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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (1438958)	2/12/2024 7:57:42 PM
From: Eric	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573048

Origin of the greenhouse effect Schwarzschild's equation provides a simple explanation for the existence of the greenhouse effect and demonstrates that it requires a non-zero lapse rate. [15] Rising air in the atmosphere expands and cools as the pressure on it falls, producing a negative temperature gradient in the Earth's troposphere. When radiation travels upward through falling temperature, the incoming radiation, I, (emitted by the warmer surface or by GHGs at lower altitudes) is more intense than that emitted locally by B?(T). [B?(T) - I] is generally less than zero throughout the troposphere, and the intensity of outward radiation decreases as it travels upward. According to Schwarzschild's equation, the rate of fall in outward intensity is proportional to the density of GHGs (n) in the atmosphere and their absorption cross-sections (s?). Any anthropogenic increase in GHGs will slow down the rate of radiative cooling to space, i.e. produce a radiative forcing until a saturation point is reached. At steady state, incoming and outgoing radiation at the top of the atmosphere (TOA) must be equal. When the presence of GHGs in the atmosphere causes outward radiation to decrease with altitude, then the surface must be warmer than it would be without GHGs - assuming nothing else changed. Some scientists quantify the greenhouse effect as the 150 W/m2 difference between the average outward flux of thermal IR from the surface (390 W/m2) and the average outward flux at the TOA. If the Earth had an isothermal atmosphere, Schwarzschild's equation predicts that there would be no greenhouse effect or no enhancement of the greenhouse effect by rising GHGs. In fact, the troposphere over the Antarctic plateau is nearly isothermal. Both observations and calculations show a slight "negative greenhouse effect" – more radiation emitted from the TOA than the surface. [16] [17] Although records are limited, the central Antarctic Plateau has seen little or no warming. [18] en.wikipedia.org

To: maceng2 who wrote (1438958)	2/12/2024 9:18:47 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573048

"Schwarzschild’s Curve is cited." This was one of the videos that popped up at the end of the video I posted about Angstrom: The number that has puzzled Happer: Fabricating CO2 Forcing\| ICR 230429 Apr 29, 2023 When I first made some progress in my research on the climate stability, I sent my draft to several well-known figures in the field, asking for comments, just after the Christmas in 2020. I was delighted to get a short reply from Will Happer. He encouraged me to keep my research, but he also suggested that atmospheric radiation be treated by the radiative transfer, namely the Schwarzschild equation, in order to obtain something quantitative. My approach was to refine the energy balance conditions both at the surface and the top of the atmosphere, because I thought, and still think, it is imperative to ensure any assumptions and quantitative calculations should be made with the constrain of the energy conservation law. Obviously, Happer was not interested in my argument and has remained silent since then. I don’t complain this as my draft was not well-prepared and he was at his advanced age. What I didn’t know is that he has been co-authored with van Wijingaarden (vinkarten) for several papers on how to quantify the radiative forcing due to the CO2 doubling by calculating the CO2 absorption line-by-line based on the Hitran transition-frequency data. He could tell me this, but he didn’t. 9.By then, I had got familiar with how to calculate the so-called radiative forcing, the change in radiative forcing to be exact, due to CO2 doubling from a German physicist, Dr Harde, although I disagreed with his assumption that the downward CO2 emission is stronger than the upward CO2 emission. 10.So, it seems a piece of cake for me to read those papers by the two Williams on climate sensitivity due to CO2 doubling, although they might have attempted to make their calculations more difficult and abstract than they really are for oridnary people. 11.Before long, it has become clear they had failed to understand what they were trying talking about. In essence, they have in effect treated the outgoing longwave radiation, they use Z instead of OLR, as a free variable without any constrain. == Interesting that the Youtube site of Yong Tuition doesn’t share much, if any, information and background on Dr. Yong nor a full name to help one check up elsewhere on his background. In fact, a fairly thorough search of the internet could not find a single item on a Dr. Yong with a Phd in physics from Monash University in Australia. There is no sign of any publications, no curricula vitae, no list of qualifications. Nothing. Nada. Even checked Linkedin Australia and no such person is on Linkedin there, which seems a bit odd. So, no such person seems to exist other than on Yong Tuition. Wonder why that is? RealClimate: Unforced Variations: Apr 2023