Sentences with phrase «there by convection»

But small planets and moons cool too quickly for a magnetic field to be maintained there by convection several billions of years after they form.

Not exact matches

The major energy input to the climate system is radiation, not either convection or conduction, and since the latter two depend on temperature differences initially induced by radiation, they wouldn't be there on their own.

There may be a cap for convection, but latent heating in a growing cumulus cloud (forced locally by... whatever) may eventually allow it to mushroom.

In full equilibrium, at any given level, there may be some net radiative heating at some frequencies compensated by some net radiative cooling at other frequencies, with convection balancing the full spectrum radiative cooling of the troposphere and heating of the surface.

The troposphere is not everywhere at all times locally vertically coupled by convection; in particular, at night and at high latitudes, especially in winter, and where there is warm air advection aloft, some layer of air can become stable to localized convection.

Actually there can be convection from the surface that is balanced by some of the radiation from within the troposphere, but in the approximation of zero non-radiative transfer above the tropopause, all the flux into the stratosphere must be from below (absent solar heating).

In general, so long as there is some solar heating beneath some level, there must be a net LW + convective heat flux upward at that level to balance it in equilibrium; convection tends to require some nonzero temperature decline with height, and a net upward LW flux requires either that the temperature declines with height on the scale of photon paths (from emission to absorption), or else requires at least a partial «veiw» of space, which can be blocked by increasing optical thickness above that level.

However, over land, where there is not very much moist convection, which is not dominated by the tropics and where one expects surface trends to be greater than for the oceans, there was no amplification at all!

Re 40 simon abingdon — there is very little mass loss to space (can be significant for evolution of conditions over geologic time or in more extreme conditions, but not for Earth like conditions over the timescales over which climatic equilibrium is determined), and latent and sensible heat are transported by conduction and convection and mass diffusion, which can't significantly extend outside the atmosphere.

Now you have the physical cause for the convection in the troposphere and the linear slope observed there, it is caused by the physics of the transmission of thermal radiation through the air.

As far as TOA is concerned energy out is still equal to energy in, no magical surplus in the system there then, so surface heat is still being whisked away by convection — which of course is dominant.

Another problem with this experiment is that there is no heat loss in the bottle by convection as it happens on the surface of the earth.

There are other processes like evaporative cooling and diffusion followed by convection which can not be affected by backradiation, and which will tend to compensate for any slowing of the radiation.

There is a heat flow from the surface to the upper atmosphere, largely in the form of convection currents, driven by the temperature gradient, to replace the lost heat and maintain equilibrium.

This energy is carried aloft by convection where the remainder of the atmosphere is essentially transparent to the emitted radiation largely because there is next to no water vapour, which is the larger absorber, in the stratosphere and above.

(There is little water vapor in the upper atmosphere and most energy leaves the lower atmosphere by convection to or radiation to the upper atmosphere.)

There I think that it is pretty obvious what actually establishes a lapse rate — differential heating of the air column at the bottom, followed by a rough equilibration due to approximately adiabatic convection.

Convection must occur because we have hotter gases at the bottom and there will be constant particle movement up and down the gravity well as particles heat up and cool down and are affected by the gravity well.

However there would then be more conduction, convection and on Earth more evaporation from the surface for an increased upward energy flow which would work to maintain the lapse rate set by sun and pressure.

There is no gravity or heat transfer by convection because they have nothing for gravity to act on and nothing to convect.

The direction of convection (which includes diffusion and advection) when there has been previously a state of thermodynamic equilibrium (with its associated temperature gradient formed by gravity) is always in all accessible directions away from any source of new thermal energy which has disturbed the previous state of thermodynamic equilibrium.

At Tmax, for example, there has been a steady T rise as the sun moves higher in the sky, the rise helped by convection of air with hot packets in it surrounding the site, held back if frost has formed overnight, complicated if there is snow around and water phase change effects need consideration, hindered or lagged by the thermal inertia of the screen surrounding the thermometer as the screen heats up.

there will be more cooling of the 250 mbar layer (near 610 cm - 1 and near 730 cm - 1) and less cooling at 350 mbar: this is likely to be erased by convection

«This heat map of a test room clearly shows the stratification effect created by a convection heater when there's little air movement in the room: the yellow bar at the ceiling represents about 22 °C, the purple bit (where your cold feet would be) about 14 °C.»

If CO2 increases there is more cooling at say 250 mbar and less cooling below: such a setting is likely to be erased by convection; and by a slight reduction of the water vapour content of the upper troposphere that will restore the OLR.

Here's my explanation: there's little heat flow from convection across the tropopause, so stratospheric temperature is governed by its radiative balance.

That is all co2 radiation deeper into the troposphere is all absorbed and the radations there has no function but to equalize all temperature variances within the troposhere, by radiation transfer within, not just convection and conduction.

If the earth warms, then there is no balance, so the atmosphere can't radiate back to it, so the extra heat radiated from the earth and absorbed by the greenhouse gases must go elsewhere (e.g. convection) until such time as the atmosphere warms up to the new temperature.

Without the heat flow from the surface there would be no back radiation since it is the upward radiation, convection and heat conduction that are responsible for the heating of the atmosphere which, in turn, results in the emission of radiation by atmosphere.

However in order for the energy to be radiated, it needs to get there and this is by convection (look at the temperature profile of the skin down to the subskin... its perfect for convection)

IMHO, there is way too much emphasis on radiation, to the virtual exclusion of convection and conduction and the simple storage of heat by matter.

You are confused: Saying we are solving for the radiative imbalance at the top - of - the - atmosphere doesn't mean that we are only interested in the temperature there... What it means is that we can use that value, along with the fact that the lapse rate in the troposphere will be determined mainly by convection to figure out what will happen at the surface most easily.

There is a good reason why scientists have focused on the energy that is emitted back to space (i.e., the energy budget at the top of the atmosphere) and that is precisely the issue that you bring up: the energy budget at the surface is strongly influenced by convection and latent heat transfer.

Maintaining convection requires that there's a heat loss from the upper atmosphere to the space by radiation and that requires GHGs.

We see that there is a discontinuity from the ground temperature to the bottom air temperature (no convection), that there is a finite top atmosphere temperature, that the mentioned temperatures and the greehouse factor are completely defined by the optical thickness (so tau is equivalent to GH).

There may be convection and conduction within the atmosphere (up to about 10 Km as found by E. O. Hulburt in 1931), but between the Earth (including the atmosphere) and «space», heat is transferred via radiation since space is a vacuum (you need matter for conduction and convection, also shown by Hulburt in 1931).