Saturday, October 22, 2022

Why I Laugh at the Sky

 

My reply:

[[I can imagine so many experiments that would prove out this subsumation were it true, but the thing which proves this concept completely moot, is the room temperature bolometer...  The (Tektronics) FLIR TG165 is sensitive in the range of CO2 global warming DOOM! 7.5–14 µm wavelength.]]

Here's the specs:

https://www.flir.com/products/tg165-x/?vertical=condition+monitoring&segment=solutions

Hmm... a killer refutation of my entire understanding of thermal physics.  I'm bleeding... :)

[[This device apparently can measure to -25C: -25°C to 300°C (-13°F to 572°F). But cannot be operated below -10 C:-10°C to 45°C (14°F to 113°F)]]

Let's check their figures:

Radiation of a wavelength of 7.5 microns to 14 microns has a Planck blackbody peak power (Wien) temperature of 113.2C to -66.1C, according to this handy free online calculator:

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/wiens-law

Here's what Wiki says:

"Some long-wave cameras require their detector to be cryogenically cooled, typically for several minutes before use, although some moderately sensitive infrared cameras do not require this. Many thermal imagers, including some forward-looking infrared cameras (such as some LWIR enhanced vision systems (EVS)) are also uncooled...  Medium-wave (MWIR) cameras operate in the 3–5 μm range. These can see almost as well, since those frequencies are less affected by water-vapor absorption, but generally require a more expensive sensor array, along with cryogenic cooling." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward-looking_infrared

Back to you:

[[If the photons prevent an equal photon from being emitted by the warmer object as the cold photon is subsumed, you get exactly the same energy transfer as you do with classical thermodynamics.]]

Classical thermodynamics is the only kind.  You claim there's another kind?  It's the only branch of physics that will never be overturned.  It says that a colder body can't raise the temperature of a hotter body by any means, including radiation.  I'm not sure that subsuming photons is prohibited by the need to emit an equal photon since a hotter black body is continually emitting photons at that wavelength anyway, but that's all that reflection is, so who cares if a colder photon is reflected or absorbed and reemitted, it still can't raise the temperature of a hotter body.  Why can't you accept that?

Wait!  The FLIR meter is measuring the Planck blackbody radiation peak emitted from objects it's looking at which are at those low temperatures, meaning that it sees the spectrum and uses software to estimate the peak. Yes, the sensor can be hotter and still register those photons striking it, although its own temperature will increase the signal-to-noise ratio.  Same principle as touching dry ice or holding your hands near it and feeling the cold.   It's not sending its own photons to it, making your argument ridiculous, and since those photons can be arranged to travel mostly untouched through the lenses and clear air., even moist air, it strengthens my understanding not yours.  Your diatribe actually has nothing to do with what you were trying to disprove, which is no surprise, because a killer refutation would require actual measurement of the sensor's quantum operation, which is prohibited by the quantum measurement problem. 


[[The completely unfounded, unscientific concept still includes an electromagnetic rewrite of all of physics which is flatly stupid.]]


That's what you're doing, rewriting the Second Law to have a quantum level exception to push a you know what concept.  Funny, that's what happened after the gigantic U.N. IPCC octopus took over and hijacked climate science to frame CO2 as causing global warming, otherwise the hoax would be too obvious to fool the unscientific and they'd have to be disbanded and find another hoax to push global Marxism.


Here's a peer-reviewed article explaining how black body radiation maximizes entropy increase, pulling the rug under the IPCC's feet:


https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/IMECE/proceedings-abstract/IMECE2006/47640/217/320872


For laffers, here's a physics blog that has been trying to save the IPCC a little too hard, starting out with physicsts telling the 2nd Law like it is, only to be inundated by a bunch of IPCC trolls trying to muddy the waters.  Where's your comments?

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/cooler-objects-able-to-increase-the-temperature-of-warmer-objects.932598/

BTW, you really should have sent your comments to the blog involved, Climate of Sophistry, which is run by an anti-IPCC astrophysicist who has had many battles with them that always end by them refusing to answer his objections and canceling him.  This blog has a tiny readership, but it's one of a bunch of IPCC-owned blogs trying to tell truth to power, although admitted a few are run by scientific crackpots.  Here's my cool free list, the most complete available:

www.historyscoper.com/climateblogs.html

In closing:

The bottom line is that all quantum effects are speculation, and that's all this blog article is.  But why fix on this tiny point in my refounding of climate science freed of IPCC hijacking?  Duh, what you really want is clearly to keep your claim going that CO2's 15 micron -80C thermal radiation can cause global warming, as if you're a paid IPCC shill.  Sorry, you didn't defend them at all, but made me look more right by failing to directly disprove me with a direct theoretical scientific argument.  Duh, and I know why: there isn't any.  When will you give up, admit I'm right and help me get the IPCC shut down, the money train stopped and refunded, and all its fake climate scientists forced to get new careers while the global Marxists search for another hoax to push? When are you going to advertise my killer disproofs on your main page and in all your margins as the best use of your readers' time?  Sorry, I'm not on Big Oil's payroll so you'd have to go totally amateur like moi.

I linked to the peer-reviewed blog establishing black body radiation increase because the entire IPCC house of cards is built on an alleged Earth-Sun energy balance, as if there's no such thing as entropy dispersion of energy into the heat death of the Universe when CO2 is concerned, which explains why satellite measurements of TOA Earth surface radiation shows a big notch at 15 microns.  This is a macro-level law, not quantum level.

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

You still insist that I'm a crackpot and that your IPCC gurus have the absolute truth from God on the subject of thermodynamics?  Why don't you try the acid test of telling your favorite IPCC climate science about their 15 micron -80C problem and asking for a definitive scientific refutation?  Watch them block you :)

Let me cut to the chase: The only quality time you'll ever spend studying real thermal physics until the IPCC falls is my cool free Internet pubs.

Start here:

https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2022/10/22/why-i-laugh-at-the-sky/

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

https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-ways-that-people-can-help-prevent-climate-change-without-changing-their-lifestyle-or-buying-new-things/answer/TL-Winslow

www.historyscoper.com/climatescience101.html

Oops! I meant the detector measures a minimum peak not a maximum peak at the frigid temperature wavelength. It’s not absorbing energy and heating up. Same principle as detecting a hole in a sunlit landscape by the black spot.

---000---












https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2022/10/22/why-i-laugh-at-the-sky/

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