Empirical Falsification Of the CAGW meme.

[CrusaderFrank]

Why lie...there has never been a measurement taken of spontaneous two way energy flow...the only evidence you could produce is evidence that you are easily fooled by instrumentation.

Only every observation ever made.

there has never been a measurement taken of spontaneous two way energy flow

Ignoring the Sun's corona/surface again?
Ignoring downward IR in Earth's atmosphere?

Any observed, measured evidence to support your claim that at equilibrium matter stops emitting?

Only every observation ever made.

Excellent! List 2 such observations that explicitly back your claim.

The corona defies our understanding of physics, I don't know why you feel that gives you license to site it as an example of cooler flowing to warmer

The corona defies our understanding of physics

You're looking at it from the wrong direction.
For the sake of this argument, I'm only interested in the ability of the Sun's surface
to emit toward hotter matter. I don't care why the corona is hotter.

I care that SSDD says photons know that they can't be emitted toward hotter matter.
If that were correct, the Sun's surface would be invisible and the only photons we'd see from the Sun
would be those emitted by the corona toward the Earth.

In theory, that sounds plausible. It looks like the cooler Sun Surface photons are passing through the corona unmolested. You can say that photons are acting contrary to the laws of physics by passing through an area that defies the laws of physics.

You can say that photons are acting contrary to the laws of physics by passing through an area that defies the laws of physics.

Which laws of physics are those photons ignoring?

That whole flowing from cooler to warmer thingy

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ignoring the Sun's corona/surface again?

You got any compelling evidence that that is spontaneous energy flow? Of course not...once again..just a story you tell in an effort to support your belief.

Ignoring downward IR in Earth's atmosphere?

Got any measurements of downward IR in any discrete wavelength in the atmosphere made with an instrument at ambient temperature? Of course not. You have measurements made across the spectrum with instruments at ambient temperature measuring the temperature changes within an internal thermopile...nothing more. Just more evidence of how easily you are fooled by instrumentation...it is like magic tricks to you.

Excellent! List 2 such observations that explicitly back your claim.

Pick any instance...show me a measurement of two radiators at equilibrium absorbing radiation from each other...just one. I can't show you such a measurement because it doesn't happen. You are the one claiming they radiate towards each other and absorb each other's radiation...the onus is upon you to show the measurements to support the claim...You can't because it doesn't happen. And what do two black bodies at equilibrium have to do with the claim of downward radiation, or any other claim made by climate science?

You got any compelling evidence that that is spontaneous energy flow?

Unless fusion is occurring at the surface or in the corona, how could it be anything but spontaneous?

Got any measurements of downward IR in any discrete wavelength in the atmosphere made with an instrument at ambient temperature?

Yes.

Do you have measurements of matter ceasing radiating at equilibrium?

You have measurements made across the spectrum with instruments at ambient temperature measuring the temperature changes within an internal thermopile

Do you have anything that explains how the thermopile knows how quickly to radiate away energy to cooler matter without any temperature information about that cooler matter being transmitted?

Do you have any other examples of matter changing behavior based on unknowable information?

Pick any instance..

As soon as you post 2 observations that explicitly back your claim, I'll be happy to discuss them.
Unless you're admitting you have none???????

I can't show you such a measurement because it doesn't happen.

Cool. So post a couple of journals, articles or books discussing this really interesting example of matter above 0K ceasing radiating........there must be hundreds of possibilities for you to link/post here.

You are the one claiming they radiate towards each other and absorb each other's radiation..

Only because that's what Stefan-Boltzmann claims as well as every physicist who ever discussed matter at equilibrium absorbing and emitting the same amount of energy, not zero energy.

And what do two black bodies at equilibrium have to do with the claim of downward radiation,

Those are just two examples of your smart photon idiocy.

Genesis 1:16 God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also.

Probably the best explanation for both the Corona and why something as ridiculously enormous as the Moon is doing in earth orbit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

there has never been a measurement taken of spontaneous two way energy flow

Ignoring the Sun's corona/surface again?
Ignoring downward IR in Earth's atmosphere?

Any observed, measured evidence to support your claim that at equilibrium matter stops emitting?

Only every observation ever made.

Excellent! List 2 such observations that explicitly back your claim.

The corona defies our understanding of physics, I don't know why you feel that gives you license to site it as an example of cooler flowing to warmer

The corona defies our understanding of physics

You're looking at it from the wrong direction.
For the sake of this argument, I'm only interested in the ability of the Sun's surface
to emit toward hotter matter. I don't care why the corona is hotter.

I care that SSDD says photons know that they can't be emitted toward hotter matter.
If that were correct, the Sun's surface would be invisible and the only photons we'd see from the Sun
would be those emitted by the corona toward the Earth.

In theory, that sounds plausible. It looks like the cooler Sun Surface photons are passing through the corona unmolested. You can say that photons are acting contrary to the laws of physics by passing through an area that defies the laws of physics.

You can say that photons are acting contrary to the laws of physics by passing through an area that defies the laws of physics.

Which laws of physics are those photons ignoring?

That whole flowing from cooler to warmer thingy

Which law mentions photons measuring temperatures before they're emitted?

 

[SSDD]

Unless fusion is occurring at the surface or in the corona, how could it be anything but spontaneous?

So the answer is no...you have nothing more than an assumption that the energy flow is spontaneous. Why do you find that you can't simply state that?

Yes.

No you don't...so now you are either a liar or don't have even as much knowledge of the instrumentation in question as I gave you credit for.

Do you have measurements of matter ceasing radiating at equilibrium?

Do you have anything that explains how the thermopile knows how quickly to radiate away energy to cooler matter without any temperature information about that cooler matter being transmitted?

Nope...do you have anything that explains the fundamental mechanism of gravity?...after all, that is a phenomenon that we have studied far longer than energy transfer...and yet. we don't yet have a grasp on what actually makes it work.

As soon as you post 2 observations that explicitly back your claim, I'll be happy to discuss them.
Unless you're admitting you have none???????

All observations back my claim toddster...every example of energy movement ever made backs my claim. Sorry that is so difficult for you to grasp. If you believe energy is moving in two directions then show an observed measured example...

It won't ever happen because there are none..that being the case, all observations and measurements point towards gross one way energy flow.

Only because that's what Stefan-Boltzmann claims as well as every physicist who ever discussed matter at equilibrium absorbing and emitting the same amount of energy, not zero energy.

Nope...set T1 and T2 to the same temperature and P=0..that is what Stefan Boltsman says. Anything more than that is your misunderstanding or deliberate misinterpretation, or your addition of something that isn't there in the equation.

 

[SSDD]

The corona defies our understanding of physics, I don't know why you feel that gives you license to site it as an example of cooler flowing to warmer

Because he is so desperate for back radiation to be true that he will happily believe, and say anything to soothe his troubled mind.

 

[SSDD]

You're looking at it from the wrong direction.
For the sake of this argument, I'm only interested in the ability of the Sun's surface
to emit toward hotter matter. I don't care why the corona is hotter.

And in looking at it that way, you miss the entire point...energy can not move SPONTANEOUSLY from cool to warm...apply work and you can get it to move in that direction.

 

[SSDD]

The fact that I don't have to eat 16,000 Calories a day to stay alive demonstrates two-way energy flow.

16,000 Calories a day is how much the S-B equation says my body radiates each day (conduction losses would only add to that tally). Yet I only eat 2,000 Calories a day.

I wonder where the missing 14,000 Calories comes from? Oh, that's right, it comes from the backradiation that I absorb after the environment around me emits it, an environment that is almost always cooler than I am.

So not only are you a black body but you are also photosynthetic? Interesting. I have always thought that you weren't much brighter than a potted plant...now you confirm my hypothesis.

 

[SSDD]

Which law mentions photons measuring temperatures before they're emitted?

Which law mentions photons at all? Got any evidence that they actually exist? Got anything that puts them in any other category than theoretical particles? You are pretty emotionally, and intellectually invested in a theoretical particle to which there is no actual physical evidence of its existence. You exemplify the problem with post modern science...who needs evidence right?...a mathematical model will do...till it doesn't.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Unless fusion is occurring at the surface or in the corona, how could it be anything but spontaneous?

So the answer is no...you have nothing more than an assumption that the energy flow is spontaneous. Why do you find that you can't simply state that?

Yes.

No you don't...so now you are either a liar or don't have even as much knowledge of the instrumentation in question as I gave you credit for.

Do you have measurements of matter ceasing radiating at equilibrium?

Do you have anything that explains how the thermopile knows how quickly to radiate away energy to cooler matter without any temperature information about that cooler matter being transmitted?

Nope...do you have anything that explains the fundamental mechanism of gravity?...after all, that is a phenomenon that we have studied far longer than energy transfer...and yet. we don't yet have a grasp on what actually makes it work.

As soon as you post 2 observations that explicitly back your claim, I'll be happy to discuss them.
Unless you're admitting you have none???????

All observations back my claim toddster...every example of energy movement ever made backs my claim. Sorry that is so difficult for you to grasp. If you believe energy is moving in two directions then show an observed measured example...

It won't ever happen because there are none..that being the case, all observations and measurements point towards gross one way energy flow.

Only because that's what Stefan-Boltzmann claims as well as every physicist who ever discussed matter at equilibrium absorbing and emitting the same amount of energy, not zero energy.

Nope...set T1 and T2 to the same temperature and P=0..that is what Stefan Boltsman says. Anything more than that is your misunderstanding or deliberate misinterpretation, or your addition of something that isn't there in the equation.

So the answer is no...you have nothing more than an assumption that the energy flow is spontaneous

Yeah, it sucks when the Sun demonstrates the stupidity of your "smart photon" theory.

Do you have anything that explains how the thermopile knows how quickly to radiate away energy to cooler matter without any temperature information about that cooler matter being transmitted?
​

Nope...​

​

DERP!​

​

All observations back my claim toddster...every example of energy movement ever made backs my claim.​

​

That is so awesome!​

Post 2 examples that explicitly show matter stops emitting at equilibrium.​

​

Nope...set T1 and T2 to the same temperature and P=0..that is what Stefan Boltsman says. ​

​

This is known as Stefan-Boltzmann law, which states that the rate of outward radiative energy (per unit area) emitted by an object with temperature T is proportional to the 4th power of T​

​

No caveat concerning the temperature of surrounding matter.​

It's almost like that surrounding matter doesn't matter (especially because it can't transmit info about it's temperature if it isn't emitting LOL!)​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're looking at it from the wrong direction.
For the sake of this argument, I'm only interested in the ability of the Sun's surface
to emit toward hotter matter. I don't care why the corona is hotter.

And in looking at it that way, you miss the entire point...energy can not move SPONTANEOUSLY from cool to warm...apply work and you can get it to move in that direction.

energy can not move SPONTANEOUSLY from cool to warm..

Good point. So why is energy allowed to move from surface to corona? Spell it out.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which law mentions photons measuring temperatures before they're emitted?

Which law mentions photons at all? Got any evidence that they actually exist? Got anything that puts them in any other category than theoretical particles? You are pretty emotionally, and intellectually invested in a theoretical particle to which there is no actual physical evidence of its existence. You exemplify the problem with post modern science...who needs evidence right?...a mathematical model will do...till it doesn't.

Which law mentions photons at all?

You're right, the 2nd Law isn't violated by photons.

 

[SSDD]

Yeah, it sucks when the Sun demonstrates the stupidity of your "smart photon" theory.​

So you believe there is a spontaneous energy flow from cool to warm in the case of the sun.

This is known as Stefan-Boltzmann law, which states that the rate of outward radiative energy (per unit area) emitted by an object with temperature T is proportional to the 4th power of T

You guys are stuck on stupid...I have already provided emails from several top shelf physicists who state pretty clearly that what you are describing is the equation for a black body alone in a vacuum...that's it...include other matter and then T1-T2 matters...sorry again, that this is all so far over your head.

No caveat concerning the temperature of surrounding matter.
It's almost like that surrounding matter doesn't matter

There is no other matter in the equation you keep going to...sorry you don't understand and apparently will never understand.​

 

[SSDD]

energy can not move SPONTANEOUSLY from cool to warm..

Good point. So why is energy allowed to move from surface to corona? Spell it out.

So again, you believe the energy flow from the surface to the corona is spontaneous? No evidence....you just think the sun is the only place in the known universe where energy just spontaneously moves from cool to warm and can be measured?

 

[SSDD]

Which law mentions photons measuring temperatures before they're emitted?

Which law mentions photons at all? Got any evidence that they actually exist? Got anything that puts them in any other category than theoretical particles? You are pretty emotionally, and intellectually invested in a theoretical particle to which there is no actual physical evidence of its existence. You exemplify the problem with post modern science...who needs evidence right?...a mathematical model will do...till it doesn't.

Which law mentions photons at all?

You're right, the 2nd Law isn't violated by photons.

Of course it isn't...since they don't move spontaneously from cool to warm. Nothing violates the second law. Energy only moves from cool to warm if work is done to make it happen. Unbelievable that you can't seem to get that through your skull. There is something at work which we don't understand which is causing energy to move from the surface of the sun to the corona...but the fact that we don't yet understand doesn't mean it isn't happening. Only an idiot would jump straight to it invalidating the second law of thermodynamics.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, it sucks when the Sun demonstrates the stupidity of your "smart photon" theory.​

So you believe there is a spontaneous energy flow from cool to warm in the case of the sun.

This is known as Stefan-Boltzmann law, which states that the rate of outward radiative energy (per unit area) emitted by an object with temperature T is proportional to the 4th power of T

You guys are stuck on stupid...I have already provided emails from several top shelf physicists who state pretty clearly that what you are describing is the equation for a black body alone in a vacuum...that's it...include other matter and then T1-T2 matters...sorry again, that this is all so far over your head.

No caveat concerning the temperature of surrounding matter.
It's almost like that surrounding matter doesn't matter

There is no other matter in the equation you keep going to...sorry you don't understand and apparently will never understand.​

So you believe there is a spontaneous energy flow from cool to warm in the case of the sun.

Yes, cooler matter of the surface of the Sun freely radiates in all directions, including toward the hotter corona.


You guys are stuck on stupid...I have already provided emails from several top shelf physicists who state pretty clearly that what you are describing is the equation for a black body alone in a vacuum...that's it...

Grey bodies in an atmosphere don't radiate?

There is no other matter in the equation you keep going to

Have you ever found a source that says, the rate of outward radiative energy (per unit area) emitted by an object with temperature T is proportional to the 4th power of T, unless there is warmer matter nearby (or billions of light years away)?

Or any source that says matter at equilibrium doesn't radiate at all?

Gustav Robert Kirchhoff (1824–1887) stated in 1860 that “at thermal equilibrium, the power radiated by an object must be equal to the power absorbed.”

Was Kirchhoff wrong?

Albert Einstein: "... Even in thermal equilibrium, transitions associated with the absorption and emission of photons are occurring continuously... "

Or Einstein?

Prove it.....................

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

energy can not move SPONTANEOUSLY from cool to warm..

Good point. So why is energy allowed to move from surface to corona? Spell it out.

So again, you believe the energy flow from the surface to the corona is spontaneous? No evidence....you just think the sun is the only place in the known universe where energy just spontaneously moves from cool to warm and can be measured?

So again, you believe the energy flow from the surface to the corona is spontaneous?

Why don't you explain the non-spontaneous flow of energy from the surface to the corona?

 

[IanC]

The fact that I don't have to eat 16,000 Calories a day to stay alive demonstrates two-way energy flow.

16,000 Calories a day is how much the S-B equation says my body radiates each day (conduction losses would only add to that tally). Yet I only eat 2,000 Calories a day.

I wonder where the missing 14,000 Calories comes from? Oh, that's right, it comes from the backradiation that I absorb after the environment around me emits it, an environment that is almost always cooler than I am.

So not only are you a black body but you are also photosynthetic? Interesting. I have always thought that you weren't much brighter than a potted plant...now you confirm my hypothesis.

Yes, skin has an emissivity very close to a perfect black body.

Yes, the human body has a complex system for regulating core temperature to keep it in a range where necessary chemical reactions can take place. This includes both heating and cooling according to need.

Food is the fuel, muscle movement produces most of the heat, the blood circulation system distributes it.

Naked humans need a warm and consistent environment to survive because the human body has only limited ability to heat and cool itself.

We know by measurement that average human skin operating temperature is about 100w/m^2, and the average area is about 1m^2, so the energy being radiated is about 10,000+ calories per day.

Few of us eat 10,000 calories a day, so the extra energy must be coming from somewhere. The source is our surroundings. While we are radiating out the environment is radiating in.

That's why we keep our artificial environment (houses,etc) about 25C. It's easy to make up the heat loss by small amounts of muscle movement. 15C is too cold, necessitating extra clothing to reduce heat loss, and 35C is too hot necessitating the body to go into a heat loss regimen that includes sweating and increased blood flow to the skin and extremities.

SSDD says your skin and body stop radiating if the environment is the same temperature as your skin. I say both the skin and environment continue to radiate but the net movement of heat is reduced to nothing.

Humans are sensitive to heat flow, and we spend much of our time fine tuning our environment to maximize our comfort level. In the meantime our bodies are taking unconscious actions to do the same.

And many of these tweaks towards maximum comfort involve 'a cool thing making a warm (actively heated) thing warmer'.

 

[IanC]

Stefan provided the experimental results that led to the S-B equations. Boltzmann provided the mathematical underpinnings.

Let's look at the experiment. A spherical cavity was coated with black carbon to give near perfect blackbody radiation and absorption. The object containing this cavity was heated to various temperatures, and a very small aperture was opened to allow a trivially small amount of radiation to escape and be measured.

SSDD says the simple one object S-B equation is useless unless you measure it in a void berift of matter or extraneous radiation. That it cannot be done and is basically meaningless.

Yet the cavity experiment does measure the amount of radiation produced. The interior is extremely close to a blackbody, there is no extraneous radiation, at least until the aperture is opened and even then the exchange is trivial.

I suppose that the instruments measuring the radiation were somewhat antiquated and could be called into question but if that is so, why does SSDD have such certainty about the S-B equations?

The simple one object equation has been endlessly reproduced by undergrad students for over a hundred years. There is little doubt that the relationship is correct.

 

[SSDD]

Yes, cooler matter of the surface of the Sun freely radiates in all directions, including toward the hotter corona.

The second law says that you are wrong...but you go ahead and believe.

Grey bodies in an atmosphere don't radiate?

Yes, but they radiate according to their emissivity, their area, and the difference in temperature between themselves and their surroundings..Set T1 and T2 to the same number and P=0.

Have you ever found a source that says, the rate of outward radiative energy (per unit area) emitted by an object with temperature T is proportional to the 4th power of T, unless there is warmer matter nearby (or billions of light years away)?

Years and distance are irrelevant to entities traveling at the speed of light. Most sources assume that the reader already knows this and therefore aren't interested in teaching basics all over again. Ever go to college? When you get to 2000 and 3000 level physics they assume that you already know the math so spend little to no time teaching algebra, trig, and calculus. If you are unaware that time and distance are irrelevant concepts when you are talking about entities that are moving at the speed of light, then you need to go back to the remedial level.

Or any source that says matter at equilibrium doesn't radiate at all?

Just the SB law...again set T1 and T2 to the same temperature and P=0...that statement actually has a literal and mathematical meaning...and since the equation has no variable that would allow for calculations of net, it is speaking to gross, one way energy movements. Sorry that you can't read an equation and know what it says. I get that your dogma requires that it say something else, but alas, the language of mathematical equations is very explicit..if you don't have an expression or expressions within the equation that would allow you to calculate net, then it isn't speaking to net.

Gustav Robert Kirchhoff (1824–1887) stated in 1860 that “at thermal equilibrium, the power radiated by an object must be equal to the power absorbed.”

Again, set T1 and T2 to the same number...P=0 that means that the power being radiated is equal to the power being absorbed from other bodies at equilibrium

Was Kirchhoff wrong?

Of course not...you are just unable to read mathematical equations...which is required if you want to know what he is saying...in verbal language, statements are open to interpretation..in mathematical language, they are not...set T1 and T2 to the same number and P=0...that mathematical statement is not open to interpretation.

Albert Einstein: "... Even in thermal equilibrium, transitions associated with the absorption and emission of photons are occurring continuously... "

According to an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model. Einstein had some opinions on models..maybe you should look them up.

 

[SSDD]

Why don't you explain the non-spontaneous flow of energy from the surface to the corona?

Their is reason that sceintists say that the movement of energy from the surface to the corona defies our understanding...it isn't because they believe energy can move spontaneously from cool to warm..it is because they believe something is happing there that we don't understand...that would be some process that equates to work making the movement happen. You seem to be the only one suggesting that the energy movement is spontaneous.