200 miles above the Martian surface at 2.2 miles per second, it will pick out finer surface details on Mars than commercial satellites can show us on Earth, where cameras have to ride twice as far above the ground to avoid our planet's thicker atmosphere.

Year - round ice - free conditions across the surface of the Arctic Ocean could explain why Earth was substantially warmer during the Pliocene Epoch than it is today, despite similar concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, according to new research carried out at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Then again, with the surface of Venus being at almost 900 °F (500 °C) under more than 90 times the air pressure of Earth's atmosphere at sea level, with occasional showers of acid, it's not easy to test the properties of materials under Venusian conditions.

Specifically, liquid CO2 is heavier than the water above it at 8,850 feet (2,700 meters) or more under the surface, meaning any leaks would never bubble back into the atmosphere.

Guiding CE5 - T1 back to Earth poses a new challenge; entering the atmosphere at a speed of 11.2 km / s is nearly 50 % faster than the return speed of China's Shenzhou spacecraft, which has carried orbiting astronauts safely back to Earth's surface.

But some regions may become redder and darker than others because parts of the atmosphere collapse, exposing those spots to more surface - darkening radiation from space, researchers report March 22 at the Lunar and Planetary Science Conference in The Woodlands, Texas.

Water pressure at those depths is more than 200 times that of the atmosphere at the surface, and no one knew what all the heat, gas, and salt below the seafloor might do to the drilling equipment.

Thanks to industrialization, mercury levels in the atmosphere are at least three times higher than they were 150 years ago, and mercury levels in ocean surface waters are higher too.

Beneath its thick atmosphere, the surface of Venus is much hotter and at a higher pressure than that of our planet, making its land surface hard to interpret.

At its height between 1960 and 1980, Polyarka was staffed by more than fifty working scientists, engineers, and technicians focused on measurements of surface weather, snow depth, sea ice, and conditions in the upper atmosphere.

Recent computational studies have shown that strong SEP events may produce ionization and dose rate enhancements of more than four orders of magnitude both at altitude in the Martian atmosphere and at the surface (Norman et al. 2014; Gronoff et al. 2015).

The observed fact that temperatures increases slower over the oceans than over land demonstrates that the large heat capacity of the ocean tries to hold back the warming of the air over the ocean and produces a delay at the surface but nevertheless the atmosphere responds quit rapidly to increasing greenhouse gases.

For example, if global warming were due to increased solar output, we would expect to see all layers of the atmosphere warm, and more warming during the day when the surface is bombarded with solar radiation than at night.

About 2.3 billion years ago oxygen has saturated the planet's surface and rapidly accumulated in vast amounts in our atmosphere, From that point on Earth's atmosphere became a glowing indicator of life for the entire Galaxy — at least, for civilizations that are slightly better in building telescopes than we are.

From my experience of a couple of years (1980 - 2) the local and regional solar surface flux averaged less than 70 % from flux at the top of the atmosphere (and for some periods of months even much less).

The physical processes by which energy might be added into the glacier material include: (A) convection between the glacier surfaces and local surrounding atmosphere and water, (B) direct radiation onto the exposed surfaces of the material, (C) addition of material that is at a temperature higher than the melting temperature onto the top of the glacier (rain, say), (D) Sublimation of the ice directly into the atmosphere, and (E) conduction into the material from the contact areas between the glacier and surrounding solid material.

Temperature tends to respond so that, depending on optical properties, LW emission will tend to reduce the vertical differential heating by cooling warmer parts more than cooler parts (for the surface and atmosphere); also (not significant within the atmosphere and ocean in general, but significant at the interface betwen the surface and the air, and also significant (in part due to the small heat fluxes involved, viscosity in the crust and somewhat in the mantle (where there are thick boundary layers with superadiabatic lapse rates) and thermal conductivity of the core) in parts of the Earth's interior) temperature changes will cause conduction / diffusion of heat that partly balances the differential heating.

The ocean has started to take up net CO2 from the atmosphere through gas exchange at the sea surface: because the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is now higher than in the surface ocean, there is net flux of CO2 into the sea.

@ 48 If your speculation is correct, I assume that another consequence would be that, if / when concentrations of greenhouse gases start to drop, corresponding reductions in surface ocean / land temperatures would take place at a much slower rate than would otherwise be the case: the surplus heat stored in the deep ocean will gradually make its way to the ocean surface, and continue to warm the atmosphere for decades, if not longer.

At the point where there is so much H2O vapor in the atmosphere that there is very little solar heating of the surface (very very far from happenning), there will also tend to be almost no net LW cooling at the surface, so a tropospheric - type lapse rate could still tend to extend down to the surface (as long as the net LW cooling is smaller than the SW heating, there will be some non-radiative flux from the surface for equilibrium conditionsAt the point where there is so much H2O vapor in the atmosphere that there is very little solar heating of the surface (very very far from happenning), there will also tend to be almost no net LW cooling at the surface, so a tropospheric - type lapse rate could still tend to extend down to the surface (as long as the net LW cooling is smaller than the SW heating, there will be some non-radiative flux from the surface for equilibrium conditionsat the surface, so a tropospheric - type lapse rate could still tend to extend down to the surface (as long as the net LW cooling is smaller than the SW heating, there will be some non-radiative flux from the surface for equilibrium conditions).

In 2) i wanted to discuss the different forcing efficacies of solar shortwave compared to anthro fossil carbon combustion upon global average surface temperature, rather than the emission temperature at top of atmosphere

he cooling due to aerosols is more than 10 W m − 2 at the top of the atmosphere, and more than 25 W m − 2 at the surface in the vicinity of Indonesia.

To achieve such a cycle, BNO (S) must at a minimum warm the surface and atmosphere of the planet by a total of 0.31 °C during 1970 - 99 which would require more than perhaps 20 ZJ during the warming phase, equally divided between the first half and the last half of this 1970 - 99 period.

A stronger gravitational field will produce a lower, denser, warmer surface than a weaker gravitational field since the amount of solar energy retained by the atmosphere will be focused into a smaller volume and that amount of energy will be determined by the amount of mass available to absorb it at any given level of solar irradiation.

That is, under the RF model, natural CO2, which exchanges between air and surface at more than an order of magnitude greater than ACO2, would be as susceptible to accumulation in the atmosphere.

me warming of the earth's temperature, but that the observed rate of warming (both at the earth's surface and throughout the lower atmosphere) is considerably less than has been anticipated by the collection of climate models upon whose projections climate alarm (i.e., justification for strict restrictions on the use of fossil fuels) is built.

What's lost in a lot of the discussion about human - caused climate change is not that the sum of human activities is leading to some warming of the earth's temperature, but that the observed rate of warming (both at the earth's surface and throughout the lower atmosphere) is considerably less than has been anticipated by the collection of climate models upon whose projections climate alarm (i.e., justification for strict restrictions on the use of fossil fuels) is built.

In addition, a combined analysis of the response at the surface and through the depth of the atmosphere using HadCM3 and the solar reconstruction of Lean et al. (1995) concluded that the near - surface temperature response to solar forcing over 1960 to 1999 is much smaller than the response to greenhouse gases (Jones et al., 2003).

-- higher temperatures give more CO2 from the oceans which, even after fractionation at the sea surface, has a higher d13C level than the current atmosphere.

The surface can only warm by absorbing more than it is emitting and that can only happen after the atmosphere begins to warm and the increased emission causes a radiative imbalance at the surface.

[6] The amount of sunlight absorbed at the surface varies strongly with latitude, being greater at the equator than at the poles, and this engenders fluid motion in both the atmosphere and ocean that acts to redistribute heat from the equator towards the poles, thereby reducing the temperature gradients that would exist in the absence of fluid motion.

The entire atmosphere surface to 100 km edge of space is already much much warmer than 193K, and a true or «partial» blackbody at 193K can not warm a much warmer blackbody at 255K or 288K.

«This is ongoing research and bears watching as other factors as still under investigation, such as changes in the time - of - day readings were taken, but at this point it helps explain why the surface measurements appear to be warming more than the deep atmosphere (where the greenhouse effect should appear.)»

It has been known at least for 50 years that surface is colder than the overlaying atmosphere over Antarctis.

The approach of this paper is different than many previous papers that focus on the energy budget at the surface or the top of the atmosphere (TOA).

The critical element is the principle that the warming is driven primarily by what happens at the top of the atmosphere (TOA) rather than the surface.

Actually, the atmosphere doesn't even delay cooling at the surface overnight either — we found that the surface temperature dropped ten times more than if it simply cooled at a direct rate without delay in cooling, and so therefore, it is not delaying cooling at the surface at all, but enhancing it.

The temperature at the poles of Venus (over 720K) can not be explained by any «runaway greenhouse effect» because there is less than 1W / m ^ 2 from the Sun that gets through the Venus atmosphere to the surface at the poles.

We see a greenhouse effect (higher surface temperature) at the Earth's surface because the temperature of the gas (atmosphere) on average is less than the temperature of the source (surface).

This is clearly not the case overall as there is radiation coming from the Earth's surface at a higher BB emission temperature than one finds in most of the atmosphere.

So the partial trapping of solar energy near the Earth's surface by clouds and greenhouse gases does cause the atmosphere to fill a volume greater than it otherwise would at that temperature.

The Earth's albedo reflects away about 30 % of the Sun's 1,368 W / m ^ 2 energy leaving 70 % or 958 W / m ^ 2 to «warm» the surface (1.5 m above ground) and at an S - B BB equilibrium temperature of 361 K, 33 C cooler (394 - 361) than the earth with no atmosphere or albedo.

Thus, the increase in the surface temperature at sea level caused by doubling of the present - day CO2 concentration in the atmosphere will be less than 0.01 °C, which is negligible in comparison with natural temporal fluctuations of global temperature.

The problem is difficult because even if there are no GHGs in the atmosphere you still get lateral convection and convective turnover because you are heating the surface more at the equator than at the poles.

Robert Brown says» I'm not arguing that a dynamically driven atmosphere can have a lapse rate, only that Jelbring's static one will not, and hence can not be looked at as a source of «heating» or as a static mechanism that maintains the surface at a higher temperature than the gas overhead.»

I do not believe that the surface at altitude receives less radiation than at sea level, in fact it should receive more because it passes through less atmosphere.