Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision
Previous revision
|
|
user_area:plane-parellel_versus_pseudo-spherical_versus_spherical [2008/10/27 13:35]
arve |
user_area:plane-parellel_versus_pseudo-spherical_versus_spherical [2008/10/27 13:36]
arve |
| | ====== Plane-parallel versus pseudo-spherical versus spherical ====== |
| In texts about radiative transfer one often encounters expressions stating that "plane-parallel geometry is assumed", or sometimes, even "pseudo-spherical" geometry is assumed. The statement "plane-parallel geometry" is just another way of saying that the Earth is assumed to be flat. For most modern observers that is not correct. Still, flat Earth, or plane-parallel, geometry is often used when solving radiative transfer problems. The main reason is computational simplicity. And, the approximation works for rather large solar zenith angles. Before continuing with some examples, please note that what follows below may not be directly applicable to your problem. Hence, make your own tests and choose your approach thereafter. | In texts about radiative transfer one often encounters expressions stating that "plane-parallel geometry is assumed", or sometimes, even "pseudo-spherical" geometry is assumed. The statement "plane-parallel geometry" is just another way of saying that the Earth is assumed to be flat. For most modern observers that is not correct. Still, flat Earth, or plane-parallel, geometry is often used when solving radiative transfer problems. The main reason is computational simplicity. And, the approximation works for rather large solar zenith angles. Before continuing with some examples, please note that what follows below may not be directly applicable to your problem. Hence, make your own tests and choose your approach thereafter. |
| |
