Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Already gave you some to which you had no rational answer. .Let's hear what evidence you have supporting the charge that AR5 is "bullshit"
Terribly sorry, but you failed at that as you have failed at every other argument you've tried to push in this debate. AR5 stands. Your arguments, very clearly, do not.
Terribly sorry, but you failed at that as you have failed at every other argument you've tried to push in this debate. AR5 stands. Your arguments, very clearly, do not.
Well there was a failure...but it was your failure....We all know that you and yours are world class projectors...you do and then immediately claim that others are doing what you have done. Sorry guy. When you can rationally explain increased confidence in the face of failing computer models, then the conversation can continue...till then project on garth.
Terribly sorry, but you failed at that as you have failed at every other argument you've tried to push in this debate. AR5 stands. Your arguments, very clearly, do not.
Well there was a failure...but it was your failure....We all know that you and yours are world class projectors...you do and then immediately claim that others are doing what you have done. Sorry guy. When you can rationally explain increased confidence in the face of failing computer models, then the conversation can continue...till then project on garth.
Still working on your smart wave mechanism?
Terribly sorry, but you failed at that as you have failed at every other argument you've tried to push in this debate. AR5 stands. Your arguments, very clearly, do not.
Well there was a failure...but it was your failure....We all know that you and yours are world class projectors...you do and then immediately claim that others are doing what you have done. Sorry guy. When you can rationally explain increased confidence in the face of failing computer models, then the conversation can continue...till then project on garth.
Still working on your smart wave mechanism?
Interesting that you think it takes smart waves to not radiate in the direction of warm but don't think that it takes smart rocks to fall down when dropped even though the mechanism for neither is known. Just dumb....no other word for it.
By the way, if we are talking about waves...then it is well known that waves can cancel each other out or that a wave of greater magnitude can cancel out a weaker wave and continue on at a diminished strength...if we are talking hypothetical photons which no one even knows whether or not exist...then what's the point of talking anyway...may as well be discussing what unicorns do on a moonless night.
Terribly sorry, but you failed at that as you have failed at every other argument you've tried to push in this debate. AR5 stands. Your arguments, very clearly, do not.
Well there was a failure...but it was your failure....We all know that you and yours are world class projectors...you do and then immediately claim that others are doing what you have done. Sorry guy. When you can rationally explain increased confidence in the face of failing computer models, then the conversation can continue...till then project on garth.
Still working on your smart wave mechanism?
Interesting that you think it takes smart waves to not radiate in the direction of warm but don't think that it takes smart rocks to fall down when dropped even though the mechanism for neither is known. Just dumb....no other word for it.
By the way, if we are talking about waves...then it is well known that waves can cancel each other out or that a wave of greater magnitude can cancel out a weaker wave and continue on at a diminished strength...if we are talking hypothetical photons which no one even knows whether or not exist...then what's the point of talking anyway...may as well be discussing what unicorns do on a moonless night.
Interesting that you think it takes smart waves to not radiate in the direction of warm
Interesting that you know better than the Stefan–Boltzmann law.
By the way, if we are talking about waves...then it is well known that waves can cancel each other out
Now the waves from the cooler object are canceled out by the waves from the warmer? LOL!
Terribly sorry, but you failed at that as you have failed at every other argument you've tried to push in this debate. AR5 stands. Your arguments, very clearly, do not.
Well there was a failure...but it was your failure....We all know that you and yours are world class projectors...you do and then immediately claim that others are doing what you have done. Sorry guy. When you can rationally explain increased confidence in the face of failing computer models, then the conversation can continue...till then project on garth.
Still working on your smart wave mechanism?
Interesting that you think it takes smart waves to not radiate in the direction of warm but don't think that it takes smart rocks to fall down when dropped even though the mechanism for neither is known. Just dumb....no other word for it.
By the way, if we are talking about waves...then it is well known that waves can cancel each other out or that a wave of greater magnitude can cancel out a weaker wave and continue on at a diminished strength...if we are talking hypothetical photons which no one even knows whether or not exist...then what's the point of talking anyway...may as well be discussing what unicorns do on a moonless night.
Interesting that you think it takes smart waves to not radiate in the direction of warm
Interesting that you know better than the Stefan–Boltzmann law.
By the way, if we are talking about waves...then it is well known that waves can cancel each other out
Now the waves from the cooler object are canceled out by the waves from the warmer? LOL!
SB equation describes a one way gross energy flow. Sorry.
As To waves....don't know what happens...neither do you...but every observation ever made tells us that energy does not move from cool to warm.
Terribly sorry, but you failed at that as you have failed at every other argument you've tried to push in this debate. AR5 stands. Your arguments, very clearly, do not.
Well there was a failure...but it was your failure....We all know that you and yours are world class projectors...you do and then immediately claim that others are doing what you have done. Sorry guy. When you can rationally explain increased confidence in the face of failing computer models, then the conversation can continue...till then project on garth.
Still working on your smart wave mechanism?
Interesting that you think it takes smart waves to not radiate in the direction of warm but don't think that it takes smart rocks to fall down when dropped even though the mechanism for neither is known. Just dumb....no other word for it.
By the way, if we are talking about waves...then it is well known that waves can cancel each other out or that a wave of greater magnitude can cancel out a weaker wave and continue on at a diminished strength...if we are talking hypothetical photons which no one even knows whether or not exist...then what's the point of talking anyway...may as well be discussing what unicorns do on a moonless night.
Net energy flow. Sorry.
the SB shows every object above 0K constantly radiates.
doesn't show that they radiate and suddenly stop when a warmer object approaches.
SB explains why a hot object radiates energy away more slowly to a 100K object than to a 50K object.
smart wave theory explains......well, you still haven't explained your smart wave theory.
Use it to explain why a hot object radiates energy away more slowly to a 100K object than to a 50K object.
Net energy flow. Sorry.
Sorry you are unable to read an equation. Again, if you would like to see what an equation that describes mythical two way energy flow looks like, I will be happy to provide it again.
the SB shows every object above 0K constantly radiates.
Into a vacuum with no other object around. Look at this equation...make the temperature of the radiator and the other object the same....tell me what the value of "P" is.
doesn't show that they radiate and suddenly stop when a warmer object approaches.
Don't they? Make the two temperatures within the parentheses the same and tell me what the value of "P" becomes?
SB explains why a hot object radiates energy away more slowly to a 100K object than to a 50K object.
Sorry this is so difficult for you....make T any temperature over 100K...now make Tc 100K....what is the value of "P"....now make Tc equal to 50K...what is the value of "P"?
smart wave theory explains......well, you still haven't explained your smart wave theory.
No smart waves needed....again, what is the value of P if T and Tc are the same value?
Use it to explain why a hot object radiates energy away more slowly to a 100K object than to a 50K object.
Just did...again, make T any temperature over 100K...now make Tc 100K...what is the value of P.....now make Tc 50K....what is the value of "P"? Can you possibly get any slower.....P changes in proportion to the difference in the temperature between T and Tc....and in case you couldn't figure it out, if you make T and Tc the same temperature the value of "P" becomes zero....what is P again?
Another thought experiment:
I have two balls. One is 50C, the other is 100C. They are separated by a flat barrier that is kept at 0C. This barrier has a hole in it. The hole is not on the line between the two balls; the balls cannot "see" each other through the holes. The environment around the entire affair is at 25C (room temperature)
Let's look at the 50C ball. It radiates towards the cold, 0C barrier. It even radiates towards the hole through which it sees its 25C surroundings. But what happens to the IR waves when they get to the hole. If you go look up refraction in any physics textbook, you will find that the waves will depart the hole as if they were coming from a point radiator. The infrared will spread evenly throughout the 180 degrees available on the other side of the cold barrier. That means that IR will strike the hotter, 100C ball. You can say it was coming from the 50C ball or the 0C barrier, but in either case, it is coming from a colder object to a warmer object.
Of course your smart wave theory might work too.
So how does your smart wave theory explain why a hot object radiates slower to 100K than to 50K?
Oh, right, you can't expalin the change in speed.
SSDD, I am wondering why you insist on your bizarre interpretation, one requiring that all matter be aware of all other matter out to the limits of the universe, and they be able to throttle their radiation selectively, when the SB equation is satisfied precisely as well by simply assuming that all objects radiate in all directions according to their temperature. Heat transfer becomes NET heat transfer and the result is the same as your interpretation without having to evoke your intellligent atoms and magical control.