To Climate Change or not to Climate change

a reply to: the2ofusr1

We are living longer and are probably more comfortable then Humans were 200 years ago ....life sucks eh ?

No for me. For my daughter and her kids...

a reply to: Phage

Lots of land in the north where the temp right now is 71 F ..kind of a cool summer so far but it will warm up I am sure .

a reply to: the2ofusr1
Cool. Everybody! Northward Ho! And move those cities inland for crying out loud.

a reply to: Phage

Gee if we do that then Al Gore will buy up all the beach front property . How many of his properties have been replaced with the ocean ? ....As far as I know all the places at the beach I grew up with have a long long way to go before anyone need to freak .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

As far as I know all the places at the beach I grew up with have a long long way to go before anyone need to freak .

Yeah, well. My yard says different. I'm not quite freaking but I am going to have to heighten my seawall before too long.

a reply to: Phage

The absorption spectrum is a function of bond energies of electrons, not of pressure or density.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Phage

Well , you have that option or you could move inland .Around here its more of a break water with rocks to stop erosion and that seems to be mostly around the Bay of Fundy .But the tide as high as it gets in Moncton they seem to be OK . Who knows maybe the trend will change and the water go somewhere else .With cooling more then likely to happen at least in the short term the snow may build up the glaciers .

a reply to: TheRedneck
Yes. The absorption spectrum does not change. I spoke in error.

Was I incorrect in saying that the value of α changes with pressure?

a reply to: Phage

You'll have to help me out here. Which attribute are you using alpha to represent? The absorption spectra?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
That referred to here in the "Simplified expression Radiative forcing."

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Phage

OK, I finally found it. Forgive me; it's late.

It appears alpha is an experimentally derived constant which is in some dispute. The first row for CO2 indicates a single value, the second both an alpha and beta value, and the third uses a third-degree polynomial curve with an alpha value. That's not extremely unusual in research. Each is attempting to fit results to a mathematical model.

I can't honestly answer your question since there is disagreement on the proper model. I can say that I would be surprised if pressure made any substantial difference on the alpha and beta constants. CO2 is a pretty symmetrical and physically stable molecule, which leads to the observation of tightly defined absorption spectra lines. Since absorption (and emission) occur when electrons jump between quantified energy levels, any change in pressure would need to affect those energy levels to affect the constants.

I don't know of a mechanism that can do that with CO2.

To contrast, H2O has a very wide absorption band because in reality there is no pure H2O. What we refer to as H2O is really an ever-changing combination of H2O, OH-, and H3O+, with hydrogen bonding between molecules. The physical geometry is continually shifting, which continually shifts energy band levels. In that case, a constant which changes with pressure looks much more likely, since pressure does affect the physical molecular geometry.

Eh, that sounds confusing to me and I wrote it, lol. I hope it answers your question though.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
It is confusing. Probably one reason I threw the absorption spectrum in there.

Maybe this would be another way to look at it; would α=5.35 on the surface of Mars?

I know it's late. Happy 5th of July?

a reply to: Phage

I believe it would.

TheRedneck

ETA: Happy nth of July. (not midnight here yet, just busy day)