Sentences with phrase «means less surface»

That would mean less surface warming.

Traditionally, smaller pixels mean less surface area for soaking up photons, and thus poorer low - light performance.

Not exact matches

«The benefit of lying on the bed versus the floor is that the bed is a squishier surface so it's less stable which means your abdominal muscles are going to work a little harder to keep you balanced during the movement,» says Smith.

It's flakier, crunchier and has a larger surface area which means you need less of it to flavor your food.

But amylose is built differently: it's a straight chain, which means it has less overall surface area.

As these winds enhance ocean circulation, they may be encouraging carbon - rich waters to rise from the deep, say the team, meaning that surface water is less able to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere.

Intriguingly, that means water could potentially reach the surface from a deep crater, where there was less ice to get through — perhaps even from a crater like the one where Dawn saw the bright spot.

This lower - intensity rainfall implies less runoff over the surface, which means we should see a decline in runoff over a whole basin.

In addition, the larger than expected loss of UV light meant less stratospheric ozone up to 45 kilometers above the surface, but more above that line.

Buie and Elliot also found that the planet's surface is now somewhat darker than five years ago, meaning that it reflects less sunlight and therefore is a bit warmer.

If this rapid warming continues, it could mean the end of the so - called slowdown — the period over the past decade or so when global surface temperatures increased less rapidly than before.

Slower plant growth means the land surface takes up less CO2 from the atmosphere.

An incision through the cornea that stops just beneath the outermost surface is also created by the laser, meaning less cutting needs to be performed once the operation starts, with a decreased risk of infection.

Their digestive tract is shorter which means there is less time and surface area to absorb nutrients.

Of course, they're therefore less divisive than Bangle's flame - surfaced creation, which means this 5 Series is less likely to offend anyone's sensibilities.

This means that over time less and less surface area of the electrode plates is available for recharging the battery.

per rotor, helping improve handling and ride comfort especially on rough road surfaces; and also reduces rotor deformation under hard braking by about 20 %, which means less tendency of the brakes to vibrate when hot and reduced likelihood of rotors cracking under heat when the vehicle is driven hard.

On slipperier surfaces, the lack of feedback through the variable electric steering rack means you are never quite sure if the front - end is going to bite, and there appears to be less traction on offer than the standard car, likely due to that big increase in front end stiffness; it will even spin up an inside front wheel on wet tarmac, which is quite a feat given the lack of accelerative force.

That means that there are more of them and that each has less surface area to illuminate, because they're firing horizontally rather than vertically.

And while Frank Auerbach's paintings take years of sittings and reworkings, the final result can mean a total revision of the entire picture surface in less than an hour.

When differences in scaling between previous studies are accounted for, the various current and previous estimates of NH mean surface temperature are largely consistent within uncertainties, despite the differences in methodology and mix of proxy data back to approximately A.D. 1000... Conclusions are less definitive for the SH and globe, which we attribute to larger uncertainties arising from the sparser available proxy data in the SH.

Surface temperatures in parts of Europe appear to have have averaged nearly 1 °C below the 20th century mean during multidecadal intervals of the late 16th and late 17th century (and with even more extreme coolness for individual years), though most reconstructions indicate less than 0.5 °C cooling relative to 20th century mean conditions for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole.

Corrections to the global mean are obviously less than for the oceans alone (since they comprise 70 % of the surface) and that is taken into account above.

Eight decades with a slightly negative global mean surface - temperature trend show that the ocean above 300 m takes up significantly less heat whereas the ocean below 300 m takes up significantly more, compared with non-hiatus decades.

It means less short term warming at the surface but at the expense of a greater earlier long - term warming, and faster sea level rise.

That means less radiation leaving the earth for outer space, So more energy stays in the earth atmosphere system making the surface warmer.

So if the atmosphere radiated more energy towards the surface would that not mean, according to your pseudoscience, that the surface radiated less energy to space.

The water vapor cooled the Earth, the snow cooled the atmosphere with resulting increase in surface albedo which does reflect radiative heat, meaning the Earth gets less warm, not colder because of it.

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean surface warming to less than 2 °C relative to pre-industrial levels1, 2,3.

The warmer the ocean becomes, the less water rises from deeper down, meaning fewer resources will be brought to the surface water where phytoplankton live.

Part way there, but no quantitation yet: of the 3.77 W / m ^ 2 radiated back dowwnard, most goes to increased rate of evaporation of the water at the surface, and much less goes to increased mean temp increase at the surface; hence increased rate of non-radiative transfer of heat from surface to upper atmosphere, slight increase in rainfall as hydrological cycle is faster, and slight increase in cloud cover.

However, the fact that trees are generally darker than most other land coverings means that forested parts of the Earth's surface reflect away less incoming solar radiation, giving forests a warming effect.

If the troposhere is cold, that means sea surface also is cold, and it is still gaining shortwave energy from the Sun at the same rate while it radiates a lesser amount longwave radiation to space.

If the atmosphere doesn't warm it means there is less energy leaving the surface for one reason or another.

The significant principal appears to me that additional CO2 broadens the absorption bands meaning energy which left earth from the surface or troposphere, (at a higher T) now would leave earth from the stratosphere (at a lower T) thus, «All other things being equal» less energy should leave earth.

So it's all gases at greatest density will be doing the same thing around the planet at the same time (*) and as these change with differences in density in the play between gravity and pressure and kinetic and potential from greatest near the surface to more rarified, less dense and absent any kinetic to write home about the higher one goes, then, energy conservation intact, the hotter will rise and cool because losing kinetic energy means losing temperature, thus cooling they which began with the closest in density and kinetic energy as a sort of band of brothers near the surface will rise and cool at the same time whereupon they'll all come down together colder but wiser that great heights don't make for more comfort and giving up their heat will sink displacing the hotter now in their place when they first went travelling.

The reason, Werner said, is because the loss of snow and ice makes the earth's surface less reflective, meaning solar radiation — or heat — is absorbed in greater amounts by the exposed dark ocean or tundra.

You're still not getting hydrostatic balance, it doesn't mean nothing is happening and you have to bring in another idea into the system to work out what will happen..., the adiabatic lapse rate will happen, because gases will become more dense and sink when cold and so will find themselves under great pressure at the surface where they will get compressed and heat up, and heated up they will become less dense and rise and in rising they will cool and in cooling they will become more dense and sink and so on.

The modest surface to volume ratio that this affords means less heat loss and therefore a smaller demand on the performance of the building envelope.

That means there is less formation of dark - colored surface melt ponds, which amplify the melting and warming in the Arctic, he explained.

In one of the troubling feedback loops of the changing climate, dark ice is partially caused by the warmer Arctic summers climate change has brought us: More warmth means less fresh snowfall to cover areas of accumulated sediment, changes to the shape and size of ice grains that make them less reflective, and more liquid near the surface.

Helen Cleugh, science director at CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere Flagship, says measurements do show that the rate at which global mean surface temperature has warmed in the past decade is less than the previous decade.

This would make the surface ocean less salty, which (along with the warming) makes the surface waters less dense, and less likely to sink, meaning that the AMOC would weaken or maybe collapse completely.

More cloud cover on a net global scale means less solar radiation penetrates the surface, which leads to a net cooling, and less cloud cover means more solar radiation penetrates into the (ocean) surface, which ultimately leads to net warming trend.

With ice cover shrinking in the Arctic during the summer months, less sunlight is reflected off the icy surface, which means the ocean absorbs the sunlight instead.

The cash value of this is, that all of NASA's estimates of annual mean global surface temperatures come with an uncertainty of + / -(not less than 0.6) °C.

More absorption means less escaping surface emission in the «atmospheric window».

5) Thus the presence of water vapour and CO2 means that less energy is radiated into space from within their characteristic radiation bands so the temperature of the earth's surface has to increase in order for energy radiated at other wavelengths to increase to compensate.

I understand therefore their results so that with the 100 W / m ^ 2 greater back radiation the upper ocean layer «works» in one regime around some mean value of the surface skin layer while under the sunny day with less back radiation the same layer oscillates around another mean value of the surface layer.

The greenhouse effect means that heat gets from the surface (land or ocean) less efficiently.