### For Φ(1 -a) coupled term a very strong ARGUMENT.

For Φ(1 -a) coupled term a very strong ARGUMENT.

What we had till now was:

Tmean.earth = 288 K

................Tmean.moon = 220 K

Te. earth = 255 K

.................Te.moon = 270 K

Tmean.mars = 210 K

...........Te.mars = 210 K

Well, Tmean.earth =288K and Tmean.moon =220K and Tmean.mars =210K are measured values, thus we accept them as correct ones.

Te.moon =270K and Te.earth =255K and Te.mars =210K are calculated values.

The blackbody equilibrium temperature (effective temperature) Te formula used is:

Te = [ (1-a) S /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴

a - is the average surface Albedo (For Earth a=0,306; For Moon a=0,11; For Mars a=0,250) and those are measured values, thus we accept them as correct ones too.

S - is the solar flux. For Earth and Moon S=So = 1.361 W/m² (So is the Solar constant) For Mars S = 586,4 W/m² S and So are measured values, thus we accept them as correct ones also.

σ = 5,67*10⁻⁸ W/m²K⁴, the Stefan-Boltzmann constant; We accept it as well!

What is not well:

Tmean.earth - Te.earth = 288K -255K = +Δ33C

Tmean.moon - Te.moon = 220K -270K = -Δ50C

Tmean.mars - Te.mars = 210K -210K = Δ0C

We should conclude there is something wrong with the Te blackbody equilibrium temperature (effective temperature) formula used here.

There something should be very wrong.

There was that assumption-explanation: Planet Te should equal the planet Tmean. Thus Te.mars=Tmean.mars=210K (Δ0C)

As for Earth's (+Δ33C) it is explained by the Earth's atmosphere GHE.

And we haven't any explanation for Moon's (-Δ50C).

As a summary

1). We had an arbitrary assumption (Planet Te should equal the planet Tmean.)

2). We had a coincidence (Te.mars=Tmean.mars=210K (Δ0C) )

3). We had a controversial explanation (Earth's (+Δ33C) is explained by the Earth's atmosphere trace greenhouse gasses content the alleged GHE.)

4). And we had a very big discrepancy (we hadn't any explanation for Moon's (-Δ50C)).

...........................

Let's see what New Theory states about:

It states (the first discovery) smooth planets' surface have very strong specular reflection.

Thus the blackbody equilibrium temperature (effective temperature) Te formula should be corrected as:

Te = [ Φ(1-a) S /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴

Φ - is the Planet Surface Solar Irradiation Accepting Factor.

Where Φ=0,47 for smooth surface planets and moons (Mercury, Moon, Earth, Mars, Europa, Ganymede).

And Φ=1 for rough surface planets and moons (heavy cratered ones) and for gaseous planets and moons.

The calculated with the corrected blackbody equilibrium formula temperatures (the corrected effective temperatures) Te.correct are:

Te.correct.earth =210K

Te.correct.moon =224K

Te.correct.mars = 174K

And Tmean.earth - Te.earth = 288K -210K = +Δ78C; Tmean.moon - Te.moon = 220K -224K = -Δ4C; Tmean.mars - Te.mars = 210K -174K = +Δ36C.

1). In this case it is pretty obvious for Earth's +Δ78C we cannot explain that much of difference by Earth's GHE.

2). In case of Mars the +Δ36C difference is in similar to Earth's pattern.

3). Moon has, compared to Earth and Mars a rather very small difference of only -Δ4C.

As a summary

1). We have a discovery (Planet Te should be corrected for smooth surface planets and moons - the Φ.)

2). We have the Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon which states: Planets' mean surface temperatures relate (everything else equals) as their (N*cp) products' sixteenth root.

In the New Theory we have not old theory's discrepancy of Mars, a planet without-atmosphere, having the same Tmean=Te=210K vs Moon's, also without-atmosphere, having Tmean-Te =-Δ50C.

Also, the New Theory explains that a faster rotating than Moon Mars has a higher +Δ36C.

And the faster rotating Earth (as fast as Mars'), and, also having a higher average surface specific heat Earth (cp =1cal/gr.oC for water vs cp =0,19cal/gr.oC for dry soil) has a much higher +Δ78C.

Now, please compare the New Theory with the old planet blackbody equilibrium temperature Te (effective temperature) results:

1). We had an arbitrary assumption (Planet Te should equal the planet Tmean.)

2). We had a coincidence (Te.mars=Tmean.mars=210K (Δ0C) )

3). We had a controversial explanation (Earth's (+Δ33C) is explained by the Earth's trace greenhouse gasses content the alleged GHE.)

4). And we had a very big discrepancy (we hadn't any explanation for Moon's (-Δ50C) ).

It is very much obvious now that the discovery (the unveiling) of Φ - the Planet Surface Solar Irradiation Accepting Factor is of a TRUE scientific value!

It is for Φ(1 -a) coupled term a very strong indeed ARGUMENT !

## How much is the planet Earth’s the incident solar beam's specular reflection?

1. How much is the planet Earth’s the incident solar beam's specular reflection?

Jdiffuse = a*So = 0,306*1.370 W/m² =419,22 W/m²

where a = 0,306 – is the average solar lit hemisphere’s Albedo (it is the diffuse reflection portion)

So = 1.370 W/m² – is the solar flux

Thus
(1 – a)*So – is the not diffusely reflected solar energy
(1-0,306)*1.370 = 0,694*1.370 = 950,78 W/m²

1 – Φ = 1 -0,47 = 0,53 is the specular reflected part
where Φ – is the planet surface solar irradiation Accepting Factor
(the planet surface spherical shape and the planet surface roughness coefficient)

950,78*0,53 =503,91 W/m²

And what amount of solar energy has remained for the planet Earth to INTERACT with?

1.370 – 419,22 – 503,91 =446,87 W/m²

***
Notice:

It is     π*r² *446,87 (W) Watts in TOTAL on the entire solar lit hemisphere
• where:
r – is the earth’s radius
W – is Watts = Joules/sec

2. 1 - Φ = 1 -0,47 = 0,53 is the specular reflected part
where Φ is the planet surface solar irradiation Accepting Factor
(the planet surface spherical shape and the planet surface roughness coefficient)

950,78*0,53 =503,91 W/m²

the specular reflected part

503,91 W/m²
The specular reflected part is 1.000 times bigger number than the

“~ +0,5 W/m² imbalance scenario”.

It is three 3 orders of magnitude higher!!!

I mean the entire GHE alarmists scientific consensus community. The consensus is not something to blame anyone personally.

The three orders of magnitude is not an insignificant value someone may turn a blind eye on!

• The planet Mercury’s Albedo a =0,068
Also we know Mercury has a surface of rock basalt.

Basalt is as smooth as glass.

Does anyone think a spherical object from basalt lit by sun absorbs
the
(1 -0,068)S = 0,932*S or 93,2% of the incident on its surface solar flux?

Everyone has played with a mirror in the sunshine.
When you look in the mirror, it looks dark, but when you “catch” the reflection of sun in the eye -it is definitely blinding!

Thus, the specular reflection is not only in my imagination, it is in your imagination too. The specular reflection is in everyone’s imagination, and not because I made you to imagine it, but because you have seen the sun in the mirror!

You have seen the sun in the mirror many-many times...remember?