Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (18904)	12/26/2007 3:31:33 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

Given the closeness of the numbers (±32 watts < 10%), the Earth radiates little or no more energy than it receives from the Sun. In other words, there is no significant energy received at the Earth's surface from any interior source. (Contrast this with Jupiter, which radiates about 10 times the energy it receives from the Sun.) As I stated, we radiate more than we receive. Any moron can deduce that from the fact that the core is 2000 K (or whatever it is ) which is >> the surface temp. But the idiot I was posting to is unfamiliar with basic thermodynamics. If we didn't radiate more than we received (forget the nonsense about it being "or no more" above, that is a fool talking as well. LOL!) the surface temp would eventually become in equilibrium with the core. We must radiate, or boil. Take your pick.