Saturday, May 15, 2021

The Thermometer Lies

https://principia-scientific.com/the-thermometer-lies/ 

My reply:

 

Another disgraceful article from P-S by Herb Rose, a truly zany Looney Tunes crackpot scientist. I normally ignore them, but this time I made an exception. Let me put my boots on.

[[The temperature the thermometer registers is defined as the mean kinetic energy of the medium being measured, but this is not always true. What the thermometer measures is the momentum of the molecules striking it.]]

A thermometer doesn’t measure the momentum of anything. Momentum is m * v. It measures kinetic energy, which is m * v^2, apples and oranges, but only indirectly.

Actually a thermometer measures heat transfer by establishing thermal equilibrium between its mercury content and the fluid it is immersed in. Mercury in tiny capillaries expands linearly with temperature, permitting a scale to be printed on the outside. This is called calorimetry. The real definition of heat is far more subtle than Rose’s 5th grader definition. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat

“Though not immediately by the definition, but in special kinds of process, quantity of energy transferred as heat can be measured by its effect on the states of interacting bodies. For example, respectively in special circumstances, heat transfer can be measured by the amount of ice melted, or by change in temperature of a body in the surroundings of the system. Such methods are called calorimetry. ”

[[When an object moves it creates a disturbance in the electric and magnet fields surrounding it. The wavelength of this disturbance is determined by the velocity of the object, the greater the velocity of the object the shorter its wavelength and the greater its energy. This is how an object loses energy by radiation.]]

Radiation absorption has nothing to do with it. Only charged particles do that It’s called Liénard–Wiechert potential. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li%C3%A9nard%E2%80%93Wiechert_potential

[[What energy an object absorbs from radiation is determined by the materials it is made from, with different materials absorbing different wavelengths.]]

How lame can you get? All black bodies absorb and emit all wavelengths. Only polar gas molecules absorb and emit in certain wavelength bands. That’s the basis of Earth climate science. I guess Rose wasn’t in class the day they taught that in 5th grade.

I wonder if Rose can even do calculus, or even trigonometry. It doesn’t seem likely. Yet he portrays himself as the next Einstein. Why does P-S disgrace itself by featuring his crackpot articles? The IPCC octopus has long been claiming that P-S is a pseudoscience rag, and it’s playing into their hands despite being right on the CO2 global warming issue. Is P-S falling into the trap of printing every crackpot’s zany Looney Tunes theories just because he says the greenhouse warming theory is wrong?

The IPCC has hijacked Big Science, leaving real science to a motley crew of independents, who ironically are the only people doing real research into the causes of Earth’s climate, CO2 not being one of them. It’s hard enough to be right in the IPCC’s world, but let’s not shoot ourselves in the foot.

https://www.quora.com/What-does-science-mean-in-the-following-question-Why-do-people-deny-the-science-of-climate-change/answer/TL-Winslow

No comments:

Post a Comment

What Is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project?

It's too bad the current brouhaha about CO2 is so narrowly focused. So what if a higher concentration in the atmosphere raises global average temps? If higher temps were accompanied by increased atmospheric moisture, it would even out around the world and turn it into a paradise planet, greening the deserts so that the teeming billions could be fed. Cold temperatures are inimical to life, not a goal of life.

Too bad, it might take a lot more CO2 than you think to really change the global weather, but not because it has any control over Earth's surface temperatures. In fact atmospheric CO2 can't melt an ice cube with its 15 micron main radiation wavelength that has a Planck radiation temperature of -80C, colder than dry ice (-78.5C).

Why do they call CO2 greenhouse gas? Because plants breathe it, and they pump it into greenhouses to help them grow and thrive. Polar regions and deserts look good in postcards, but who wants to live there. Meanwhile global pop. is zooming, so obviously the real answer is to pump more CO2 and water vapor into the atmosphere to turn the Earth into a greenhouse, turning deserts both hot and cold into lush green crop-growing regions like 35 million years ago when the avg. global temp was 88F and the CO2 level was 1K parts per million (vs. 415 PPM today). So what if we lose some desert polar regions and even some yummy coastline, the adjustments will be inconvenient but temporary, but I prefer shirt-sleeve weather to Frosty the Snowman. How many arctic animals can't adapt to a warmer climate? What animal needs to live in ice and snow and wouldn't like a vacation to Tahiti? They can lose the fat, hair or feathers.

The real question is can we make and keep the global CO2/H20 levels high enough, and for how long? Sooner or later mass global starvation will become unstoppable if world pop. keeps climbing, and this is the way to forestall it, if we act soon enough. Don't give me them Malthusian objections, give me some CO2/H20 solutions. I like a paradise Earth in the possibility window.

So, while the world is debating the horrors, extent or lack thereof of global warming caused by CO2, let's engineer the CO2/H20 solution to making the Earth a warm temperate planet from pole to pole with no deserts or ice wastelands, allowing vastly more food to be grown and turning poor nations rich. I DON'T mean a planet with wild swings between super-hot summers and super-cold winters, but one that is warmer than now everywhere, but moister and greener, with a giant network of plant life helping to avoid extremes. Since CO2 and water vapor are the keys, and the paltry amounts in the atmosphere need to be increased as soon as possible to turn deserts green and get the warming process off to a good start, but the new levels have to be maintained permanently, I'm looking to remote Antarctica (which is really a sea) as the most promising source for unlimited CO2 and water vapor generation, given that noxious emissions (sulfur dioxide, etc.) can be controlled.

This blog is for posting news on the world climate situation, scientific and political, along with my own articles. I'm sure it will start out with hardly any interest or followers, but I'm hoping that it will attract the smartest people eventually and in the end I hope for a global consensus that if it can be done it must be done.

So what is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project? My working idea is that an international effort to reactivate as many volcanoes in Antarctica as possible in an ideal location for distributing the CO2/H20 will produce the best and most cost-effective results. Sorry, one-worlders, it won't give you a license to override and control any country's economy, but if your country is suffering from lack of food you will be too busy expanding farming to care. Hence until I think of or hear about a better way to increase world CO2/H20 levels, this is my pet project. If you are a scientist, please climb aboard my AVP Express and let's make it happen.

It Would Be Funny If It Were's So Sad

It would be funny it weren't so sad, but when the scientists say "greenhouse gas" they are using a malaprop. It should be greenhouse GLASS, because that's why a greenhouse stays warm, by glass walls stopping convection of air and trapping heat. Yes, CO2 is pumped into greenhouses, but not for heating purposes, only to help plants BREATHE. So the whole sucker's game of "greenhouse gas" must truly be for the purpose of stopping more vegetation from growing and feeding the teeming billions. Is that their true goal? Another blip on the horizon is the promise of melting permafrost releasing gigantic amounts of CO2 from the Arctic not Antarctic sector. Let's hope we at least get some more good CO2 that way.

Jan. 14, 2011. Good article on CO2 levels and global temps 30-40 million years ago

Aug. 31, 2011. Giant pipe and balloon to pump water into the sky in climate experiment

May 31, 2013. Scientists find that higher CO2 levels green arid regions

Mar. 30, 2015. Higher atmospheric CO2 levels causing boom in vegetation

Aug. 2015. 'Unprecedented' volcanic eruption released enough water vapor to heat Earth: report

Aug. 15, 2017. Scientists find 91 new volcanoes miles beneath Antarctica's thick ice sheet

How Much CO2 Do Volcanoes Emit?

Will a major volcanic eruption fix climate change? - James Matkin

Part of the heat is coming from beneath our feet

Did any volcanoes erupt in 2020?

T.L. Winslow (TLW, the Historyscoper (tm)

My Blog List

Total Pageviews