<p>Possible, but rare.  The reason is that many things are not linear with respect to temperature.</p>
<p>Volume of gas is in direct proportion to temperature (at given pressure) but we rarely need to consider this.</p>
<p>But, for example, the density of water is markedly non-linear with temperature.</p>
<p>Moreover our physiometric response to temperature is also non linear. We dont experience 300K as being 4% higher than 288K.</p>
<p>As such, planetary temperatures are usually described in Kelvin, Celcius or Fahrenheit (or even Rankin if you look hard enough) rather than being referred to Earth temperaturees.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-01T02:10:39.430Z
Phase changes are the ultimate example of "not linear with temperature". In or out of "goldilocks zone" is an alternative metric but it's absolute and boolean, the opposite of relative.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-28T20:32:19.587Z
2021-02-28T20:32:19.587Z
James K
<p>Earth's average surface temperature is about 288 K.  If we had a hypothetical exoplanet with a surface temperature of 300 K, this would be about 4% higher than Earth's.</p>
<p>Because we say Earth radii and Earth masses, would we refer to this as 1.04 Earth temperatures?  Or, how about 1.04 Earth's temperature?  <span class="math-container">$1.04 \cdot T_⊕$</span>?  Is there a standard in astronomy to use?</p>

<temperature>
How do you refer to comparative temperature?
Xi-K
# How do you refer to comparative temperature?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-02-28)

Earth's average surface temperature is about 288 K. If we had a hypothetical exoplanet with a surface temperature of 300 K, this would be about 4% higher than Earth's.

Because we say Earth radii and Earth masses, would we refer to this as 1.04 Earth temperatures? Or, how about 1.04 Earth's temperature? $1.04 \cdot T\_⊕$? Is there a standard in astronomy to use?

**Tags:** temperature


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2021-02-28. Score: 5

Possible, but rare. The reason is that many things are not linear with respect to temperature.

Volume of gas is in direct proportion to temperature (at given pressure) but we rarely need to consider this.

But, for example, the density of water is markedly non-linear with temperature.

Moreover our physiometric response to temperature is also non linear. We dont experience 300K as being 4% higher than 288K.

As such, planetary temperatures are usually described in Kelvin, Celcius or Fahrenheit (or even Rankin if you look hard enough) rather than being referred to Earth temperaturees.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Phase changes are the ultimate example of "not linear with temperature". In or out of "goldilocks zone" is an alternative metric but it's absolute and boolean, the opposite of relative.  

---

