This article is within the scope of WikiProject Meteorology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Meteorology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Sunlight is included in the Wikipedia CD Selection, see Sunlight at Schools Wikipedia. Please maintain high quality standards; if you are an established editor your last version in the article history may be used so please don't leave the article with unresolved issues, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the DVDs.
I agree with the value of spectranalysis. Is it coincidence that the sky away from the sun looks light blue and the difference between the visible [solar spectrum] above & below the atmosphere is somewhat greater in blue? My intuition (for what it is worth) says that light blue implies broad spectrum (white) with an excess of blue produces a light blue. On a possibly related issue, is some 'average' of the yellow sun and the blue sky (maybe plant green too), a basis for our evolved perception of white?
--Wikidity (talk) 23:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
"Women often try to shift or remove clothing straps from areas that would be exposed by a different style of clothing. This means the area gets some tan and strap marks are not too obvious. One way this is done is to remove straps while lying face down, so as to avoid being seen topless. Another way is to adjust the straps slightly a few times while tanning."
I would simply delete the section. The text before and after this paragraph isn't much better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
I don't see why "A photon starting at the centre of the sun and changing direction every time it encounters a charged particle would take between 10 000 and 170 000 years to get to the surface." should be stated so early. That is not actually a significant part of the process by with sunlight is generated.
It's not even a meaningful part. Photons are just packets of electromagnetic energy obeying Bose-Einstein statistics and as such don't have identities. Particles absorb and emit photons but an emitted photon can't be identified with any specific absorbed photon; if it could it would obey Fermi-Dirac statistics. Putting this sentence right after the 8.3 minutes for sunlight to reach Earth implies an impossibly slow flow of energy from the center of the Sun to the surface. Vaughan Pratt (talk) 06:32, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
I suggest that "burning glass" retinal damage be included in Effects on human health. It is largely the result of the high luminance of sunlight. This is easily observed in the increase of vision problems after solar eclipses, but it is much more common than that. Luminance is related to the light intensity at the sun's surface, unlike illuminance which is the intensity at the Earth's surface.
An other health effect may be macular degeneration due to cumulative exposure to blue light, but that may be too subtle to include here, at this time.
At the end of the section, "peak oil" and "new urbanism" are given as examples of possible post-fossil-fuel scenarios. Both are in fact irrelevant examples regarding the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 13:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)