Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Layman struggles with Science
Thank you Richard111.
When I did the what is AGW paper I noticed the weird times each version appeared. I already knew there was no "father" for GH "theory" as such. The weird times of the versions meant the "theory" must have come from the models themselves. But when, who, how???

The answer appears to be Dines is the "father" of the only version that matters. The version that is modelled, that spawned all the other simplified versions for public consumption.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
That is thinking way out of my sphere. This implies that in the evolution of GCMs there is a 'genetic error'.

Could never have imagined that. My thinking is that interested organisations would create their own GCMs relevant to their own experience and the information treated as sensitive. Ah well, cie la vie as the foreigners say.

Anyway, I still firmly believe that there is no such thing as “back radiation“ from gas molecules in the atmosphere. Confusedtir:
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
How I confuse and confound warmists.  Cool


When someone tries to tell me how terrible are the effects of CO2 (usually just carbon), I don't regale them with the science of radiation. I just tell them about an experience I've had many times during my past working life.

I explain how I came to live and work in the Namib Desert where life could be quite unpleasant if you were ever caught outside under the summer sun. Local daytime temperatures often exceeded 40C and could occasionally reach 50C. That is hot!

Because of the beautiful clear skies at night I became interested in astronomy. I often wondered off into the desert to get away from the building lights. I found that in the hours just before dawn the desert temperature could drop to nearly freezing.!.!.

I advise my warmist irritant to check the net on how the Romans made ice in the deserts of North Africa over two thousand years ago. I then remark on how much the temperature dropped in the desert in just 12 hours from about 3pm to 3am. I point out this is radiation heat loss.

Now for the $64,000 question... How hot would the desert get the next day if there was no sun???

"Can't happen." they claim and I suggest they look up "The year without summer" on the web and learn a bit about volcanoes.

Then the final question "Please explain how a radiative gas in the atmosphere traps heat?"

Never had an answer yet.  Big Grin
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
Hello Richard111,
Love the £64,000 dollar question..

But, errr, the temperature drop from 3pm to 3am,
surely that is mostly conduction and convection of sensible heat from the surface to the atmosphere!
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
Hi Derek,

Okay, why is this effect limited to clear skies in desert regions?

Heat loss via radiation is very effective in low humidity air.

Have encountered this here in Pembrokeshire when conditions are right but nowhere near as dramatic as desert.

Once the rock surface is cooler than the air it keeps cooling. Air is not effective at transferring heat DOWN unless there is a breeze and turbulence.
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
Looks like my layman struggles were heading in the right direction.

Here is a link explaining why cool objects, even though they are radiating, cannot warm up any nearby warmer objects.

http://principia-scientific.org/breaking...ation-law/

Beware! Lots of heavy math.
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
More support for my layman thinking that CO2 can only cool the atmosphere.

50 Inverted Hockey Sticks – Scientists Find Earth Cools As CO2 Rises
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
More people are catching on too,here is a comment at a political forum I recently joined. It has a good threads on climate stuff there.

I am posting a lot in replies to warmists there,who as usual are not being rational or civil.

Inquisitor replies to this silliness,

PoliticalCenter writes,

"With CO2 trapping heat ..."


Quote:Inquisitor

Heat cannot be trapped. Heat cannot be stored, contained or reflected back. This is a law. Understand? 100% of scientists cannot break the most fundamental, central law of nature. Understand?
This how the law is written: " Heat ALWAYS FLOWS from a hotter body to a colder body in a spontaneous process." 15 words. No less, no more. The most fundamental, central law of the universe.
Understand?
Any questions?
ALWAYS.
Understand?
Any questions?
FLOWS.
Understand?
Any questions?

LINK

Originally it was between me and Politicalcenter,but Inquisitor joined in with the above. Begins on page 10.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
Checked the link SST. Don't think I'll join in.  Rolleyes
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
>>
Heat cannot be trapped. Heat cannot be stored, contained or reflected back. This is a law.
<<
I used to have a parabolic mirror (about 6" diameter) that would hold a cigarette at the focal point.  When I focused sunlight on the end, it would light the cigarette.  I wonder where the heat came from if it wasn't reflected?
And heat can't be stored, but internal energy can.  The First Law of Thermodynamics is often stated as dU = [delta]Q + [delta]W (where U is internal energy, Q is heat, W is work, and [delta] is supposed to be a lower case Greek delta, but HTML doesn't work on this site).
Jim
Reply
(03-23-2017, 06:20 AM)jamesbat Wrote: >>
Heat cannot be trapped. Heat cannot be stored, contained or reflected back. This is a law.
<<
I used to have a parabolic mirror (about 6" diameter) that would hold a cigarette at the focal point.  When I focused sunlight on the end, it would light the cigarette.  I wonder where the heat came from if it wasn't reflected?
And heat can't be stored, but internal energy can.  The First Law of Thermodynamics is often stated as dU = [delta]Q + [delta]W (where U is internal energy, Q is heat, W is work, and [delta] is supposed to be a lower case Greek delta, but HTML doesn't work on this site).
Jim

You wrote SUNLIGHT,which the mirror concentrate to a small point. He is talking about HEAT not being reflected,but IR can be reflected,just like Visible light.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
(03-21-2017, 10:57 AM)Richard111 Wrote: Checked the link SST. Don't think I'll join in.  Rolleyes

Wasn't suggesting you join,just let you know that there are others, who bothers to read up the Thermodynamics laws.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
(03-23-2017, 08:34 AM)Sunsettommy Wrote:
(03-23-2017, 06:20 AM)jamesbat Wrote: >>
Heat cannot be trapped. Heat cannot be stored, contained or reflected back. This is a law.
<<
I used to have a parabolic mirror (about 6" diameter) that would hold a cigarette at the focal point.  When I focused sunlight on the end, it would light the cigarette.  I wonder where the heat came from if it wasn't reflected?
And heat can't be stored, but internal energy can.  The First Law of Thermodynamics is often stated as dU = [delta]Q + [delta]W (where U is internal energy, Q is heat, W is work, and [delta] is supposed to be a lower case Greek delta, but HTML doesn't work on this site).
Jim

You wrote SUNLIGHT,which the mirror concentrate to a small point. He is talking about HEAT not being reflected,but IR can be reflected,just like Visible light.

So sunlight isn't a form of heat energy?  What has been heating the Earth for 4.5 billion years if it wasn't the Sun?

Jim
Reply
(03-23-2017, 10:04 AM)jamesbat Wrote:
(03-23-2017, 08:34 AM)Sunsettommy Wrote:
(03-23-2017, 06:20 AM)jamesbat Wrote: >>
Heat cannot be trapped. Heat cannot be stored, contained or reflected back. This is a law.
<<
I used to have a parabolic mirror (about 6" diameter) that would hold a cigarette at the focal point.  When I focused sunlight on the end, it would light the cigarette.  I wonder where the heat came from if it wasn't reflected?
And heat can't be stored, but internal energy can.  The First Law of Thermodynamics is often stated as dU = [delta]Q + [delta]W (where U is internal energy, Q is heat, W is work, and [delta] is supposed to be a lower case Greek delta, but HTML doesn't work on this site).
Jim

You wrote SUNLIGHT,which the mirror concentrate to a small point. He is talking about HEAT not being reflected,but IR can be reflected,just like Visible light.

So sunlight isn't a form of heat energy?  What has been heating the Earth for 4.5 billion years if it wasn't the Sun?

Jim

When Visible light strikes a surface, the energy in it is converted to heat, since it encounters matter, that warms up..
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
G. J. V. Wylen, Thermodynamics, John Wiley & Sons, 1960:

Quote:“Heat is defined as the form of energy that is transferred across a boundary by virtue of a temperature difference or temperature gradient. Implied in this definition is the very important fact that a body never contains heat, but that heat is identified as heat only as it crosses the boundary. Thus, heat is a transient phenomenon. If we consider the hot block of copper as a system and the cold water in the beaker as another system, we recognize that originally neither system contains any heat (they do contain energy, of course.) When the copper is placed in the water and the two are in thermal communication, heat is transferred from the copper to the water, until equilibrium of temperature is established. At that point we no longer have heat transfer, since there is no temperature difference. Neither of the systems contains any heat at the conclusion of the process. It also follows that heat is identified at the boundaries of the system, for heat is defined as energy being transferred across the system boundary.”
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
(03-23-2017, 02:02 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote: When Visible light strikes a surface, the energy in it is converted to heat, since it encounters matter, that warms up..

That is absolutely not the Thermodynamic definition of heat.  Heat only appears at boundaries.  It is a transfer of energy from one body to another due to a temperature difference across a system boundary.  Heat may be transferred by conduction or radiation or both.  (And sunlight contains more frequencies of EMR than just visible light.)  Once heat enters a system, it is no longer heat.  A bucket of hot water does not "contain" heat.  But it does have a higher internal energy than a cold bucket of water with the same mass.

Jim
Reply
(03-23-2017, 02:30 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote: G. J. V. Wylen, Thermodynamics, John Wiley & Sons, 1960:

Quote:“Heat is defined as the form of energy that is transferred across a boundary by virtue of a temperature difference or temperature gradient. Implied in this definition is the very important fact that a body never contains heat, but that heat is identified as heat only as it crosses the boundary. Thus, heat is a transient phenomenon. If we consider the hot block of copper as a system and the cold water in the beaker as another system, we recognize that originally neither system contains any heat (they do contain energy, of course.) When the copper is placed in the water and the two are in thermal communication, heat is transferred from the copper to the water, until equilibrium of temperature is established. At that point we no longer have heat transfer, since there is no temperature difference. Neither of the systems contains any heat at the conclusion of the process. It also follows that heat is identified at the boundaries of the system, for heat is defined as energy being transferred across the system boundary.”

Well, there you go.

Jim
Reply
(03-23-2017, 02:31 PM)jamesbat Wrote:
(03-23-2017, 02:02 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote: When Visible light strikes a surface, the energy in it is converted to heat, since it encounters matter, that warms up..

That is absolutely not the Thermodynamic definition of heat.  Heat only appears at boundaries.  It is a transfer of energy from one body to another due to a temperature difference across a system boundary.  Heat may be transferred by conduction or radiation or both.  (And sunlight contains more frequencies of EMR than just visible light.)  Once heat enters a system, it is no longer heat.  A bucket of hot water does not "contain" heat.  But it does have a higher internal energy than a cold bucket of water with the same mass.

Jim

D. V. Schroeder, Thermal Physics, Addison Wesley Longman, 2000:

Quote:“Much of thermodynamics deals with three closely related concepts: temperature, energy, and heat. Much of students’ difficulty with thermodynamics comes from confusing these three concepts with each other.”

Solar radiation are composed of light waves of specific energy levels, NOT heat.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
(03-23-2017, 08:18 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote: Solar radiation are composed of light waves of specific energy levels, NOT heat.


It's called radiation heat transfer.
The photon is the quanta of electromagnetic (EM) radiation and energy carrier for radiation heat transfer.
Maxwell: "In Radiation, the hotter body loses heat, and the colder body receives heat by means of a process occurring in some intervening medium which does not itself thereby become hot."
So, yes, EMR is heat, by definition.

Jim
Reply
(03-23-2017, 08:18 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote: D. V. Schroeder, Thermal Physics, Addison Wesley Longman, 2000:

Quote:“Much of thermodynamics deals with three closely related concepts: temperature, energy, and heat. Much of students’ difficulty with thermodynamics comes from confusing these three concepts with each other.”

Temperature is an intensive Thermodynamic property.  Entropy is an extensive Thermodynamic property.  Entropy and Temperature form a conjugate pair--their product is energy.  Pressure (an intensive Thermo property) and volume (an extensive Thermo property) also form a conjugate pair--their product is also energy.  If temperature is in Kelvin and entropy is in Joules/Kelvin, then their product is Joules.

Energy comes in many forms: heat energy in calories or BTUs, work in joules, ft-lbs, newton-meters, watt-hours, ergs, dyne-centimeters, pascal-meters^3 and so on.  Energy is an extensive Thermo property.

Heat is the transfer of energy across a boundary due to a temperature difference.  It is (heat) energy in motion--kinda what Thermodynamics means.

The First Law deals with internal energy (a state variable), heat (a path variable), and work (another path variable).  The signs of heat and work are not standard, unfortunately.  I learned the Clausius standard, that is heat applied TO the system is positive and work done BY the system is positive.  That gives us the equation dU = [delta]Q - [delta]W.  Many are using the IUPAC standard which is heat applied TO the system is positive and work done ON the system is positive.  That gives us the equation dU = [delta]Q + [delta]W.  You need to keep your signs straight, but either equation is valid.

Do I pass or am I confused?

Jim
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)