<p>I will throw out 2 hypothesises to answer the why of the question. Not saying it is true, just saying that it may be valid hypothesises. And both hypothesises don't discount the internal properties of greenhouse gasses.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Somehow positive and negative feedback forces level each other out in the 1 bar thick atmosphere sytems on all 3 planets</p>
</li>
<li><p>There is another overruling equilibrium mechanism, as proposed by Dr. Ronan Connolly &amp; Dr. Michael Connolly, who studied all the weather balloon data.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="https://youtu.be/XfRBr7PEawY?t=2506" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://youtu.be/XfRBr7PEawY?t=2506</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-16T23:36:09.897Z
2021-02-17T02:44:02.297Z
2021-02-17T02:44:02.297Z
MP1
<p>The temperature of a planetary body in space varies with the fourth-root of the power incident upon it, this is derived from the Stefan-Boltzmann Law.</p>
<p>This is understandable when applied to a black body in space. However, when applied to certain pressure levels (like 1 bar) at planets with a thick atmosphere the outcome is the same</p>
<p>Meaning that the temperature of Venus at 1atm (Tv) should be the fourth-root of 1.91 times the temperature on Earth at 1atm (Te). Venus receives 1.91 times the solar insolation of Earth.</p>
<p>Venus Tv=∜1.91 x Te</p>
<p>Tv = 1.176 x 288</p>
<p>Tv = 339 Kelvin</p>
<p>For Titan, the temperature of a planetary body in space varies with the fourth-root of the power incident upon it, meaning that the temperature of Titan at 1atm (Tt) should be the fourth-root of 0.01089 times the temperature on Earth at 1atm (Te). Titan receives 0.01089 times the solar insolation of Earth.</p>
<p>Titan Tt=∜0.01089 x Te</p>
<p>Tt = 0.323 x 288</p>
<p>Tt = 93 Kelvin</p>
<div class="s-table-container">
<table class="s-table">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Planet</th>
<th style="text-align: right;">Measured Temp 1atm</th>
<th style="text-align: right;">Relative Solar Insolation</th>
<th style="text-align: right;">4th Root</th>
<th style="text-align: right;">Calculated Temp</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Earth</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">~288 Kelvin</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">1.00</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">1.000</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">288 Kelvin</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Venus</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">~340 Kelvin</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">1.91</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">1.176</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">339 Kelvin</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Titan</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">~90 Kelvin</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">0.01089</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">0.316</td>
<td style="text-align: right;">93 Kelvin</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-16T17:13:18.227Z
Have you checked the wikipedia page on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_equilibrium_temperature?
AtmosphericPrisonEscape
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-16T17:18:37.790Z
@ AtmosphericPrisonEscape . Looked at it but in the calculation on that page there is a correction for albedo. In this case there is no need to adjust for albedo, and for the amount of greenhouse gasses. The temperature at 1 bar is proportinal to the distance of the sun alone.
MP1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-16T17:32:06.593Z
You need the high Albedo correction at Venus and at Earth, together with green-house gases to get the right temperature. Your statement " The temperature at 1 bar is proportional to the distance of the sun alone" is wrong. What your scaling formula is computing, is the equivalent Temperature of solar radiation at a distance. Check this paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.6859.pdf for a solar-system wide comparison taking into account all the available data.
AtmosphericPrisonEscape
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-16T19:28:46.087Z
@ AtmosphericPrisonEscape. So the temperature at 1 Bar of planets with a thick atmosphere is proportional to the equivalent Temperature of solar radiation at a distance?
MP1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-16T20:47:29.150Z
The total solar irradiation at the top of the atmosphere is proportional to the distance of the sun. So it doesn't matter if it is related to the distance of the sun or the TSI at the TOA, principle is the same. And the question remains unanswered ...why?, or how is that possible?
MP1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-17T00:11:27.867Z
If it were true we would not have current global warming. But we DO have global warming that is unrelated to changing distance from sun or change to surface air pressure, therefore it is not true. Distance and atmospheric pressure are factors but other factors are involved too, like Greenhouse Effect. Too few planets and insufficient and imprecise data has led to jumping to the conclusion that climate science is wrong about the significance of greenhouse gases.
Ken Fabian
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-17T01:42:15.110Z
@ Ken Fabian. Oscillations around an average equilibrium system are normal. And am not suggesting that the internal properties of greenhouse gasses are wrong.. Albedo is also not needed to calculate the correct proportionality to the TSI at the TOA, or to the proportional distance of the sun.
MP1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-17T02:49:49.103Z
According to quite some measurement systems our atmosphere 1 Bar average temperature recently oscillated back to an average temperature from 1979 to 2000. https://i.imgur.com/25UO9NS.jpg
MP1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-17T10:37:56.860Z
The top-of-the-atmosphere (TOA) FLUX is inversely proportional to the squared distance to the host star. Not the temperature. The resulting atmospheric temperature profiles at the TOA result from the ability of the atmosphere to re-radiate, i.e. ratios of the planck-opacities. The resulting 1-bar temperatures, i.e. where the infrared is already optically thick, have to be computed by taking albedo and greenhouse into account, and will be generally higher than the equivalent temperature of solar radiation at that distance. I recommend an intro course on radiation transport.
AtmosphericPrisonEscape
<atmosphere><geophysics><climate><thermodynamics><astronomy>
Why is the average 1 Bar temperature on planets with a thick atmosphere proportional to the distance of the sun?
MP1
# Why is the average 1 Bar temperature on planets with a thick atmosphere proportional to the distance of the sun?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-02-16)

The temperature of a planetary body in space varies with the fourth-root of the power incident upon it, this is derived from the Stefan-Boltzmann Law.

This is understandable when applied to a black body in space. However, when applied to certain pressure levels (like 1 bar) at planets with a thick atmosphere the outcome is the same

Meaning that the temperature of Venus at 1atm (Tv) should be the fourth-root of 1.91 times the temperature on Earth at 1atm (Te). Venus receives 1.91 times the solar insolation of Earth.

Venus Tv=∜1.91 x Te

Tv = 1.176 x 288

Tv = 339 Kelvin

For Titan, the temperature of a planetary body in space varies with the fourth-root of the power incident upon it, meaning that the temperature of Titan at 1atm (Tt) should be the fourth-root of 0.01089 times the temperature on Earth at 1atm (Te). Titan receives 0.01089 times the solar insolation of Earth.

Titan Tt=∜0.01089 x Te

Tt = 0.323 x 288

Tt = 93 Kelvin

| Planet | Measured Temp 1atm | Relative Solar Insolation | 4th Root | Calculated Temp |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Earth | ~288 Kelvin | 1.00 | 1.000 | 288 Kelvin |
| Venus | ~340 Kelvin | 1.91 | 1.176 | 339 Kelvin |
| Titan | ~90 Kelvin | 0.01089 | 0.316 | 93 Kelvin |

**Tags:** atmosphere, geophysics, climate, thermodynamics, astronomy

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Have you checked the wikipedia page on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_equilibrium_temperature?  
> **username_0**: @ username_1 . Looked at it but in the calculation on that page there is a correction for albedo. In this case there is no need to adjust for albedo, and for the amount of greenhouse gasses. The temperature at 1 bar is proportinal to the distance of the sun alone.  
> **username_1**: You need the high Albedo correction at Venus and at Earth, together with green-house gases to get the right temperature. Your statement " The temperature at 1 bar is proportional to the distance of the sun alone" is wrong. What your scaling formula is computing, is the equivalent Temperature of solar radiation at a distance. Check this paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.6859.pdf for a solar-system wide comparison taking into account all the available data.  
> **username_0**: @ username_1. So the temperature at 1 Bar of planets with a thick atmosphere is proportional to the equivalent Temperature of solar radiation at a distance?  
> **username_0**: The total solar irradiation at the top of the atmosphere is proportional to the distance of the sun. So it doesn't matter if it is related to the distance of the sun or the TSI at the TOA, principle is the same. And the question remains unanswered ...why?, or how is that possible?  
> **username_2**: If it were true we would not have current global warming. But we DO have global warming that is unrelated to changing distance from sun or change to surface air pressure, therefore it is not true. Distance and atmospheric pressure are factors but other factors are involved too, like Greenhouse Effect. Too few planets and insufficient and imprecise data has led to jumping to the conclusion that climate science is wrong about the significance of greenhouse gases.  
> **username_0**: @ username_2. Oscillations around an average equilibrium system are normal. And am not suggesting that the internal properties of greenhouse gasses are wrong.. Albedo is also not needed to calculate the correct proportionality to the TSI at the TOA, or to the proportional distance of the sun.  
> **username_0**: According to quite some measurement systems our atmosphere 1 Bar average temperature recently oscillated back to an average temperature from 1979 to 2000. https://i.imgur.com/25UO9NS.jpg  
> **username_1**: The top-of-the-atmosphere (TOA) FLUX is inversely proportional to the squared distance to the host star. Not the temperature. The resulting atmospheric temperature profiles at the TOA result from the ability of the atmosphere to re-radiate, i.e. ratios of the planck-opacities. The resulting 1-bar temperatures, i.e. where the infrared is already optically thick, have to be computed by taking albedo and greenhouse into account, and will be generally higher than the equivalent temperature of solar radiation at that distance. I recommend an intro course on radiation transport.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_0 on 2021-02-16. Score: -1

I will throw out 2 hypothesises to answer the why of the question. Not saying it is true, just saying that it may be valid hypothesises. And both hypothesises don't discount the internal properties of greenhouse gasses.

* Somehow positive and negative feedback forces level each other out in the 1 bar thick atmosphere sytems on all 3 planets
* There is another overruling equilibrium mechanism, as proposed by Dr. Ronan Connolly & Dr. Michael Connolly, who studied all the weather balloon data.

<https://youtu.be/XfRBr7PEawY?t=2506>


---

