Confirming the Orderly Universe.

The new equation shows that the NASA satellite measurements are very precise. Also it helps to explain some inconsistencies that scientists had noticed, in planet's and moon's temperature behavior.

When a new planet at different solar system is discovered, scientists speculate whether it is habitable or not. They were counting only on the star's irradiation flux and on the distance from the star. Now it is possible to have a much more precise estimation of the planet's temperature, in cases when the planet's spin is already known.

The new equation brings order in the field of planets' temperatures measurements.

Revising the Understanding of Planet Properties.

The new equation provides some new information about the physical properties of planets that changes established understanding. The new equation can accurately predict a planet's mean surface temperature, without using any terms in the equation to account for atmospheric properties or for internal heat, and consequently that implies that the planet's mean surface temperature is not affected by the atmospheric composition or the internal heat. The new equation shows that there is no greenhouse effect on Titan (the Saturn's satellite, which has an atmosphere of 95% N₂ and 5% methane - a very strong greenhouse gas). The 5% methane gas is not enough to create a measurable greenhouse effect on Titan. This changes the established understanding that Titan, similarly to Earth, has a strong greenhouse effect.

And also there is the consequence that the gaseous planets Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune do not have any inner source of energy as it is wrongly assumed.

Revising the Understanding of the Greenhouse Effect.

Hansen et. al., (1981) gave an early estimate for the magnitude of the greenhouse effect as 33°C. This 33°C estimate was obtained by using the simple blackbody Equation (2) to calculate the Earth's effective radiating temperature (255 K), then comparing that to the NASA mean measured temperature (288 K), and assuming that the difference (the excess temperature of 33°C = 288 - 255 ) was entirely caused by the greenhouse effect.[22]

"Using values for planet Earth (with albedoa~ 0.3 and solar flux So = 1367 watts per square meter), this equation calculates that Te ~ 255 K."[23]

Notice that this calculated temperature of 255 K is less than the NASA's measured mean temperature of Tsat ~ 288 K by a difference of 33°C, and that this difference has been attributed to the greenhouse effect: . . . According to[24]| Hansen et. al. (1981)] . . . "The excess, Ts - Te, is the greenhouse effect of gases and clouds, which cause the mean radiating level to be above the surface."

However, attributing all of this difference (33°C = 288 - 255 ) entirely to the greenhouse effect is tantamount to assuming that the blackbody Equation (2) is perfect and has no error due to making simplifying assumptions -- which is unlikely. This is demonstrated in Table 1, which shows significant differences (Ts - Te) even for planets and moons having no atmosphere. Hence, the difference (Ts - Te) can be caused entirely or partly by factors other than a greenhouse effect.

The improved equation for the planet's surface temperature (Eqn.3) includes some additional factors to mathematically represent the planet's actual conditions more appropriately than the simplifying blackbody assumptions.

Using the new equation, the Earth's mean surface temperature (with no atmosphere) is calculated to be 288°K, which closely matches the NASA measured mean temperature (with atmosphere) of 288°K, leaving no error term (formerly 33°C) to attribute to a postulated atmospheric "greenhouse" effect.

The trace gas CO2 does not make planet warmer.

Our planet Earth is in continuous atmospheric CO2 depletion pattern for many hundred thousands and many millions years now.

If we humans had not used wood and fossil fuels burning, planet Earth would have been in a much worse atmospheric CO2 depletion ecological problem.
Natural carbon cycle inevitably leads to the Earth system carbon depletion, by sequestering it in fossil fuels natural deposits.

It is a one way natural ecological process.
Numerous species have flourished and dissappeared in that process.

Live still exists on planet Earth because of the presence of some atmospheric CO2 gas. Planet Earth is in urgent need for more atmospheric CO2, not less.

Atmospheric CO2 content is so small it is called trace gas.
The trace gas CO2 does not make planet warmer.



It is a too small in magnitude phenomenon

Thank you, for your very substancial and informative comment. You are absolutely right when saying:

"...theres a very simple reason why the hottest places on Earth are those with the least supposed greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. There are less greenhouse gases to block the Sun when it hits. So it hits the hardest.

... the hottest places on Earth cool the fastest. There are less greenhouse gases to block the radiation that leaves the Earth."

Today we had in Athens a sunny winter day. The cold and, therefore, very dry Northern winds blowing, and the sun shinning in the clear sky.

You know, it was unbearably hot in the sun, we used the shaded side in the street, just like we use to do in summer. But today it was even more necessary.

I think the sun on our bodies was at 1362 W/m2, and not less. There was not any Albedo a=0,3 there. The sun was definitelly burning.


Well, I used to live in dessert. During the day it was unbearably hot. And during the night it was very cool.

The explanation they had was the very dry climate they had in there.


Also, I have experienced in winter a sudden cloudy sky getting us warmer.

And, there are places in Greece, at seaside, when at summer there are times there is not any kind of air movement, and the moisture in the air is very much thick, and the sun from above is not so much burning, but the hot is deadly.


All those are examples of the water vapor and of the clouds greenhouse warming effect.


But, from that point, of some greenhouse warming effect at some places, at some times,

it is a too small in magnitude phenomenon, when compared with the alleged +33C atmospheric global greenhouse effect.

"As an approximation, the average flux will give the average temperature."

The approximation of Earth's

Te = 255K, when compared with the Earth's actual the average surface temperature

Tmean = 288K...

When 288K - 255K = 33°C, that approximation is what leads to mistaken conclusion the Earth's average surface atmospheric greenhouse effect is so much big +33°C!

For planets and moons with smooth surface, the surface's specular reflection is not negligible.

The smooth surface planets and moons have a very strong the surface's specular reflection.

The specular reflection is not included in albedo.

So we had (for those planets and moons with smooth surface, and, therefore, with surface's strong specular reflection), we had to correct their respective the planet effective temperature Te.

Thus, for Earth, the

Te =255K, when corrected, became Te.correct =210K.

The 288K - 210K = 78°C very big difference is, nevertheless gets "managed"by planet Earth's very powerful the Rotational Warming Phenomenon.


The incoming solar EM energy averaging is a mistaken thought experiment - because the EM/surface interaction result is unique.

Solar EM energy at the instant of incidence on the planet surface what it does is to interact with the surface's matter.

At every point of incidence solar EM energy produces at that point the EM/surface interaction result.

The EM/surface interaction result is localized at that very point of EM energy incidence.

We cannot average the incident on a planet solar EM energy over some planet surface areas, because solar EM energy interacts with surface only at the point of incidence.

Because when the incident solar EM energy averaging, the new EM/surface interaction layout changes the actual EM/surface interaction result.


For the Smooth Surface Planets and Moons their Strong Specular Reflection was Neglected.

Solar system planets and moons during their 4,5 bn years long live-time, and because of their very different the respective "personal"

conditions, at which the planets and moons had evolved - thus planets and moons have developed very different the planetary surface features.

Therefore, some planets and moons have developed the distinquishly smooth(for the incident solar EM energy the specular reflection to occur) the smooth planetian surfaces, whereas other planets and moons have developed the distinquishly rough surfaces (for capturing the incident solar EM energy).

The smooth surface planets and moons specular reflection should be necessarily considered in the planets' and moons' "Energy in" estimation, because the Planet Energy Income for the smooth surface planets and moons is very much overestimated.