The very POWERFUL the Solar Irradiated planet surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon: ( N*cp )^1/16

Earth's thermal inertia is tremendously large. It is the reason Earth is never in equilibrium with incoming solar energy. Either there is a slow, orbitally forced rise in global accumulated thermal energy, or, decline in thermal energy, because of the orbitally forced the lessened the surface accumulative abilities. In our times the total yearly SW reflection along with the total yearly immediate IR emission are lower, than some few millennia previously. Lowering radiative losses resulted to increased heat accumulation and global temperature rise. The warming is because of orbital circumstances, not because of extensive fossil fuels burning. The phenomenon originates from the planet's changing ability to accumulate solar energy. When Earth is closer to sun on winters, Earth gets warmer, than when Earth is closer to sun on summers. A big differencies occur, with the intermediate phases in between. You will be immediatelly convinced by a single glance at a classroom's demonstration globe

Planetary mean surface temperatures are often discussed using global radiative equilibrium concepts in which absorbed solar flux is averaged over the planetary sphere and equated to thermal emission. While useful as accounting tools, such averages do not describe the local physical interaction between incident electromagnetic radiation and planetary surfaces. Insolation is spatially and temporally heterogeneous, and emission depends nonlinearly on temperature. As a result, the fraction of incident energy converted into stored heat depends on surface thermal properties and rotation. Airless bodies provide a useful baseline for understanding this process. Mercury and the Moon exhibit large diurnal temperature excursions, rapidly re-emitting much of the incident energy before it can be stored as heat. Faster rotation and higher surface heat capacity increase the ability of a surface to retain energy between illumination cycles, raising the mean temperature without invoking atmospheric tra

Good evening everyone! Wishing you health, happiness and prosperity! I am still working 24/7 as an Independent Researcher - explaining the obvious things. Here it is my latest post, simple but unfortunatelly does not yet acceptable by the wide scientifical consensus: Atmosphere is very thin. Atmosphere doesn't play a role of a warming blanket. The CO2 content (~0,042% or 1 CO2 molecule vs 2500 air molecules) is an infinitesimally small amount in an already thin atmosphere. Link: https://www.cristos-vournas.com With best regards, Christos /////////////////////////////// ////////////////////////// ////////////////////// Christos Vournas @CVournas44116 · 7m Atmosphere doesn't play a role of a warming bla... https://cristos-vournas.com/blog/atmosphere-doesn-t-play-a-role-of-a-warming-blanke… Thought for 16s Christos Vournas, a mechanical engineer, promotes alternative climate theories on X, with this post linking to his blog denying the atmosphere's role as a warming blanket, part of a pa

As we can see, in English version of Wikipedia, the table "Sample albedos" is about "Typical albedo" , which is diffusely reflected solar energy ratio. In French version, the analogue table is reffered to as "Bond Albedo", which is a mistaken naming. ///////////////////////////// //////////////////////////// Albedo - Wikipedia Sample albedos Surface Typical albedo Fresh asphalt 0.04[6] Open ocean 0.06[7] Worn asphalt 0.12[6] Conifer forest, summer 0.08,[8] 0.09 to 0.15[9] Deciduous forest 0.15 to 0.18[9] Bare soil 0.17[10] Green grass 0.25[10] Desert sand 0.40[11] New concrete 0.55[10] Ocean ice 0.50 to 0.70[10] Fresh snow 0.80[10] Aluminium 0.85[12][13] Albédo — Wikipédia Type de surface Albédo de Bond (de 0 à 1) Corps noir parfait 0,00 Surface de lac 0,02 à 0,04 lave 0,04 Forêt de conifères[7] 0,05 à 0,15 Surface de la mer 0,05 à 0,15 Sol sombre 0,05 à 0,15 Forêt de feuillus[7] 0,15 à 0,20 Cultures 0,15 à 0,25 Sable léger et sec 0,25 à 0,45 Calcaire[8] 0,40 environ Nuage 0,50 à 0,80

That is why the Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon: It was traditionally believed, when a surface is solar irradiated, what is not reflected, it is absorbed as heat. It was a traditional believe: either solar energy is reflected, or it is absorbed as heat. So, that believe led to the logical assertion, that no matter how fast a planet rotates, the entire not reflected solar energy is absorbed as heat. Now we know, the not reflected portion is not entirely absorbed as heat. It is Immediately IR Emitted, and, only a small part is absorbed. So, when faster rotating, a planetary surface exhibits a lower Immediate IR Emission, and a higher Heat Absorption. In general case, a planet with a higher (N*cp) product (everything else equals), that planet absorbs more heat, and therefore, that planet develops a higher average surface temperature (Tmean). - Link: https://www.cristos-vournas.com

Good evening! I think thermodynamics is about gases in closed systems. The air is rarer the higher you go. When warmed by contact with the ground, air becomes lighter. Yet it cannot reach too high, because up there the air is less dence. Gases in the smog chimneys get warmed not from the sun - you know that - it is the combustion, not the radiation. The average surface temperature is not a remperature per ce. A surface doesn't emit at average temperature. When under the sun surface induced a local higher temperature. And when under the sun, surface emits more intensively. This local temperature also is measured and added to the total summ, but it is not the result of heat acculation and warming, it is an induced temperature, because of the SW /surface interaction process. The planet surface effective temperature also is not temperature - it is a mathematical abstraction. A planet doesn't emit at that temperature. Also, the heat absorbed by a planet or moon every given moment is very mu