Does SSDD have a point that the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to radiative heat transfer

[Wuwei]

There was NO resonance involved in the experiment by Penzias and Wilson.

Sorry goober...but you and your supporters are just wrong...it isn't as if it would have been that tough to actually look it up...took me a couple of seconds...

1964.[1]

Working at Bell Labs in Holmdel, New Jersey, in 1964, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were experimenting with a supersensitive, 6 meter (20 ft) horn antenna originally built to detect radio waves bounced off Echo balloon satellites. To measure these faint radio waves, they had to eliminate all recognizable interference from their receiver. They removed the effects of radar and radio broadcasting, and suppressed interference from the heat in the receiver itself by cooling it with liquid helium to −269 °C, only 4 K above absolute zero.

There was NO resonance involved in the experiment by Penzias and Wilson. They directly measured the CMB using a radiometer - a device for measuring the radiant flux (power) of electromagnetic radiation. It was an instrument warmer than the source. I repeat there were no "resonance radio frequencies", (A term you made up.) If you google that phrase you made up, you will find only 8 results, and none of them refer to IR detectors.

So your statement,...a resonance radio frequency was what was measured....not IR...is totally erroneous and meaningless.

So that measurement of the CMB actually was a measurable, observable, repeatable experiment illustrating that energy from a cold object can hit a warmer object.

They removed the effects of radar and radio broadcasting, and suppressed interference from the heat in the receiver itself by cooling it with liquid helium to −269 °C, only 4 K above absolute zero.

 

[SSDD]

There was NO resonance involved in the experiment by Penzias and Wilson.

Sorry goober...but you and your supporters are just wrong...it isn't as if it would have been that tough to actually look it up...took me a couple of seconds...

1964.[1]

Working at Bell Labs in Holmdel, New Jersey, in 1964, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were experimenting with a supersensitive, 6 meter (20 ft) horn antenna originally built to detect radio waves bounced off Echo balloon satellites. To measure these faint radio waves, they had to eliminate all recognizable interference from their receiver. They removed the effects of radar and radio broadcasting, and suppressed interference from the heat in the receiver itself by cooling it with liquid helium to −269 °C, only 4 K above absolute zero.

There was NO resonance involved in the experiment by Penzias and Wilson.

Sorry guy, but you are acting like a religious zealot...it says right in the paper describing the experiment of Penzias and Wilson that they were, in fact, measuring radio frequencies...they weren't looking for CMB...they were there to measure radio frequencies and that is what they did...they discovered CMB via resonance radio waves...

Discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation - Wikipedia

To measure these faint radio waves, they had to eliminate all recognizable interference from their receiver. They removed the effects of radar and radio broadcasting, and suppressed interference from the heat in the receiver itself by cooling it with liquid helium to −269 °C, only 4 K above absolute zero.

In addition, they had the instrument cooled to -269C....

They directly measured the CMB using a radiometer - a device for measuring the radiant flux (power) of electromagnetic radiation. It was an instrument warmer than the source. I repeat there were no "resonance radio frequencies", (A term you made up.) If you google that phrase you made up, you will find only 8 results, and none of them refer to IR detectors.

The article continues....

When Penzias and Wilson reduced their data they found a low, steady, mysterious noise that persisted in their receiver. This residual noise was 100 times more intense than they had expected, was evenly spread over the sky, and was present day and night. They were certain that the radiation they detected on a wavelength of 7.35 centimeters did not come from the Earth, the Sun, or our galaxy. After thoroughly checking their equipment, removing some pigeons nesting in the antenna and cleaning out the accumulated droppings, the noise remained. Both concluded that this noise was coming from outside our own galaxy—although they were not aware of any radio source that would account for it.

OK...first...7.35 centimeters...that is CENTIMETERS...which is the wavelength they received that is in question is a radio frequency.....second the article states clearly that the weren't aware of any RADIO source that would account for that particular radio frequency....At this point, you are just being f'ing stupid...

So your statement,...a resonance radio frequency was what was measured....not IR...is totally erroneous and meaningless.

Perhaps it is meaningless to you..but then that isn't really saying much is it?....I would imagine that the authors expect that anyone reading such material would know that CMB the CMB was detected via a resonance radio frequency...

Here...from another source....

https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/files/documents/pml/general/1796.pdf

In 1964, two American scientists, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, discovered a faint radio noise whose origin they could not, at first, identify Further investigation re- vealed that the radiation had a cosmic origin and that th.e intensity of the radiation was the same in whatever direc- tion they looked.

So that measurement of the CMB actually was a measurable, observable, repeatable experiment illustrating that energy from a cold object can hit a warmer object.

And in your dogma induced zeal, you failed to note that even then, the instrument was cooled to a temperature of just 4 degrees above absolute zero.

 

[Wuwei]

Not many people understand Electromagnetic radiation. Light is EM radiation at short wavelengths measured in microns. We have a name for those various frequencies, eg., red green, etc... EM at much shorter wavelengths have a different name, gamma rays.

Any measurement of something as cold as 2.7K would emit very long wave EM radiation. Radiation at those wavelengths is called radio waves, and is measured in centimeters. So, to measure the cosmic background radiation, a radio antenna is needed to measure those radio waves. That should not be a surprise.

There are a lot of other man-made sources of radio waves that are not associated with low temperature heat. So, yes Penzias and Wilson tuned them out and initially focused on 7.35 cm. Nevertheless the energy at that wavelength was coming from an unknown source, which was confirmed to be the CMB.

The radio wave radiation detector was cooled to 4K to cut down on heat interference. Even so, they saw the effects of the CMB at an even lower temperature, 2.7K. That illustrates that the cold CMB radiation was able to pass through the much warmer atmosphere, strike the much warmer reflector, and be observed and measured by the slightly warmer detector.

 

[SSDD]

Not many people understand Electromagnetic radiation. Light is EM radiation at short wavelengths measured in microns. We have a name for those various frequencies, eg., red green, etc... EM at much shorter wavelengths have a different name, gamma rays.

Any measurement of something as cold as 2.7K would emit very long wave EM radiation. Radiation at those wavelengths is called radio waves, and is measured in centimeters. So, to measure the cosmic background radiation, a radio antenna is needed to measure those radio waves. That should not be a surprise.

There are a lot of other man-made sources of radio waves that are not associated with low temperature heat. So, yes Penzias and Wilson tuned them out and initially focused on 7.35 cm. Nevertheless the energy at that wavelength was coming from an unknown source, which was confirmed to be the CMB.

The radio wave radiation detector was cooled to 4K to cut down on heat interference. Even so, they saw the effects of the CMB at an even lower temperature, 2.7K. That illustrates that the cold CMB radiation was able to pass through the much warmer atmosphere, strike the much warmer reflector, and be observed and measured by the slightly warmer detector.

via resonance frequency....like it or not, that is precisely how CMB was discovered...and the discovery was accidental...they were looking for radio waves in an entirely different frequency....later actual measurements of CMB have been made...again, with instruments cooled to very near absolute zero...

There is a reason that whenever the topic is discussed, the authors make a point of saying that the radio frequency of 7.35cm CORRESPONDS to a black body radiating at 2.75K...

Do you need a definition of the word corresponds?....so that you can understand what the reference means?

Here...just to help you out...the EM spectrum in question is 7.35 CENTIMETERS....look at the chart below...first note that the scale is in meters....then look way over on the left side where it says RADIO....that is where you will find any wave with a length of 7.35cm...

 

[jc456]

And for all that...the second law still says that energy doesn't move spontaneously from cool to warm...never been observed...never been measured...never will because it doesn't happen...ever.

And for all that...the second law still says that energy doesn't move spontaneously from cool to warm...

And for all that, none of those references violates the second law.
Why do you keep confusing radiation with heat?
Is it because you're stupid?
Or do you realize the idiocy of your original claim but just can't admit it?

Why do you keep excluding energy...If you have a problem with the word...take it up with the physics department at Georgia State...

I repeat...

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Yeah, one poorly worded source means your claim that "matter knows the temperature of all other matter in the universe at all times" must be true and all those real scientists in Wuwei's post are wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

DERP!

still haven't seen any observation. and then there is the whole second law thingy. Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm. We're all just patiently waiting.

SSDD is spot on and messes with you you can't change the facts. I've been laughing at the entire thread. He's gotcha!!!!!

still haven't seen any observation.

You haven't observed photons moving from cooler to warmer matter? Are you sure?

and then there is the whole second law thingy.

Exactly! The second law says nothing about photons being prohibited from moving from cooler to warmer matter.

Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm.

Don't forget about photons moving between matter of the same temperature.
Or do you feel that violates the 2nd Law as well?

I've been laughing at the entire thread.

Well of course you've been.

He's gotcha!!!!!

Yup. He has me, Einstein, Kirchoff and Planck. Among others.
Feel free to refute any of the info referenced in Wuwei's post #15......

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/16305830/

If you ever stop laughing.

Just from Wikipedia:

"The first law of thermodynamics provides the basic definition of internal energy, associated with all thermodynamic systems, and states the rule of conservation of energy.[1][2] The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes.[3] It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Since a photon is energy, it resides as a natural process.

And yes, I'm still laughing, here:

 

[Wuwei]

There is a reason that whenever the topic is discussed, the authors make a point of saying that the radio frequency of 7.35cm CORRESPONDS to a black body radiating at 2.75K...

Do you need a definition of the word corresponds?....so that you can understand what the reference means?

What's your problem? You seem to be doubting that Penzias and Wilson discovered the CMB. Do you know that they got the Nobel prize for that accidental discovery of the CMB?

Here...just to help you out...the EM spectrum in question is 7.35 CENTIMETERS....look at the chart below...first note that the scale is in meters....then look way over on the left side where it says RADIO....that is where you will find any wave with a length of 7.35cm...

Again, what's your problem? It's well known that they used a radio antenna and it's well known that blackbody radiation at 2.7K is around the centimeter range, and that their antenna is the type of instrument that would pick up that thermal radiation.

There is something you don't understand and I'm not sure what it is.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And for all that...the second law still says that energy doesn't move spontaneously from cool to warm...

And for all that, none of those references violates the second law.
Why do you keep confusing radiation with heat?
Is it because you're stupid?
Or do you realize the idiocy of your original claim but just can't admit it?

Why do you keep excluding energy...If you have a problem with the word...take it up with the physics department at Georgia State...

I repeat...

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Yeah, one poorly worded source means your claim that "matter knows the temperature of all other matter in the universe at all times" must be true and all those real scientists in Wuwei's post are wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

DERP!

still haven't seen any observation. and then there is the whole second law thingy. Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm. We're all just patiently waiting.

SSDD is spot on and messes with you you can't change the facts. I've been laughing at the entire thread. He's gotcha!!!!!

still haven't seen any observation.

You haven't observed photons moving from cooler to warmer matter? Are you sure?

and then there is the whole second law thingy.

Exactly! The second law says nothing about photons being prohibited from moving from cooler to warmer matter.

Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm.

Don't forget about photons moving between matter of the same temperature.
Or do you feel that violates the 2nd Law as well?

I've been laughing at the entire thread.

Well of course you've been.

He's gotcha!!!!!

Yup. He has me, Einstein, Kirchoff and Planck. Among others.
Feel free to refute any of the info referenced in Wuwei's post #15......

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/16305830/

If you ever stop laughing.

Just from Wikipedia:

"The first law of thermodynamics provides the basic definition of internal energy, associated with all thermodynamic systems, and states the rule of conservation of energy.[1][2] The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes.[3] It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Since a photon is energy, it resides as a natural process.

And yes, I'm still laughing, here:

For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Cool. Do you have a source that actually helps SSDD's claim?
It would have to say that photons never travel from cooler to hotter.
Because heat is not the same as photons.

 

[jc456]

Why do you keep excluding energy...If you have a problem with the word...take it up with the physics department at Georgia State...

I repeat...

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Yeah, one poorly worded source means your claim that "matter knows the temperature of all other matter in the universe at all times" must be true and all those real scientists in Wuwei's post are wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

DERP!

still haven't seen any observation. and then there is the whole second law thingy. Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm. We're all just patiently waiting.

SSDD is spot on and messes with you you can't change the facts. I've been laughing at the entire thread. He's gotcha!!!!!

still haven't seen any observation.

You haven't observed photons moving from cooler to warmer matter? Are you sure?

and then there is the whole second law thingy.

Exactly! The second law says nothing about photons being prohibited from moving from cooler to warmer matter.

Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm.

Don't forget about photons moving between matter of the same temperature.
Or do you feel that violates the 2nd Law as well?

I've been laughing at the entire thread.

Well of course you've been.

He's gotcha!!!!!

Yup. He has me, Einstein, Kirchoff and Planck. Among others.
Feel free to refute any of the info referenced in Wuwei's post #15......

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/16305830/

If you ever stop laughing.

Just from Wikipedia:

"The first law of thermodynamics provides the basic definition of internal energy, associated with all thermodynamic systems, and states the rule of conservation of energy.[1][2] The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes.[3] It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Since a photon is energy, it resides as a natural process.

And yes, I'm still laughing, here:

For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Cool. Do you have a source that actually helps SSDD's claim?
It would have to say that photons never travel from cooler to hotter.
Because heat is not the same as photons.

well photons are energy and they are part of the natural process and the natural process never goes in reverse

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, one poorly worded source means your claim that "matter knows the temperature of all other matter in the universe at all times" must be true and all those real scientists in Wuwei's post are wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

DERP!

still haven't seen any observation. and then there is the whole second law thingy. Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm. We're all just patiently waiting.

SSDD is spot on and messes with you you can't change the facts. I've been laughing at the entire thread. He's gotcha!!!!!

still haven't seen any observation.

You haven't observed photons moving from cooler to warmer matter? Are you sure?

and then there is the whole second law thingy.

Exactly! The second law says nothing about photons being prohibited from moving from cooler to warmer matter.

Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm.

Don't forget about photons moving between matter of the same temperature.
Or do you feel that violates the 2nd Law as well?

I've been laughing at the entire thread.

Well of course you've been.

He's gotcha!!!!!

Yup. He has me, Einstein, Kirchoff and Planck. Among others.
Feel free to refute any of the info referenced in Wuwei's post #15......

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/16305830/

If you ever stop laughing.

Just from Wikipedia:

"The first law of thermodynamics provides the basic definition of internal energy, associated with all thermodynamic systems, and states the rule of conservation of energy.[1][2] The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes.[3] It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Since a photon is energy, it resides as a natural process.

And yes, I'm still laughing, here:

For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Cool. Do you have a source that actually helps SSDD's claim?
It would have to say that photons never travel from cooler to hotter.
Because heat is not the same as photons.

well photons are energy and they are part of the natural process and the natural process never goes in reverse

well photons are energy

And the 2nd Law mentions heat, not energy or photons.

Good thing, otherwise photons couldn't move from the surface of the Sun toward the hotter photosphere.

 

[jc456]

still haven't seen any observation. and then there is the whole second law thingy. Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm. We're all just patiently waiting.

SSDD is spot on and messes with you you can't change the facts. I've been laughing at the entire thread. He's gotcha!!!!!

still haven't seen any observation.

You haven't observed photons moving from cooler to warmer matter? Are you sure?

and then there is the whole second law thingy.

Exactly! The second law says nothing about photons being prohibited from moving from cooler to warmer matter.

Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm.

Don't forget about photons moving between matter of the same temperature.
Or do you feel that violates the 2nd Law as well?

I've been laughing at the entire thread.

Well of course you've been.

He's gotcha!!!!!

Yup. He has me, Einstein, Kirchoff and Planck. Among others.
Feel free to refute any of the info referenced in Wuwei's post #15......

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/16305830/

If you ever stop laughing.

Just from Wikipedia:

"The first law of thermodynamics provides the basic definition of internal energy, associated with all thermodynamic systems, and states the rule of conservation of energy.[1][2] The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes.[3] It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Since a photon is energy, it resides as a natural process.

And yes, I'm still laughing, here:

For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Cool. Do you have a source that actually helps SSDD's claim?
It would have to say that photons never travel from cooler to hotter.
Because heat is not the same as photons.

well photons are energy and they are part of the natural process and the natural process never goes in reverse

well photons are energy

And the 2nd Law mentions heat, not energy or photons.

Good thing, otherwise photons couldn't move from the surface of the Sun toward the hotter photosphere.

there is a surface to the sun? I thought it was Hydrogen Gas. How is that a surface?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

still haven't seen any observation.

You haven't observed photons moving from cooler to warmer matter? Are you sure?

and then there is the whole second law thingy.

Exactly! The second law says nothing about photons being prohibited from moving from cooler to warmer matter.

Anytime, just post up that observation of thermal energy moving from cold to warm.

Don't forget about photons moving between matter of the same temperature.
Or do you feel that violates the 2nd Law as well?

I've been laughing at the entire thread.

Well of course you've been.

He's gotcha!!!!!

Yup. He has me, Einstein, Kirchoff and Planck. Among others.
Feel free to refute any of the info referenced in Wuwei's post #15......

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/16305830/

If you ever stop laughing.

Just from Wikipedia:

"The first law of thermodynamics provides the basic definition of internal energy, associated with all thermodynamic systems, and states the rule of conservation of energy.[1][2] The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes.[3] It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Since a photon is energy, it resides as a natural process.

And yes, I'm still laughing, here:

For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Cool. Do you have a source that actually helps SSDD's claim?
It would have to say that photons never travel from cooler to hotter.
Because heat is not the same as photons.

well photons are energy and they are part of the natural process and the natural process never goes in reverse

well photons are energy

And the 2nd Law mentions heat, not energy or photons.

Good thing, otherwise photons couldn't move from the surface of the Sun toward the hotter photosphere.

there is a surface to the sun? I thought it was Hydrogen Gas. How is that a surface?

The Sun does not have a definite boundary, and in its outer parts its density decreases exponentially with increasing distance from its center.[37] For the purpose of measurement, however, the Sun's radius is considered to be the distance from its center to the edge of the photosphere, the apparent visible surface of the Sun

Photosphere (effective): 5,772 K[1]

Corona: ≈5×10^6 K

Sun - Wikipedia

Don't tell SSDD, but the photosphere is much cooler than the corona.

 

[jc456]

Just from Wikipedia:

"The first law of thermodynamics provides the basic definition of internal energy, associated with all thermodynamic systems, and states the rule of conservation of energy.[1][2] The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes.[3] It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Since a photon is energy, it resides as a natural process.

And yes, I'm still laughing, here:

For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Cool. Do you have a source that actually helps SSDD's claim?
It would have to say that photons never travel from cooler to hotter.
Because heat is not the same as photons.

well photons are energy and they are part of the natural process and the natural process never goes in reverse

well photons are energy

And the 2nd Law mentions heat, not energy or photons.

Good thing, otherwise photons couldn't move from the surface of the Sun toward the hotter photosphere.

there is a surface to the sun? I thought it was Hydrogen Gas. How is that a surface?

The Sun does not have a definite boundary, and in its outer parts its density decreases exponentially with increasing distance from its center.[37] For the purpose of measurement, however, the Sun's radius is considered to be the distance from its center to the edge of the photosphere, the apparent visible surface of the Sun

Photosphere (effective): 5,772 K[1]

Corona: ≈5×10^6 K

Sun - Wikipedia

Don't tell SSDD, but the photosphere is much cooler than the corona.

and it violates your IR rules.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

For example, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, and never the reverse,"

Cool. Do you have a source that actually helps SSDD's claim?
It would have to say that photons never travel from cooler to hotter.
Because heat is not the same as photons.

well photons are energy and they are part of the natural process and the natural process never goes in reverse

well photons are energy

And the 2nd Law mentions heat, not energy or photons.

Good thing, otherwise photons couldn't move from the surface of the Sun toward the hotter photosphere.

there is a surface to the sun? I thought it was Hydrogen Gas. How is that a surface?

The Sun does not have a definite boundary, and in its outer parts its density decreases exponentially with increasing distance from its center.[37] For the purpose of measurement, however, the Sun's radius is considered to be the distance from its center to the edge of the photosphere, the apparent visible surface of the Sun

Photosphere (effective): 5,772 K[1]

Corona: ≈5×10^6 K

Sun - Wikipedia

Don't tell SSDD, but the photosphere is much cooler than the corona.

and it violates your IR rules.

What violates what IR rule? Where?

 

[jc456]

well photons are energy and they are part of the natural process and the natural process never goes in reverse

well photons are energy

And the 2nd Law mentions heat, not energy or photons.

Good thing, otherwise photons couldn't move from the surface of the Sun toward the hotter photosphere.

there is a surface to the sun? I thought it was Hydrogen Gas. How is that a surface?

The Sun does not have a definite boundary, and in its outer parts its density decreases exponentially with increasing distance from its center.[37] For the purpose of measurement, however, the Sun's radius is considered to be the distance from its center to the edge of the photosphere, the apparent visible surface of the Sun

Photosphere (effective): 5,772 K[1]

Corona: ≈5×10^6 K

Sun - Wikipedia

Don't tell SSDD, but the photosphere is much cooler than the corona.

and it violates your IR rules.

What violates what IR rule? Where?

your rule about back radiation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

well photons are energy

And the 2nd Law mentions heat, not energy or photons.

Good thing, otherwise photons couldn't move from the surface of the Sun toward the hotter photosphere.

there is a surface to the sun? I thought it was Hydrogen Gas. How is that a surface?

The Sun does not have a definite boundary, and in its outer parts its density decreases exponentially with increasing distance from its center.[37] For the purpose of measurement, however, the Sun's radius is considered to be the distance from its center to the edge of the photosphere, the apparent visible surface of the Sun

Photosphere (effective): 5,772 K[1]

Corona: ≈5×10^6 K

Sun - Wikipedia

Don't tell SSDD, but the photosphere is much cooler than the corona.

and it violates your IR rules.

What violates what IR rule? Where?

your rule about back radiation.

The Sun does not violate any rule about back radiation.
Where did you get the idea that it did?

 

[jc456]

there is a surface to the sun? I thought it was Hydrogen Gas. How is that a surface?

The Sun does not have a definite boundary, and in its outer parts its density decreases exponentially with increasing distance from its center.[37] For the purpose of measurement, however, the Sun's radius is considered to be the distance from its center to the edge of the photosphere, the apparent visible surface of the Sun

Photosphere (effective): 5,772 K[1]

Corona: ≈5×10^6 K

Sun - Wikipedia

Don't tell SSDD, but the photosphere is much cooler than the corona.

and it violates your IR rules.

What violates what IR rule? Where?

your rule about back radiation.

The Sun does not violate any rule about back radiation.
Where did you get the idea that it did?

well the corona is hotter than the center, means it doesn't radiate back to the cooler center.

 

[SSDD]

Again, what's your problem? It's well known that they used a radio antenna and it's well known that blackbody radiation at 2.7K is around the centimeter range, and that their antenna is the type of instrument that would pick up that thermal radiation.

There is something you don't understand and I'm not sure what it is.

I understand that your religious zealotry has finally gotten the better of you....I understand that even when the fellows who accidentally discovered CMB state that they were looking at RADIO waves...and discovered CMB via a radio wave...you can't accept the fact because you want it to be otherwise...

The more you talk...the more you reveal about yourself and the degree to which you have bought into the scam...and the associated pseudoscience that goes along with it...so much so, that when the discoverers of CMB state that they were looking at radio waves and noticed that one of them looked strange that you can't accept that they were looking at radio waves...in short...you are absolutely full of shit...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Sun does not have a definite boundary, and in its outer parts its density decreases exponentially with increasing distance from its center.[37] For the purpose of measurement, however, the Sun's radius is considered to be the distance from its center to the edge of the photosphere, the apparent visible surface of the Sun

Photosphere (effective): 5,772 K[1]

Corona: ≈5×10^6 K

Sun - Wikipedia

Don't tell SSDD, but the photosphere is much cooler than the corona.

and it violates your IR rules.

What violates what IR rule? Where?

your rule about back radiation.

The Sun does not violate any rule about back radiation.
Where did you get the idea that it did?

well the corona is hotter than the center, means it doesn't radiate back to the cooler center.

Wrong. All matter above 0K radiates in all directions.

 

[jc456]

and it violates your IR rules.

What violates what IR rule? Where?

your rule about back radiation.

The Sun does not violate any rule about back radiation.
Where did you get the idea that it did?

well the corona is hotter than the center, means it doesn't radiate back to the cooler center.

Wrong. All matter above 0K radiates in all directions.

let me know when you can get by this:


"Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Again, what's your problem? It's well known that they used a radio antenna and it's well known that blackbody radiation at 2.7K is around the centimeter range, and that their antenna is the type of instrument that would pick up that thermal radiation.

There is something you don't understand and I'm not sure what it is.

I understand that your religious zealotry has finally gotten the better of you....I understand that even when the fellows who accidentally discovered CMB state that they were looking at RADIO waves...and discovered CMB via a radio wave...you can't accept the fact because you want it to be otherwise...

The more you talk...the more you reveal about yourself and the degree to which you have bought into the scam...and the associated pseudoscience that goes along with it...so much so, that when the discoverers of CMB state that they were looking at radio waves and noticed that one of them looked strange that you can't accept that they were looking at radio waves...in short...you are absolutely full of shit...

....I understand that even when the fellows who accidentally discovered CMB state that they were looking at RADIO waves...and discovered CMB via a radio wave...you can't accept the fact because you want it to be otherwise...

They are radio waves. Why do you feel that helps any of your claims or harms any of Wuwei's?

The CMB is a cosmic background radiation that is fundamental to observational cosmology because it is the oldest light in the universe, dating to the epoch of recombination. With a traditional optical telescope, the space between stars and galaxies (the background) is completely dark. However, a sufficiently sensitive radio telescope shows a faint background glow, almost isotropic, that is not associated with any star, galaxy, or other object. This glow is strongest in the microwave region of the radio spectrum. The accidental discovery of the CMB in 1964 by American radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson[1][2] was the culmination of work initiated in the 1940s, and earned the discoverers the 1978 Nobel Prize.

Cosmic microwave background - Wikipedia