![[Image: GW170104a_close-up_spinning_black_holes.jpg?1496290097]](https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/system/avm_image_sqls/binaries/67/thumb/GW170104a_close-up_spinning_black_holes.jpg?1496290097)
LIGO detects gravitational wave caused by merging Black Holes , again!
http://news.mit.edu/2017/ligo-detects-me...-time-0601
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 18, 2024, 11:01 pm
Thread Rating:
|
Science Porn
|
 LIGO detects gravitational wave caused by merging Black Holes , again! http://news.mit.edu/2017/ligo-detects-me...-time-0601 
KELT 9b
new exo planet discovery I saw today. Surface temperature is 7800 F !!! Very close orbit around a very hot (A type) star is what's happening. This planet is hotter (on the star facing side) than all M type stars, and a few of the cooler K types !!! The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
 RE: Science Porn
June 7, 2017 at 6:17 pm
(This post was last modified: June 7, 2017 at 6:18 pm by Alex K.)
I think I'm addressing the right crowd here: I am trying to quantitatively understand the greenhouse effect on a back-of-envelope level. I've worked out the equilibrium temperature w/o greenhouse gases. Does anyone know a not too difficult explanation how to take into account the co2 blanketing effect in that radiation balance as a function of the %?
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Yes.
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni: "You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???"
Can anyone give me one?
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Sorry. I don't even understand the question.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---  (June 7, 2017 at 6:17 pm)Alex K Wrote: I think I'm addressing the right crowd here: I am trying to quantitatively understand the greenhouse effect on a back-of-envelope level. I've worked out the equilibrium temperature w/o greenhouse gases. Does anyone know a not too difficult explanation how to take into account the co2 blanketing effect in that radiation balance as a function of the %? Wow.... the CO2 contribution should be an extra coefficient on that equilibrium level that you already calculated for the normal atmosphere. You just need to know how much Infrared gets absorbed by CO2, depending on the concentration in the atmosphere... Or how much more CO2 absorbs, when compared with O2 and N2... I tried searching for it, but couldn't find it in 5 minutes... Best luck to you.
Sorry, Alex.
You lost me early into the second sentence... Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni: "You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???"  (June 7, 2017 at 6:17 pm)Alex K Wrote: I think I'm addressing the right crowd here: I am trying to quantitatively understand the greenhouse effect on a back-of-envelope level. I've worked out the equilibrium temperature w/o greenhouse gases. Does anyone know a not too difficult explanation how to take into account the co2 blanketing effect in that radiation balance as a function of the %? I know an atmospheric scientist (retired). If I see him tomorrow at my carving class, I'll try to remember to ask.
If you get to thinking you’re a person of some influence, try ordering somebody else’s dog around.
Fireball
(June 7, 2017 at 6:17 pm)Alex K Wrote: I think I'm addressing the right crowd here: I am trying to quantitatively understand the greenhouse effect on a back-of-envelope level. I've worked out the equilibrium temperature w/o greenhouse gases. Does anyone know a not too difficult explanation how to take into account the co2 blanketing effect in that radiation balance as a function of the %? I know an atmospheric scientist (retired). If I see him tomorrow at my carving class, I'll try to remember to ask. Since I can't edit the post due to aging out of the edit window, I'm responding to myself, ask for further clarification. Alex, do you just want it as a percentage of atmosphere, or might it make more sense to look at it in an integrated sense of graduated concentration? This guy may have a handle on that, though I don't know for sure.
If you get to thinking you’re a person of some influence, try ordering somebody else’s dog around.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 11 Guest(s)
