气氛变得更厚?- 江南体育网页版- - - - -地球科学堆江南电子竞技平台栈交换 最近30从www.hoelymoley.com 2023 - 07 - 07 - t13:55:05z //www.hoelymoley.com/feeds/question/2486 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/rdf //www.hoelymoley.com/q/2486 11 气氛变得更厚? user128932 //www.hoelymoley.com/users/855 2014 - 09 - 15 - t07:12:48z 2021 - 07 - 10 - t07:33:09z < p >是大气中与各种气体密度越来越大,汽车污染在北美(2亿辆),工厂污染,更多的水蒸气和密集的云层?如果是可以“厚”的气氛中表现得像个镜头和放大太阳光的强度高于它应该什么? < / p > //www.hoelymoley.com/questions/2486/-/2499 # 2499 14 gerrit回答的是气氛变得更厚? gerrit //www.hoelymoley.com/users/6 2014 - 09 - 17 - t15:16:57z 2014 - 09 - 18 - t13:48:02z < p > <强>没有,气氛不是变得更厚。< /强> < / p > < p >如果任何东西,大气层越来越薄,但只有在很长的时间尺度。地球慢慢地失去部分大气由于< a href = " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_escape " >大气逃脱< / >,空间或固体地球。历史上的大气压力很难确定,但数十亿年前,它可能比现在厚很多,特别是与更多的温室气体。一条线索是< a href = " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faint_young_Sun_paradox " >微弱的年轻阳光悖论< / >;我们知道有一次液态水太阳能输出减少了20%,这需要太多的温室效应,大气压力一定是高得多。但陪审团仍在。< / p >

The atmosphere is not becoming significantly denser, either.

The concentration of gases that we are adding to the atmosphere is typically measured in parts per million (ppm) or parts per billion (ppb). The effect of adding to this is small compared to the natural variability in atmospheric surface pressure / density due to weather and other effects.

The atmosphere does not act like a lens.

 //www.hoelymoley.com/questions/2486/-/8689 # 8689 5 戈登斯坦格回答的是气氛变得更厚? 戈登斯坦格 //www.hoelymoley.com/users/4507 2016 - 09 - 04 - t13:01:49z 2016 - 09 - 04 - t13:01:49z < p > Gerrit是正确的,气氛不是成为< em > < / em >密度,但它正变得略微< em > < / em >密度,实际上约0.02%,因为二氧化碳约为1.5 x密度比空气,我们增加了约120 ppm自工业革命的开始。在短期内这是一个让人担忧的,但从长远来看,从地质学角度看,这仅仅是一个小插曲在地球大气的进化——比如主要火山喷发。气体释放的放射产生的氦无关紧要,传入的气体从太空碎片。< / p > < p >折射太阳日晒不明显随大气密度变化,即使那样,它只会是一个听不清而微不足道的影响在阳光下吸收——仅仅是一个局部热异常,迅速重新分配的天气。< / p > //www.hoelymoley.com/questions/2486/-/8693 # 8693 3 回答小外星人的气氛变得更厚? 小外星人 //www.hoelymoley.com/users/6272 2016 - 09 - 05 - t12:21:03z 2016 - 09 - 05 - t12:21:03z < p >的最后一部分你的问题。地球的大气温度保持温暖的要比没有它不是因为透镜而是因为温室效应。来自太阳的光线击中地面,加热和热地面发出的热辐射,喜欢你的次要地位。温室气体捕获它。厚的大气层,越高的概率是low-freq热辐射将转向地球(太阳非常热,它发出higher-freq光,它的大气层是透明的)。< / p > < p >你说可以有另一种效果,切线飞到地球表面的光子可以被atmopsphere(透镜)和弹到地上,就像如果你捕获一只苍蝇,经过你用手附近,发送到你的嘴。似乎效果是真实的和被称为< a href = " https://sites.google.com/a/apps.district279.org/lightapplicationslucysaidu/refraction " rel = " nofollow noreferrer " >大气折射< / > < / p > < p > < a href = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/q90J5.png " rel = " nofollow noreferrer " > < img src = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/q90J5.png " alt = "在这里输入图像描述" > < / > < / p > < p >你能感觉到它在sunraises和日落,太阳在地平线时,大气中仍然是光,这意味着它捕获一些光,地球表面的切线的光子并将经过如果大气不捕捉它。也就是镜头不能产生比地球从太阳吸收的光子。它不能提高地球的温度。它只能收集光线并将其发送到一个点或更大的增长,收集一些来自地球以外的并将其发送到地球上,喜欢捕捉苍蝇用长双手靠近你的身体。 Let's suppose that refraction is real and atmosphere can capture the tangent photons. So, the question is: which effect is stronger: greenhouse warming or lensing warming? The thicker atmosphere increases both of them. But, the diagram is misleading. It says that the atmosphere is very fat, almost like the Earth diameter or larger, which is far from truth. In fact, the atmosphere is only a couple of kilometers in thickness whereas the Earth is 6000 km. Morevover, refraction operates only on the perimeter area, the rim around the earth

enter image description here

whereas greenhouse gases reflect the Earth heat back to the surface over the whole earth surface, which makes the effect not 1000 times smaller but 1000x1000 times smaller. So, I would account your lensing as important only when atmosphere sichness would reach the size of the Earth and beyond. There is however one negative feedback that I cannot estimate but it would be important for a very large atmosphere. It is that surface of heat irradiation would also be much larger if your planet is much larger. Probably your lensing gives less warm than increased irradiation takes away.

Enough of speculations for today, I suppose.

Baidu
map