> In what world do you conflate "detectable" with "visible with the naked eye"
They are literally synonymous and only vary in the instrument we are using to detect it. Your eye versus, say, an antenna.
Visible light is also on the electromagnetic spectrum, it also abides by the inverse square law.
> What's more, the ratio of visible light to IR would be... highly abnormal.
No, it wouldn't. The sun radiates across the entire EM spectrum including IR and Visible light.
It would take ~6200 structures that have the same area as the United States including Alaska (3.8 million square miles) to block out 1% of the EM radiation that the sun produces.
>You mean like the energy output of, you know, a star?
IF a sufficiently advanced civilization could magically conjure up enough materials in the solar system strip mining the solar system AND we had 100% efficiency in collecting then radiating 1% of the energy the sun gives off.....
They are literally synonymous and only vary in the instrument we are using to detect it. Your eye versus, say, an antenna.
Visible light is also on the electromagnetic spectrum, it also abides by the inverse square law.
> What's more, the ratio of visible light to IR would be... highly abnormal.
No, it wouldn't. The sun radiates across the entire EM spectrum including IR and Visible light.
It would take ~6200 structures that have the same area as the United States including Alaska (3.8 million square miles) to block out 1% of the EM radiation that the sun produces.
>You mean like the energy output of, you know, a star?
IF a sufficiently advanced civilization could magically conjure up enough materials in the solar system strip mining the solar system AND we had 100% efficiency in collecting then radiating 1% of the energy the sun gives off.....
Yeah isn't gonna happen.