Lets Do the Math on our Atmosphere...

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Billy_Bob, Jul 20, 2019.

  1. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    18,003
    Thanks Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +18,674
    Lets Do the Math on our Atmosphere...

    LWIR can not warm our atmosphere directly as it can not interact with anything except water vapor, which can use the energy to warm itself in our atmosphere. IR heaters prove this out in testing as energy in the 12um-16um setting is incapable of warming O2, N2, CO2 and other atmospheric gases. This type of energy must interact with a Black Body or a Grey Body in order to warm anything (solid surface or water).

    If you do the math on what little energy can interact with atmospheric gases, the input energy would have to be >5600w/m^2 just to raise the temp 1 deg C absent water vapor.(Roughly 4 times the output of our sun, in this narrow band, at TOA-[Top Of Atmosphere])

    You only need to look at the band pass graph of our atmosphere to see why we would need this much energy to warm the mass of the atmosphere.

    absorbtion vs power chart of atmosphere.jpg

    CO2 can not hold energy long enough to warm and it loses energy by collision some 30,000 times to 1 re-emission. Thus the energy is lost a long time before it has the potential to warm the molecule or any other molecule in our atmosphere. Absent water vapor LWIR is transparent to our atmosphere.

    Many times I have pointed out our deserts and places of low water content, which have a 40% larger temperature swing and far faster rates of change than other areas of high water content. Most desert areas can cool to 32 deg F at night and be 110 deg F in the day time by 10 am and areas of high water content will get to 55 deg F at night and take until 3pm to reach 90 Deg F (much slower warming due to atmospheric loss and then cool slower due to warmer water in the atmosphere).

    IF you note the power curve in the above graphing (green dotted line) you will begin to understand why the atmosphere can not warm with such a small bandwidth of LWIR and what little power it represents when you take that small region into account only.

    ON to the math....
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    15,568
    Thanks Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +9,016
    Don't guess we will see the wackos much on this thread....By the way William Happer says that only 1 in a billion CO2 molecules actually gets to emit a photon..
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    18,003
    Thanks Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +18,674
    I saw that. Its from his paper on atmospheric processes and the alarmists are having a real hard time digesting it... LOL
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    15,568
    Thanks Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +9,016
    In the end, what did you think of that paper? Was there anything in it that struck you as new?...new in so far as skepticism goes...it will probably all be new to alarmists.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    18,003
    Thanks Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +18,674
    It confirmed the work we did in the atmospherics lab on CO2 and LWIR transmission (or should I say confirms that LWIR is transparent to our atmosphere absent water vapor). Our paper should be published later this year and it will be met with fierce opposition. I believe Happer is one of the physicists reviewing our work as well.
     
  6. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    18,003
    Thanks Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +18,674
    This is the section of the atmosphere were talking about, where LWIR exits.

    upload_2019-7-20_10-21-48.png

    You will note that the upwelling bandwidth is 3.2um to 120um (this graphing stops at 70um) Below is a graphing from Wiki ( I hate these because of inaccuracies and changes made at a whim, but this appears to be accurate at the moment).

    upload_2019-7-20_10-27-18.png

    As you can see the energy contained in any transmission decreases with length of the wave and particle power drops as the temperature of the emitting molecule decreases. With this we now have several of the numbers we need to do the math and figure out just how much power is contained in the up-welling LWIR. We also have the percentage of the total Watts/Meter^2 from the graph above to get us a ball park figure of what energy is being sent up in the bandwidth which CO2 can interfere with.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2019
  7. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    18,003
    Thanks Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +18,674
    Lets do the easy one first...

    Total upwelling radiation is 396w/m^2

    Percentage of the spectrum that CO2 can affect = 3.23%

    Percentage of radiation derived by 1% at 320mev and 2.3% at 137mev = 4.261%

    396 X 3.23% = 12.7908w/m^2 (low threshold)

    396 x 4.261% = 16.8735w/m^2(upper limit)

    Our answer must be between 12.7908w/m^2 and 16.8735w/m^2. 4.0827w/m^2 is the total possible range of CO2 affect without any enhancement or dampening affect given the energy it contains.
     
  8. Fort Fun Indiana
    Online

    Fort Fun Indiana Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2017
    Messages:
    27,152
    Thanks Received:
    1,779
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Ratings:
    +12,470
    Well, that's because you are the wackos.
     
  9. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    15,568
    Thanks Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +9,016

    Says the guy who by his own admission does't know enough about the science to have any idea one way or another.
     
  10. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    18,003
    Thanks Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +18,674
    Before I go further, a couple of caveats..

    1.- This is a very rough generalization of the math.
    2.- The amplification and or dampening effect can push beyond upper and lower limits.
    3.- The math is consistent with the LOG of CO2 and the base slowing of energy release.
    4.- I will not be getting into Coriolis affects and solar input on 1/2 of the globe at any given time.
    5.- Water vapor dwarfs CO2 by a factor of 22-1 and can act as a enhancer or dampener.
     

Share This Page