Sentences with phrase «where radiation from the surface»

Not exact matches

Sholes has gathered estimates of how quickly solar radiation generates carbon monoxide in Mars's atmosphere, and how fast it diffuses down to the planet's surface and into subsurface rocks, where any Martian life would shelter from deadly radiation.

The best environment for such organisms, she told the UK newspaper, would be two to three meters below the planet's surface, where they are more likely to be protected from the sun's intense UV radiation.

In the context of the real atmosphere, an observer looking down from space will see Planckian radiation upwelling at the surface temperature for those wavelengths where the air is very transparent.

Less TOA cooling will occur if bands are placed where, in the upper atmosphere or near TOA, they absorb more of the increases in radiation from below from surface + tropospheric (+ lower stratospheric) warming.

Although that will be true in the mid atmosphere, do you agree that is not the case near the surface of the Earth where the greenhouse molecules are being excited by blackbody radiation from the Earth's surface, but are being relaxed by collisions with other air molecules such as N2 & O2?

The effect where, adding a «new» absorption band and increasing the absorption, there may initially be warming of the colder layers, etc, followed by a stage of upper level or near - TOA cooling — this includes the warming from absorption from increased radiation from the surface + troposphere — which will be greater when more of the spectrum, especially near wavelengths where the emitted spectral flux change is greatest, has a greater amount of absorption.

Hence, whereas the planet is heated at the surface, it's main heat loss takes place from a height about 5.5 km above the ground, where most of the radiation is free to escape out to space.

This is not the case with surface - to - air heat exchange (which involves evapo - transpiration, sensible heat flows, and radiation) or even within the troposphere where impacts of latent heating on atmospheric circulations are realized on scales ranging from hundreds of meters to thousands of kilometers.

Dynamical upward transport by convection removes excess heat from the surface more efficiently than longwave radiation is able to accomplish in the presence of a humid, optically thick boundary layer, and deposits it in the upper troposphere where it is more easily radiated to space, thereby affecting the planetary energy balance.

Once we move into the far infra red where radiation from the greenhouse effect occurs, only the immediate surface «skin» of the ocean can absorb that radiation.

Much of it is in the lower part of the stratosphere, where it absorbs UV radiation from the Sun which can damage DNA in plants, animals and humans if it reaches the Earth's surface.

where latent heat release and net radiation into the atmospheric column, R, balance heat divergence, and the relatively weak contribution from sensible heat transport from the land surface to the atmospheric column has been neglected.

They go straight from the Earth's surface to empty space where there is no convection but only radiation.

First, CO2 outgases where cold water from the ocean depths surfaces at the equator to absorb solar radiation.

Anyone who seen a Realclimate thread weave endlessly for weeks on end simply because the team absolutely insist that back radiation does heat the surface, even though a more careful use of words would have closed the inquiry off very quickly, may understand where I'm coming from.

In that process, oxygen absorbs much of the ultraviolet radiation and prevents it from reaching the Earth's surface where we live.

The best papers I've read (so far) that seek to explain how things like the DALR and wet air lapse rates effect the actual transport of heat from the solar - heated surface and atmosphere to where it is ultimately lost via radiation are really quite good.

There seems to be (somewhere else) a website where they discuss how a hot surface «can't receive» radiation from a cooler one.

So what good is this experiment for the real scenario where carbon dioxide temperature is at ambient temperature or cooler and infrared radiation is coming from surface at ambient temperature?

Albedo is the proportion of incoming radiation that is reflected from surface back to where it came from.

So what good is this experiment for the real scenario where carbon dioxide temperature is at ambient temperature or cooler and infrared radiations is coming from surface at ambient temperature?

In Earth's atmosphere, there is a «window» between the 8 and 12 micron band where there is virtually no absorption going on, and through which IR radiation passes out from the surface to space virtually unimpeded.

«in an isotropic non GHG world, the net would be zero, as the mean conduction flux would equalize, but in our earth it is still nearly zero» if the atmosphere were isothermal at the same temperature as the surface then exactly the downwelling radiation absorbed by the surface would be equal to the radiation of th surface absorbed by the air (or rather by its trace gases) and both numbers would be (1 - 2E3 (t (nu)-RRB--RRB- pi B (nu, T) where t (nu) is the optical thickness, B the Planck function, nu the optical frequency and T the temperature; as the flow from the air absorbed by the surface is equal to the flow from the surface absorbed by the air, the radiative heat transfer is zero between surface and air.

Somehow, largely by conduction, convection and latent heat, and such means other than by radiation, heat flows from the earth's surface to somewhere, where it is then radiated into space.

In the case of dry air and without CO2, the cooling of the radiator is given by h * (T - Ta) where T and Ta are temperatures of the surface and the air layer, respectively, at the given time t. h describes the heat transport from the surface to the layer by radiation and convection.

CO2 absorbs infrared emissions from the Earth's surface only minimally in the range 7 to 13μm and it is within this range where the greatest proportion of radiation emitted by the Earth is found.

I have many comments where I point out that radiation drives convection and that without convective heat transfer from the surface of the Earth, it would be considerably hotter.

324 (back radiation)-- 235 (absorbed by surface + absorbed by atmosphere) = 89; from where?

In that view, this electrical energy is transferred from space to the Van Allen radiation belts, where it awaits discharge to the planet's surface, and eventually to the core, in the process creating the magnetic and electric fields which we observe to be affiliated with the Earth.

We use the 9 climate variables of surface air temperature (SAT), sea level pressure (SLP), precipitation (rain), the top of atmosphere (TOA) shortwave (SW) and longwave (LW) full - sky radiation, clear - sky radiation (CLR, radiative flux where clouds do not exists), and cloud radiative forcing (CRF, radiative effect by clouds diagnosed from the difference between full - sky and clear - sky radiation, Cess et al. 1990).