From: Richard Larsson
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 5:42 AM
To: Thomas,Renish
Cc: Stefan Buehler ;
arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de
Subject: Re: [arts-users] Calculated brightness temperature bias causes.
Hi,
Just by numbers:
RJBT at 300 K 183 GHz is 3.086705214957283e-15
Planck at 300 K
, lat/lon grid resolution also cause a bias?
>
> Thanks,
> Renish
>
>
> Original message
> From: Stefan Buehler
> Date: 4/20/21 6:11 AM (GMT-06:00)
> To: "Thomas,Renish"
> Cc: "arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de" <
> arts_
?
Thanks,
Renish
Original message
From: Stefan Buehler
Date: 4/20/21 6:11 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: "Thomas,Renish"
Cc: "arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de"
Subject: Re: [arts-users] Calculated brightness temperature bias causes.
Dear Renish,
do you use Plan
Dear Renish,
do you use Planck or Rayleigh-Jeans brightness temperature? For Planck,
you should indeed approach the ambient temperature if you go low enough.
Cheers
Stefan
On 20 Apr 2021, at 12:46, Thomas,Renish wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I had some questions about the calculated brightness
Hi Everyone,
I had some questions about the calculated brightness temperature in ARTS.
When I calculate the brightness temperature for an atmospheric scenario in
"horizon looking mode" and in clearsky. I get a brightness temperature at
183.31 GHz (Water vapor absorption line), which is about 3
