Ultra-white ceramic cools buildings with record-high 99.6% reflectivity::undefined

  • schmidtster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sure, but there is more than just transparent gases, there is also some solid objects. Those would be heated by outgoing radiation. There is also convection currents that can affect weather and migration patterns…

    That’s one part of it yeah, and there is absolutely no scientific data on the resulting reflection issues. It’s also funny that ice age answer kinda proves my point, if sheets of ice can make an ice age worse… yeah coating a bunch of stuff with this will absolutely affect stuff. And you are claiming it won’t? Because this answer directly contradicts your previous ones….

    Can I see your sources I’m actually quite interested in this and I’m surprised people are answering this with grade school level answers that aren’t even close to being correct.

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Of course it will affect stuff: it will cool it down. It’ really very basic. Scenario 1:

      • bunch of photons (energy) comes from space
      • hit the earth and heat it up
      • the heat is transferred to air by contact
      • the air heats up

      Scenario 2:

      • photons heat white surface and are scattered around
      • some scattered photons will hit other things but not all of them, most will just fly back into space without transferring energy
      • the white surface doesn’t heat up as much as ground
      • less heat is transferred to air bu contact
      • air is cooler
      • schmidtster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        And all the greenhouse gases it will heat up as it passes through them? You can’t just ignore these gases…

        It’s not that simple, and you claiming it is show you have zero understanding of the potential issues. Your ice age example shows that it can affect the globe at scale. Thank you for part of the answer, I’m surprised you’re still arguing after proving my point.

        • ExLisper@linux.community
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not arguing it’s not going to affect the globe at scale (even though you would have to cover shitload of building in this to affect it). I’m saying that we know what the effect would be: it would cool it down.

          What you fail to understand is that if solar radiation hits a dark surface, like a roof, this energy is transferred to earth. That’s it. It’s here. Now it’s really difficult to get rid of it. Greenhouse gases make this even more difficult.

          But if solar radiation hits a white surface SOME of this energy will be reflected back to space. Not ALL of it, some of will still stay here but overall it will LESS energy.

          Greenhouse gasses trap the radiation emitted by earth as heat, not the reflected light. Think about it. If greenhouse gases reflected light then we would get less light from the sun, right? Part of it would be reflected. They don’t do that. They let light pass through and stop the heat radiated from earth. If you reflect light instead of trapping it that’s a good thing.

          This is so basic I’m starting to suspect you’re just trolling so I will end this conversation here…

          • schmidtster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I understand that fine…

            Green house gases absorb radiation unlike transparent gases. It directly refutes one of your claims since they exist at the same time. Why are you talking about reflection here…?

            You clearly don’t know enough to answer the question correctly. And you completely incorrectly explaining greenhouse gases and how radiation affects it just proves it all the more. Have a great day, I’m sorry you thought you knew more than you thought here. It happens.

            You claim it’s basic, yet each of your “basic” points have easily been refuted by going to intermediates, it’s not as simple as you claim it is… and you claiming it is also just shows you have zero credibility understanding of the subject.

            So who’s the troll here? The one getting flustered from having their “basic” explanations refuted with just as basic science, or the one contesting with examples that show it’s not actually that basic…?