The Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon

The Planet Mean Surface Temperature Equation Tmean = [ Φ (1-a) S (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴

Disputing the Milutin Milankovitch "The cooler summers lead to Glaciation" notion.

Christos Vournas - July 7, 2021

When comparing with the Perihelion point, which is at January 2, the solar irradiance Earth receives now is 7% less. As a result we have at the North Hemisphere much cooler summers and much warmer winters.

In 10.000 (ten thousand) years from now, Earth’s axis will be pointing at star Vega, instead of Polaris at which it points now. So in 10.000 years the Winter Solstice will occur when Earth is in Aphelion (it happens now with Earth in Perihelion).

As a result in 10.000 years we would have at the North Hemisphere much warmer summers and much cooler winters.

A shift of 7% in the Hemispheres’ insolation intensity will happen.

Instead of the Southern Hemisphere (as it happens now) with its vast oceans accumulative capacity… there would be a +7% stronger insolation on the North Hemisphere’s plethora of continental areas.

We know continents do not accumulate heat so much effectively as oceans do, thus Earth will gradually cool down, until a New Ice Age commences!

As for the current warming phase – we still receive the +7% solar energy onto Southern Hemisphere’s oceans… and oceans willingly accumulate the excess solar energy…

It happens so during the current Winter Solstices, when Earth is still tilted towards sun with its Southern Hemisphere’s vast oceanic waters. 

 

Opponent:

"Warmer conditions enhance freshening of the Arctic Ocean surface water reducing thermohaline circulation and transport of heat northward.

Cooler summers create conditions for survival of ice leading to runaway ice sheet feedback."

 

Christos Vournas:

“Cooler summers create conditions for survival of ice leading to runaway ice sheet feedback.”

Cooler summers means warmer winters at the Northern Hemisphere. Also it means warmer summers and colder winters in the Southern Hemisphere.

We consider Earth as a whole…

Please explain how “Cooler summers create conditions for survival of ice leading to runaway ice sheet feedback.”

The cooler summers would be followed by warmer winters, warmer late autumns and warmer early springs…

And, conclusively, the average North Hemisphere temperature will be higher.

So, how possible it is for ice to pile up thru the on average year higher North Hemisphere temperatures, and how “the runaway ice sheet feedback” is possible to occur then?

About the Glaciation being "the runaway ice sheet feedback"

I see, you support the notion the Glaciation is "the runaway ice sheet feedback".

But why it is a "runaway feedback" for you? When there is less solar energy absorption by the global surface area, Earth's surface gradually cools and the ice sheet grows...

There is not any feedback... Not any positive feedback...

Feedback means the existence of ice sheet makes it inevitable to continue growing - the runaway!

When ice covers earth it behaves in the negative feedback pattern, because ice sheet keeps earth from emitting more IR EM energy.

Open water's emissivity is higher than snow covered ice sheet's.

When ocean is covered with ice, it protects earth from the intensive cooling, thus, by ice cover Earth saves energy and being kept warmer.

There is not a positive feedback from the ice sheet cover. The feedback from ice sheet is negative.

Opponent: "Unfortunately it is very hard to get an average temperature analysis for the moon."

Opponent / July 8. 2021:

"You have put a lot of work into your analysis which I thank you for. Unfortunately it is very hard to get an average temperature analysis for the moon. The figure you are quoting may not be correct [220C] The NASA version is the 270.4 C which equates well with albedo and TOA [which is basically the moon surface].

Sorry."

Christos Vournas:

Thank you for your good faith, it is the most important!

Well, I am sorry too. When I first looked for lunar surface temperature (Dec. 2015) it was 220K.

Yes, I am fully aware of that:

"– https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Moon gives Surface temp.

min mean max equator 100 K 220 K

 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Moon gives Surface temp.

min mean max Equator 100 K[12] 250 K 390 K[1

 

– Moon Fact sheet NASA gives

– Moon Earth Solar irradiance (W/m2) 1361.0 1361.0 1.000 Black-body temperature (K) 270.4 254.0 1.065"

 

When earlier this year I wanted to refer to Wikipedia, I realized the Moon surface temperature 220K was changed to 250K... It was a very unpleasant surprise for me.

How could that suddenly have changed?

So, I looked in other Wikipedia pages, I looked in other languages' pages to demonstrate the prove I had the 220K for Moon surface temperature taken from Wikipedia...

And, therefore, it was from NASA, because Wikipedia has not any other source, except NASA, for the Planet surface temperatures data.

Then, I looked in the "simple Wikipedia" page and found it in English again. But first let me present you some other pages:

 

القمر - ويكيبيديا (wikipedia.org)

https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%85%D8%B1

الحرارة 95 كلفن، و390 كلفن[3] تعديل قيمة خاصية (P2076) في ويكي بيانات حرارة السطح - كلفن - كلفن الدنيا 100 عند الاستواء 70 عند 85 ش المتوسطة 220 عند الاستواء 130 عند 85 ش القصوى 390 عند الاستواء 230 عند 85 ش

 

Lune — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org)

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lune

Maximum 396 K (123 °C) Moyenne 200 K (−73 °C) Minimum 40 K (−233 °C)

 

月球 - 维基百科,自由的百科全书 (wikipedia.org)

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9C%88%E7%90%83

表面溫度最低平均

最高赤道100 K220 K390 K85°N[3]70 K130 K230 K

 

月球 - 维基百科 (wikipedia.org)

https://wuu.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9C%88%E7%90%83

表面溫度最低平均最高赤道100 开220 开390 开85°NTemplate:Lower70 开130 开230 开

 

Lua – Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre (wikipedia.org)

https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lua Temperatura média: -53,1 ºC

mínima: -173,1 ºC máxima: 116,9 ºC

 

Luna - Wikipedia

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna

Temp. la suprafață min med max Ecuator 100 K 220 K 390 K 85°N 150 K

 

चन्द्रमा - विकिपिडिया (wikipedia.org)

https://dty.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A4%9A%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%BE

Surface temp. min mean max equator 100 के 220 के 390 के 85°N[५] 70 के 130 के 230 के 230 K[8]

 

Луна — Википедия (wikipedia.org)

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B0

Температура мин. сред. макс. Температура на экваторе[3] 100 К (−173 °C) 220 К (−53 °C) 390 К (117 °C)

 

*************************************

Sorry to bother you with all those links to Wikipedia, but, you see, I have to defend my discoveries. I have to defend the rightness of my discoveries.

I have to make them known, and I have to explain them so they become well understood and well accepted.

Thank you.

Planet is not a flat surface, which half the time is in sunlight and half the time it isn't.

July 15, 2021

Opponent:

 "Half the time half the surface is in sunlight – half the time it isn’t. Regardless of how fast it spins."

Answer:

No, planet is not a flat surface, which half the time is in sunlight and half the time it isn't.

Planet is a rotating sphere in the parallel solar beams flow. Planet rotates all the time... And it is important for surface temperatures how fast planet spins.

When rotating every planet's spot changes its position in relation to the solar angular incidence. Now it is at dawn position, then it is at midday, at afternoon, at dusk... at midnight...

It is a mistake thinking about the planetary rotation as "Half the time half the surface is in sunlight – half the time it isn’t. Regardless of how fast it spins." 

Earth is a warmer faster rotating planet

July 19, 2021

Opponent:

"We do not have a warmer faster rotating planet".

Answer:

An example of a faster rotating planet which is a warmer planet is Earth vs Moon.

Moon, because of the lower Albedo (a=0,11) than Earth’s Albedo (a=0,306), Moon receives 28% more solar energy than Earth…

Nevertheless, Moon is considered a much colder planet than Earth.

Moon’s rotational spin is 29,5 times slower than Earth’s. And Moon’s average surface specific heat is 0,19 times of that of Earth’s.

Moon has almost five times lower average surface specific heat than Earth. Because Moon’s surface consists of lunar regolith (soil), and Earth’s surface consists of water (ocean).

Both those physics data (the rotational spin and the average surface specific heat) are measured evidence.

What we did here is to compare two celestial bodies’ the average surface temperatures… The method we use is the “Planet Surface Temperatures Comparison Method”.

By inserting the Warming Factor we transform the planet theoretical blackbody temperature Te into the planet mean surface temperature Tmean.

July 27, 2021

An answer to opponent

Opponent:

The Earth's without-atmosphere theoretical blackbody temperature according to the classical equation

Te = [ (1-a) So /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ = 255 K

And according to the corrected equation with the use of Φ -Factor

Te.correct = [ Φ (1-a) So /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ = 210 K

 

And according to the New Tmean equation

Tmean = [ Φ (1-a) So (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ = 288 K

 

All three equations have the solar flux So = 1.361 W/m² as the only source of incident energy.

When using the New equation there is an obvious violation of first law of thermodynamics...

 

The answer:

We are not justified to compare the theoretical blackbody equation and the New Tmean equation results.

Those two equations are completely different physics terms. They cannot be compared.

When applying to the classical planet blackbody Te equation the Warming Factor [(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴]¹∕ ⁴ we are dealing with a completely different physics term.

The Warming Factor [(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴]¹∕ ⁴ does not add some new energy forcing onto the planet's surface.

By inserting the Warming Factor we transform the planet theoretical blackbody temperature Te into the planet mean surface temperature Tmean.

What the Research was needed for?

July 27, 2021

Opponent:

What the Research was needed for?

 

Answer:

Well, it is a good question. An opponent at one of the first presentations of the New Theory asked: "Why it should be again explained, what is already explained?"

Well, it was very much obvious to me that the Trace Greenhouse Gases Content in thin Earth's atmosphere were not able to produce any Greenhouse Warming Effect on the Earth's surface.

It was obvious to me... but when discussing the theme with a scientist, who is a specialist in climatology... he was very much certain that without Earth's atmosphere greenhouse effect Earth would have been a snowball.

Science can only progress if assumptions are tested.

The research concluded in deriving a Universal Equation for calculating surface temperatures of planets or moons, for comparison with NASA satellite measurements of such bodies in our solar system.

Earth has never emitted those certain ranges of the IR spectrum...

July 29, 2021

Opponent:

"The same satellite data you use to benchmark your calculation also shows that Earth’s atmosphere is highly absorbing in certain ranges of the IR spectrum (see the spectrum here

https://ibb.co/8NVdj4Q  

How do you explain this contradiction?"

 

Answer:

Yes,  I visited the Link you provided. There is not a contradiction with the data.

Graph shows the measured Earth emissions in certain ranges of the IR spectrum... Earth's atmosphere does not absorb what is shown in the Graph.

It is a product of a mistaken comparison of the measured IR spectrum emitted by the surface with the alleged blackbody emission curve at 288K.

Earth's surface does not have a uniform surface temperature of 288K. Thus any measured IR emissions cannot be compared with that curve.

Also it is a question what those measured emissions (the so called atmospheric windows) represent. Are they average globe emissions, are they day-time emissions?

What they are?

 

Conclusion

Earth’s atmosphere highly absorbing in certain ranges of the IR spectrum narrative is fictions, because Earth has never emitted those certain ranges of the IR spectrum.

One cannot measure IR radiative emission that is not emitted... But that does not make it being absorbed by atmosphere.

It was simply deduced those certain ranges of the IR spectrum were absorbed by the Earth's atmosphere, because they were comparing the Earth's actual emission ranges with the blackbody uniform 288K Stefan-Boltzmann emission law curve.

It was simply deduced that those certain ranges of the IR spectrum were absorbed by the Earth's atmosphere.

It happened so, because it was wrongly compared the Earth's actual emission ranges with the blackbody uniform 288K Stefan-Boltzmann emission law curve.

When certain ranges of the IR spectrum are not there... it is a confirmation planet does not emit as a blackbody. 

Venus' atmosphere has a strong Greenhouse Effect on the Venus' mean surface temperature.

August 4, 2021

Opponent:

"Basically it appears you admit that your model cannot explain Venus and it does require a GHE.

Then how is it you can call it a New Universal Law, if it does not work for Venus?"

 

Answer:

I never said there is not GHE. What I have shown is that Earth's atmosphere is very thin and the greenhouse gases content is very small, it is trace gases in a very thin atmosphere...

I have calculated Venus' surface temperature theoretically using the New Equation, by adding in the equation the greenhouse gases' density factor.

The result is very satisfactory.

I have also theoretically calculated by the use of the greenhouse gases' density factor the mean surface temperatures for Earth's and Titan's atmosphere and the results were again very much satisfactory.

Please visit the page in my site about Venus’ 735K globally averaged surface temperature.

Thank you for asking about a very important aspect of the theme.

Link to the page:

https://www.cristos-vournas.com/446364348