Sentences with phrase «radiation than earth»

The intensity of the Sun's radiation increases, of course, the closer the planet is, by a factor of the distance squared, which means Venus gets 1.38 - squared (or 1.91) MORE solar radiation than Earth.

This condition exists in spite of the fact that the high reflectivity of the Venusian clouds causes the planet to absorb less solar radiation than Earth.

Because Proxima b is so much closer to its star than Earth is to the sun, the flare would have blasted Proxima b with 4,000 times more radiation than Earth typically gets from the sun's flares.

Not exact matches

Mars colonists will get blasted with radiation levels eight times higher than government limits on Earth.

High - energy radiation from a gamma - ray burst reached Earth 4 minutes later than the lower - energy rays.

At sea level on Earth, sunlight's «radiation pressure» is about 50 million times smaller than atmospheric pressure.

The feeble glow of microwaves from the sun is absorbed by our air on the way down, anyway, so unless the core somehow also strips off Earth's atmosphere — in which case we have bigger problems than solar radiation — we should be safe enough from microwaves if our planet's center stops spinning.

Although Proxima Centauri's dimness provides the planet with a balmy climate, the star is prone to outbursts of harsh X-ray and ultraviolet radiation, which could damage any chance of life on the planet — X-rays hit the surface 400 times more often than those from the sun pummel Earth.

But TRAPPIST - 1 emits enough radiation for its inner planets to have lost 20 times more water in the last eight billion years than all the Earth's oceans combined, they found.

Pioneer 10 also survived and charted the intense radiation belts in the Jovian system, which are 10,000 times stronger than anything measured on Earth.

It sent a flood of high - energy radiation towards Earth that lasted much longer than is typical for a gamma - ray burst (GRB).

Surprisingly, this dust gives off the brightest infrared radiation in the solar system (except for the sun's), some 300 times brighter than Earth's.

The star has emitted a flare that made it 68 times brighter than usual, and could expose any life on its orbiting Earth - sized planet to fatal levels of ultraviolet radiation.

Astronomers have seen the star emit a superflare that briefly made it 68 times brighter than usual, and could expose any life on the surface of its orbiting Earth - sized planet to fatal levels of UV radiation.

A molecule of water is two hundred times more effective at trapping radiation from Earth than a molecule of carbon dioxide.

The gauntlet Juno ran at Jupiter held many chances for catastrophe: The spacecraft might have been knocked out by intense magnetic fields (at that distance, 20 times stronger than Earth's), ionizing radiation (a total dose of 265 rads — more than enough to kill a human being), dust particles from Jupiter's rings (from which the main engine was completely unshielded) or loss of power if the solar arrays were unable to reorient to the sun.

The Great Barrier Reef lies directly below the largest hole in the ozone layer, which means the region receives significantly more UV radiation than other place on Earth.

According to standard physics, cosmic rays created outside our galaxy with energies greater than about 1020 electronvolts (eV) should not reach Earth at those energies: as they travel over such vast regions of space they should lose energy because of collisions with photons of the cosmic microwave background (CMB), the radiation left over from the big bang.

But radiation from the sun and cosmic rays is 100 times stronger in space than on Earth, which is protected by a layer of ozone and the Van Allen radiation belts.

Thus when the Earth is radiating with a greater intensity than the back radiation from the air, then the excess radiation will be absorbed by the air molecules, and the air will warm.

To understand Earth's changing radiation environment: Regular monitoring of the stratosphere over California shows that cosmic rays have intensified more than 10 % since 2015.

Blazars appear to produce more gamma radiation than other types of active galaxies, but this may be because one of their jets is pointed toward Earth.

Okay, one little nit - picky issue with Q2 is that O2 and N2 actually DO absorb infrared radiation, just at shorter wavelengths than matter for the Earth's infrared emission spectrum (3 - 27 microns, with a peak around 9 microns or so).

Surface radiative energy budget plays an important role in the Arctic, which is covered by snow and ice: when the balance is positive, more solar radiation from the Sun and the Earth's atmosphere arrives on the Earth's surface than is emitted from it.

It's a little denser than Earth, suggesting an iron core, and it's about the same size and receives a similar amount of radiation from its parent star as we do from the Sun.

Researchers say that if there were no VLF bubble, the radiation belt boundary would be far closer to Earth than it is.

However, the telescope will explore a much larger region of the sky than Kepler, with an emphasis on detecting rocky planets on Earth - like orbits that receive a similar amount of radiation as our own planet (the so - called habitable zone).

With the current GHG content in the atmosphere, more solar energy arrives than leaves via radiation -LRB-.85 + / -.15 Watt / m ^ 2), which raises the heat content of the terrestrial system, i.e., the average temperature over the whole earth + oceans + atmosphere.

Thus when the Earth is radiating with a greater intensity than the back radiation from the air, then the excess radiation will be absorbed by the air molecules, and the air will warm.

The whole issue is that any level above what is often called the «effective radiating level» (say, at ~ 255 K on Earth) should start to cool as atmospheric CO2 increases, since the layers above this height are being shielded more strongly from upwelling radiation... except not quite, because convection distributes heating higher than this level, the stratosphere marks the point where convection gives out and there is high static stability.

Because the wavelength of emitted EM radiation varies with the temperature of the source, it does so in the form of longer - wave IR than that received from the Sun — the Earth's surface is significantly cooler than that of the Sun.

Okay, one little nit - picky issue with Q2 is that O2 and N2 actually DO absorb infrared radiation, just at shorter wavelengths than matter for the Earth's infrared emission spectrum (3 - 27 microns, with a peak around 9 microns or so).

1) Although it receives slightly less radiation from its host star than the Earth, that is not really an issue.

More to the point though, CO2 (or H2O or whatever) absorption of IR radiation does not depend on the earth's blackbody or brightness temperature being higher than the mean temperature of the atmosphere (and the CO2).

Can CO2 at ~ 1 km, ~ 6C colder than the surface and the earth's brightness temperature, not absorb any of the earth's IR radiation?

Likewise, CO2 at a mean temperature less than the earth's brightness temperature still absorbs radiation.

The net result is, earth receives a lot less infrared radiation from the sun than it radiates away.

Actually, though, most of the OLR originates from below the tropopause (can get up around 18 km in the tropics, generally lower)-- with a majority of solar radiation absorbed at the surface, a crude approximation can be made that the area emitting to space is less than 2 * (20/6371) * 100 % ~ = 0.628 % more than the area heated by the sun, so the OLR per unit area should be well within about 0.6 % of the value calculated without the Earth's curvature (I'm guessing it would actually be closer to if not less than 0.3 % different).

``... peer reviewed science empriically shows that during the late 20th century warming there was an increase of 2.7 W / m ² to 6.8 W / m ² more solar radiation reaching the earth's surface, which was ~ 10 times greater than the increase in CO2 forcing..»

Just face reality and admit that peer reviewed science empriically shows that during the late 20th century warming there was an increase of 2.7 W / m ² to 6.8 W / m ² more solar radiation reaching the earth's surface, which was ~ 10 times greater than the increase in CO2 forcing.

The moon, for example, is much cooler than the Earth, but as you noted, it radiates energy because it's temperature is above zero K. Certainly you are not suggesting that the Earth has some «smart shield» around it that redirects the radiation from the moon, but lets the sun's radiation in.

The evolving radiation balance of the earth as seen in the satellite data shows that the energy added by the CO2 and feedbacks is more than sufficient to explain the observed warming surface temperatures.

Now, when the energy received directly from the Sun at the surface of Venus is less than 10 % of what we receive on Earth, then there is less than 10 % coming back as back radiation — far less in fact.

Due to the earth's spherical shape and orbital effects, annual incoming solar radiation at the poles is so low, polar regions always radiate more heat back to space than is ever absorbed locally.

The heat capacity of the ocean is 1,000 x greater than the atmosphere, ocean is over 70 % of earth's surface and earth is warmed by radiation from sun and GHE.

It would, but it would not make the surface hotter than the Sun's radiation could make it anywhere on Earth.

If the radiation from one molecule of carbon dioxide in every 2,500 air molecules could actually slow the rate of cooling of Earth's surface, then the radiation from water vapour should slow the cooling at least a hundred fold, making rain forests about 50 degrees hotter than dry regions at similar latitudes and altitudes.

- Associated Press: Study says sun getting hotter Solar radiation reaching the Earth is 0.036 percent warmer than it was in 1986, when the current solar cycle was beginning, a researcher reports in a study to be published Friday in the journal Science.

It lasts just nine years in Earth's atmosphere but is about 34 times more potent at trapping infrared radiation (the greenhouse effect) than carbon dioxide, which is more abundant and lasts longer.

Or, put another way, methane is more effectual than carbon dioxide at absorbing infrared radiation emitted from the earth's surface and preventing it from escaping into space.