Sentences with phrase «thermal radiation from the atmosphere»

So you concede that the atmosphere emits thermal radiation to the surface which you claim then inhibits the emission of thermal radiation from that surface, but wouldn't the radiation from the surface then inhibit the emission of thermal radiation from the atmosphere too?

the GHG thermal radiation from the atmosphere reduces surface emissivity so the impedance to heat transport from all sources rises.

Nope: the GHG thermal radiation from the atmosphere reduces surface emissivity so the impedance to heat transport from all sources rises.

Others also call the total flows of thermal radiation from the atmosphere to the surface and visa versa, heat.

Not exact matches

Thanks to the dry, clear atmosphere at the South Pole, SPT is better able to «look» at the cosmic microwave background — the thermal radiation left over from the Big Bang — and map out the location of galaxy clusters, which are hundreds to thousands of galaxies that are bound together gravitationally and among the largest objects in the universe.

14 C is produced by thermal neutrons from cosmic radiation in the upper atmosphere, and is transported down to earth to be absorbed by living biological material.

Absorption of thermal radiation cools the thermal spectra of the earth as seen from space, radiation emitted by de-excitation is what results in the further warming of the surface, and the surface continues to warm until the rate at which energy is radiated from the earth's climate system (given the increased opacity of the atmosphere to longwave radiation) is equal to the rate at which energy enters it.

ABSTRACT «We investigate the interaction of infrared active molecules in the atmosphere with their own thermal background radiation as well as with radiation from an external blackbody radiator.

What the CO2 (both «cold, hot and warm CO2 ′) and other gasses do is to make the atmosphere more optically thick to thermal IR radiation emitted (mainly) from the Earth's surface [note2] which has consequences for the equilibrium temperature profile of the atmosphere.

Thermal radiation from O2 and N2 isn't even worth mentioning in the context of discussing the radiative properties of the atmosphere.

Do you think you the results from your experiments would allow you to accurately predict how a doubling CO2 will interact with thermal radiation in the earth's atmosphere?

«Carbon dioxide absorbs in the atmospheric «window» from 7 to 14 micrometers which transmits thermal radiation emitted by the earth's surface and lower atmosphere.

Looking down from above the atmosphere, a thermal imaging camera sees only the «top layer» of all this radiation.

The spectrum of thermal infrared radiation is practically distinct from that of shortwave or solar radiation because of the difference in temperature between the Sun and the Earth - atmosphere system.

This is because, when radiation from a cooler atmosphere strikes a warmer surface it undergoes «resonant scattering» (sometimes called pseudo-scattering) and this means its energy is not converted to thermal energy.

The warmer body cools more slowly as a result because a ready source of energy from incident radiation is quicker to just «reflect» back into the atmosphere, rather than have to convert its own thermal energy to radiated energy.

Atmospheres absorb incident radiation from the Sun at all altitudes, and radiate it away until they cool to the predetermined thermal profile.

So water dances at many speeds, from the unimaginable fast vibrations of its molecules responding to thermal infrared radiation, to the moment - to - moment dance of its phase changes in response to temperature changes, to the week - long dance of its vapor in and out of the atmosphere, to the slow geological pavanes of rock, air and life, of which it too forms an inextricable part.

«Because the solar - thermal energy balance of Earth [at the top of the atmosphere (TOA)-RSB- is maintained by radiative processes only, and because all the global net advective energy transports must equal zero, it follows that the global average surface temperature must be determined in full by the radiative fluxes arising from the patterns of temperature and absorption of radiation.»

If CO2 and H2O molecules now are cooled below the previous equilibrium point by having their radiation allowed to escape to outer space, then I believe these molecules must then tend to absorb more energy than yield energy with each interaction with the other components of the atmosphere until that atmosphere as a whole reaches a new thermal equilibrium where the net radiation going out and the net radiation coming in (primarily from the sun and the surrounding atmosphere) is the same.

Each higher and cooler layer in turn emits thermal radiation corresponding to its temperature; and much of that also escapes directly to space around the absorption bands of the higher atmosphere layers; and so on; so that the total LWIR emission from the earth should then be a composite of roughly BB spectra but with source temepratures ranging ove the entire surface Temeprature range, as well as the range of atmospheric emitting Temperatures.

A consequence of the model you have proposed would seem to be that the «back radiation» due to CO2 interception of surface emitted (from solid or liquid continuum thermal radiation can consist only of the specific wavelengths that the CO2 absorbed in the first place; since you say no net energy is exchanged between the CO2 and the Atmosphere.

Not sure if you meant the double negative here, but just to clarify matters, radiation from a cooler atmosphere is not converted to thermal energy when it meets a warmer surface because its frequency is below the cut - off.

We hqppen to have such a star that delivers EM energy to the bottom of the transparent atmosphere, and that energy warms the bottom of the atmosphere by all the well known thermal processes, until the energy loss rate, eventually limited by radiation, matches the supply rate from the star.

Briefly, the warmer body (Earth's surface) is not affected by radiation from the cooler one (the atmosphere) because that radiation does not have enough energy (high enough frequency) to bring about the conversion of its energy into thermal energy.

Any emission to the surface will not be absorbed and converted to thermal energy (because it comes from a cooler source) and so all radiation from the atmosphere eventually ends up going to space.

The only effect that radiation from a cooler atmosphere can have on the surface is to slow down the rate of thermal energy transferred by radiation to the atmosphere.

All the NASA and Trenberth et al energy diagrams treat solar radiation and atmospheric radiation exactly the same, with a clear implication that the energy in radiation from the atmosphere is converted to thermal energy in the surface, which could then exit by evaporation, diffusion or additional radiation.

«Changes in the Earth's radiation budget are driven by changes in the balance between the thermal emission from the top of the atmosphere and the net sunlight absorbed.

The biggest error of all the errors in the physics of the radiative greenhouse conjecture is that they «explain» the surface temperature of 288K using Stefan - Boltzmann calculations based on the direct solar radiation PLUS about TWICE as much supposed thermal energy input from the colder atmosphere.

There are also metal (thermal) radiation shields sitting intermediately between the inner very cold area and the outside which limit the heat flow from the outside, much as greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, limit the rate at which the surface cools.

The latter two processes transfer twice as much thermal energy to the atmosphere as does radiation from the surface according to the NASA net energy diagram reproduced in my paper.

The effect of this disparity is that thermal radiation escaping to space comes mostly from the cold upper atmosphere, while the surface is maintained at a substantially warmer temperature.

The atmosphere of the Earth is less able to absorb shortwave radiation from the Sun than thermal radiation coming from the surface.

You get the real GHE from correct radiation physics, which is that thermal IR from the lower atmosphere blocks surface IR emission in GHG band centres, reducing total emissivity.

So the atmosphere must be opaque to thermal IR radiation to produce an effective temperature at the TOA different from the ground one.

There is «backradiation» because people have given that label to «downward directed thermal IR radiation from the atmosphere toward the surface».

Wayne If you don't like «back radiation», you could always use «plain old thermal radiation from the molecules in the atmosphere that happens to be directed back down in the general direction of the surface».......

Thermal radiation comes into the atmosphere from the sun, is converted to different wavelengths, and leaves it again.

But you still have the whole broad wavelength range of thermal radiation, so that is either directly from the surface; so should exhibit the surface Temperature characteristic (spectrum); or it is emitted from the atmosphere.