Posted on 08/08/2023 4:50:07 AM PDT by Eleutheria5
They don’t bother to outline the atmospheric effect of gamma radiation.
That’s a tell.
Mehr Un Nisa
Stupidity born of open border floods and government schools...
S-so you mean Bruce Banner and Betty Ross won’t have have Son of Hulk? Damn! Think of the continuing franchise! Stan Lee and Disney will lose millions! No. Billions!
Scientists finally admit they don’t know everything, which means they don’t know anything, except how to get grants.
Climate change is affecting the sun now. /s
indeed
All that I know I know that I know nothing.
Plato
something like that
When I was getting my degree, every question about the weather brought up far more questions that were mostly answered with *We don’t know*.
All the learning showed me not what we do know, but the massive amount of what we don’t know.
Scientists are almost as arrogant as doctors and medical professionals.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing for more reasons than one. At the very least, if feeds pride like nothing else.
“Unprecendented high energy from the sun.”
Better said, newly discovered.
High energy from the sun is “unprecedented”?
Seriously?
You.re right. But they should not be surprised unless in their arrogance they think they know everything possible about the sun.
Where do the gamma rays go at night?
Interesting.
The fact that the gamma rays are absorbed by the upper atmosphere means that their energy is being converted to heat.
I wonder if this has more of an effect on atmospheric temperature than so-called greenhouse gases.
I’ve read where “greenhouse gases” are responsible for keeping the earth an average of 30 degrees above what it would be if the atmosphere only contained nitrogen. But I have never seen a physicochemical explanation of how this occurs. Granted, I am not a physical chemist, but my understanding of physical chemistry in the classes I have taken does not cover how “greenhouse gases” would physically trap heat in such a way as to increase the temperature.
What I understand as far as chemical processes go is that it takes a certain amount of absorbed heat energy for a chemical to change from one form to another. For example, adding heat to water ice results in no change of temperature until the ice absorbs enough to melt. In an experimental setting where the volume of ice is small and the heat is added slowly, the exact amount of heat needed to convert ice to water can be precisely measured.
When there is no change in the form of the chemical, adding heat results in increased temperature. The more heat, the faster molecules move. (The actual physical processes are more complicated than this.) When the heat source is removed, the energy dissipates in all directions as IR energy. Some of that IR goes out into space.
The hypothesis that carbon dioxide exerts a disproportionate effect on global temperature because it “absorbs” heat is highly inadequate. I have never actually seen a detailed explanation of the physics supposedly involved.
But gamma rays hitting the earth and converting to kinetic and heat energy, that makes sense. A lot of factors contribute to overall global temperatures, and I would not be surprised if further research reveals that sun cycles of gamma ray strength is another of those factors. The linked article was not very clear on exactly how much energy is contained in visible light versus upper atmosphere gamma rays, but even so, it seems that gamma rays have one trillion times the energy of visible light. That is a lot of energy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.