Friday, October 21, 2022

Id’s Nth law of Thermobviousness

https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2022/10/21/ids-nth-law-of-thermobviousness/

My reply:


[[CO2 in the planetary atmosphere has a temperature. CO2 emits radiation, even cold CO2 does. This emission of energy (cooling) happens as stated by the second law of thermodynamics. If this atmospheric CO2 is warmer than than the near absolute zero temperature background radiation of the universe, the planet surface will be warmer than it would be without the CO2 radiation. The radiation impinges on a surface capable of absorbing radiation, therefore energy must transfer. This fact applies even if the planet surface is already warmer than the CO2 itself — which in the case of earth’s atmosphere, it is. The simple energy transfer is independent of the temperature DIFFERENCE of the emitting and receiving object, the NET energy transfer is not.

[[Photons are time-frozen objects. It’s not like the emitted IR photons remember the temperature of the object they come from and the one they are going to in order to make some kind of absorption decision at the moment of interaction.]]

Sorry, heat is a flow of energy from a hotter to a colder object.  There is no "net flow" of energy both ways.  This flow doesn't depend on the method, whether conduction, convection, or radiation.  This is required by Nature's ironclad Second Law of Thermodynamics.  Too bad, the IPCC octopus pretends the Second Law doesn't apply to CO2 in order to push their global Marxist takeover attempt.

And yes, the photons themselves are just packets of energy, but the amount is dependent on the wavelength.  It's the black body radiators that know precisely what photons are energetic enough to build up a receiving black body radiator to the exact same temperature, and the black body radiation curve of power vs. wavelength has a peak at which most of the photons are concentrated so that it can transmit heat energy by radiation.  Heat is measured by what?  Temperature.  If a black body radiator emits its radiation onto a colder black body radiator, the latter will absorb the photons and slowly increase its temperature based on its heat capacity, but is itself radiating heat energy via its own black body radiation curve solely dependent on temperature independent of the material.  When/if the two black bodies equalize temperatures, their radiation curves will also equalize, achieving equilibrium.  The second black body can't keep raising its temperature higher than the first's.  But not with the IPCC lie machine, which wants you to believe that while an iron rod chilled to -80C will cool anything it's in contact with down ultimately to -80C, this doesn't apply to CO2's "back radiation", whose photons are indistinguishable from the iron rod's main radiation.

The IPCC also denies the basis of the Second Law, namely, entropy.  Only the surfaces of the Earth and Sun are black bodies that transfer energy in the form of heat.  The atmosphere can only transmit the energy and maybe slow down its transmission with convection, evaporation, and precipitation while doing nothing to transmit its own energy in the form of heat anywhere.  Of course the heat energy in gases is not in the internal energy density of solids and liquids which have chemical bonds, but in the kinetic energy of the bouncing molecules, with some molecules with the right electron dipoles able to capture and reemit individual photons at specific wavelengths, but never become a black body that can absorb and emit radiation at all wavelengths, after downshifting the emissions to satisfy entropy along a black body curve.


The biggest lie is to ignore or deny that energy transfer in the form of heat always increases entropy, which harmlessly disperses the energy into the heat death of the Universe, after which it can never cause heat or do work.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(energy_dispersal)


"By definition, blackbody radiation is that radiation which produces the largest amount of entropy for a given quantity of energy." - 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-01622-6


The IPCC wants you to believe that every solar photon that reaches the surface ends up being reemitted at a longer wavelength to preserve some mystical Sun-Earth energy balance, ignoring the obvious fact that some of the solar energy ends up moving air to create wind and storms, driving a heat engine that trades heat energy for work, thus increasing entropy.  The IPCC scientists all decided to ignore that Nature article long ago because they're kept cage hens working for Marxist politician scammers.


Photons have no temperature, thus aren't heat.  Do the photons from a colder black body radiator bounce off surface of a hotter black body, get absorbed and immediately spit out, or just get dispersed by entropy?  Here's the best answer I've seen, using the concept of chemical potential:

/“Between two objects, one warmer and one cooler, the chemical potential increases in the intervening space as one ascends the energy gradient from cooler to warmer object. Thus photons from the cooler object will be subsumed before they ever reach the warmer object because warmer objects have higher energy density at all wavelengths than cooler objects.” -Hyperphysics Fails at Basic Science, Logic, Reasoning, and Math (https://climateofsophistry.com/2021/11/17/hyperphysics-fails-at-basic-science-logic-reasoning-and-math/)

So where does the 15 micron CO2 radiation go?  It doesn't reach the top of the atmosphere, as NASA satellites confirm.  But that doesn't imply that they raise Earth surface temperature, it only confirms entropy dispersal of their energy.

Here's my cool free essay giving the killer disproof of "net heat flow":

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-say-no-net-heat-flow-between-two-objects-of-different-temperatures-but-not-no-heat-flow/answer/TL-Winslow

In parting, I quote the Ego, er, Id again:

[[This is how knowing something vs believing something works. Everything in science must fit, or it needs to be reconsidered.]]


Do it then.






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