LWIR FAILS to Warm the Atmosphere by Empirical Experiment.

[Toddsterpatriot]

nope, not the interpretation at all.

What interpretation?

intensity that depends only on the body's temperature,

That's very straight forward.

warm only radiates. Only warm.

Yes, your fantasy is very amusing, but you still haven't posted anything that refutes any of the sources I posted.

more from your link:

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature,[9]called the Planck spectrum or Planck's lawThe spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum.[10][11][12] "

surrounding.

BTW, there is even more in that link. you should actually read it since you posted it.

None of that disagrees with my claims. Or helps your claims.

So when are you going to post something that agrees with your claims?

I truly enjoy when the likes like you post shit that proves my point and not yours. still waiting on that flow from cold to warm. tick tock general.

What part proved your "point" that matter only radiates to cooler matter?

the parts I quoted for you. No need to repeat it.

Nothing you quoted supports the claim that photons only move from warm matter to cooler matter.

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature, called the Planck spectrum or Planck's law
.
The spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at ​

room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum"


Not even a little bit.
The portion I underlined refutes your silly claim.
Note the phrase "depends only on the body's temperature".

No mention of surroundings or any other restriction.

 

[jc456]

more from your link:

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature,[9]called the Planck spectrum or Planck's lawThe spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum.[10][11][12] "

surrounding.

BTW, there is even more in that link. you should actually read it since you posted it.

None of that disagrees with my claims. Or helps your claims.

So when are you going to post something that agrees with your claims?

I truly enjoy when the likes like you post shit that proves my point and not yours. still waiting on that flow from cold to warm. tick tock general.

What part proved your "point" that matter only radiates to cooler matter?

the parts I quoted for you. No need to repeat it.

Nothing you quoted supports the claim that photons only move from warm matter to cooler matter.

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature, called the Planck spectrum or Planck's law
.
The spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at ​

room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum"


Not even a little bit.
The portion I underlined refutes your silly claim.
Note the phrase "depends only on the body's temperature".

No mention of surroundings or any other restriction.

dude, too fking funny, it says right in your post with increasing temperature and at room temperature, i.e., surroundings, just like I said. sorry bubba.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

None of that disagrees with my claims. Or helps your claims.

So when are you going to post something that agrees with your claims?

I truly enjoy when the likes like you post shit that proves my point and not yours. still waiting on that flow from cold to warm. tick tock general.

What part proved your "point" that matter only radiates to cooler matter?

the parts I quoted for you. No need to repeat it.

Nothing you quoted supports the claim that photons only move from warm matter to cooler matter.

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature, called the Planck spectrum or Planck's law
.
The spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at ​

room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum"


Not even a little bit.
The portion I underlined refutes your silly claim.
Note the phrase "depends only on the body's temperature".

No mention of surroundings or any other restriction.

dude, too fking funny, it says right in your post with increasing temperature and at room temperature, i.e., surroundings, just like I said. sorry bubba.

Yes, increasing the temperature shifts the frequency higher.
Yes, room temperature emissions are infrared.
Still no help for your moronic claim.

 

[jc456]

I truly enjoy when the likes like you post shit that proves my point and not yours. still waiting on that flow from cold to warm. tick tock general.

What part proved your "point" that matter only radiates to cooler matter?

the parts I quoted for you. No need to repeat it.

Nothing you quoted supports the claim that photons only move from warm matter to cooler matter.

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature, called the Planck spectrum or Planck's law
.
The spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at ​

room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum"


Not even a little bit.
The portion I underlined refutes your silly claim.
Note the phrase "depends only on the body's temperature".

No mention of surroundings or any other restriction.

dude, too fking funny, it says right in your post with increasing temperature and at room temperature, i.e., surroundings, just like I said. sorry bubba.

Yes, increasing the temperature shifts the frequency higher.
Yes, room temperature emissions are infrared.
Still no help for your moronic claim.

it's all my claim, it's called surroundings, and the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates. It's exactly what I fking said.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What part proved your "point" that matter only radiates to cooler matter?

the parts I quoted for you. No need to repeat it.

Nothing you quoted supports the claim that photons only move from warm matter to cooler matter.

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature, called the Planck spectrum or Planck's law
.
The spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at ​

room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum"


Not even a little bit.
The portion I underlined refutes your silly claim.
Note the phrase "depends only on the body's temperature".

No mention of surroundings or any other restriction.

dude, too fking funny, it says right in your post with increasing temperature and at room temperature, i.e., surroundings, just like I said. sorry bubba.

Yes, increasing the temperature shifts the frequency higher.
Yes, room temperature emissions are infrared.
Still no help for your moronic claim.

it's all my claim, it's called surroundings, and the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates. It's exactly what I fking said.

the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates.

The link doesn't say anything close to your claim.
I realize your brain injury was serious, and I'm sorry about your Alzheimer's

 

[jc456]

the parts I quoted for you. No need to repeat it.

Nothing you quoted supports the claim that photons only move from warm matter to cooler matter.

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature, called the Planck spectrum or Planck's law
.
The spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at ​

room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum"


Not even a little bit.
The portion I underlined refutes your silly claim.
Note the phrase "depends only on the body's temperature".

No mention of surroundings or any other restriction.

dude, too fking funny, it says right in your post with increasing temperature and at room temperature, i.e., surroundings, just like I said. sorry bubba.

Yes, increasing the temperature shifts the frequency higher.
Yes, room temperature emissions are infrared.
Still no help for your moronic claim.

it's all my claim, it's called surroundings, and the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates. It's exactly what I fking said.

the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates.

The link doesn't say anything close to your claim.
I realize your brain injury was serious, and I'm sorry about your Alzheimer's

sure it does. Again, I gave you examples, so no need to repeat. your continued washing is acknowledged.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nothing you quoted supports the claim that photons only move from warm matter to cooler matter.

"Black-body radiation has a characteristic, continuous frequency spectrum that depends only on the body's temperature, called the Planck spectrum or Planck's law
.
The spectrum is peaked at a characteristic frequency that shifts to higher frequencies with increasing temperature, and at ​

room temperature most of the emission is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum"


Not even a little bit.
The portion I underlined refutes your silly claim.
Note the phrase "depends only on the body's temperature".

No mention of surroundings or any other restriction.

dude, too fking funny, it says right in your post with increasing temperature and at room temperature, i.e., surroundings, just like I said. sorry bubba.

Yes, increasing the temperature shifts the frequency higher.
Yes, room temperature emissions are infrared.
Still no help for your moronic claim.

it's all my claim, it's called surroundings, and the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates. It's exactly what I fking said.

the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates.

The link doesn't say anything close to your claim.
I realize your brain injury was serious, and I'm sorry about your Alzheimer's

sure it does. Again, I gave you examples, so no need to repeat. your continued washing is acknowledged.

Further down the page, another refutation of your silly claim.

 

[jc456]

dude, too fking funny, it says right in your post with increasing temperature and at room temperature, i.e., surroundings, just like I said. sorry bubba.

Yes, increasing the temperature shifts the frequency higher.
Yes, room temperature emissions are infrared.
Still no help for your moronic claim.

it's all my claim, it's called surroundings, and the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates. It's exactly what I fking said.

the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates.

The link doesn't say anything close to your claim.
I realize your brain injury was serious, and I'm sorry about your Alzheimer's

sure it does. Again, I gave you examples, so no need to repeat. your continued washing is acknowledged.

View attachment 239044
Further down the page, another refutation of your silly claim.

more laundry.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, increasing the temperature shifts the frequency higher.
Yes, room temperature emissions are infrared.
Still no help for your moronic claim.

it's all my claim, it's called surroundings, and the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates. It's exactly what I fking said.

the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates.

The link doesn't say anything close to your claim.
I realize your brain injury was serious, and I'm sorry about your Alzheimer's

sure it does. Again, I gave you examples, so no need to repeat. your continued washing is acknowledged.

View attachment 239044
Further down the page, another refutation of your silly claim.

more laundry.

 

[jc456]

it's all my claim, it's called surroundings, and the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates. It's exactly what I fking said.

the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates.

The link doesn't say anything close to your claim.
I realize your brain injury was serious, and I'm sorry about your Alzheimer's

sure it does. Again, I gave you examples, so no need to repeat. your continued washing is acknowledged.

View attachment 239044
Further down the page, another refutation of your silly claim.

more laundry.

dude, you think that what, embarrasses me? naw, it's all you got. you can't back your claim that cold moves toward warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me. if your laundry is so important that you need to continually wash it in here, I ain't gonna rinse for you. you lost the battle and looks like the war. not one of you all has posted observed measured evidence, and look at the count in the thread. I'll take my bow now.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

the temperature of the surrounding changes how an object radiates.

The link doesn't say anything close to your claim.
I realize your brain injury was serious, and I'm sorry about your Alzheimer's

sure it does. Again, I gave you examples, so no need to repeat. your continued washing is acknowledged.

View attachment 239044
Further down the page, another refutation of your silly claim.

more laundry.

dude, you think that what, embarrasses me? naw, it's all you got. you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me. if your laundry is so important that you need to continually wash it in here, I ain't gonna rinse for you. you lost the battle and looks like the war. not of you all has posted observed measured evidence, and look at the count in the thread. I'll take my bow now.

you think that what, embarrasses me?

No, your idiocy doesn't embarrass you.

you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me.

Well, it's clear you didn't understand the link.

I'll take my bow now.

Don't bump your head again, you can't afford another concussion.

 

[jc456]

sure it does. Again, I gave you examples, so no need to repeat. your continued washing is acknowledged.

View attachment 239044
Further down the page, another refutation of your silly claim.

more laundry.

dude, you think that what, embarrasses me? naw, it's all you got. you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me. if your laundry is so important that you need to continually wash it in here, I ain't gonna rinse for you. you lost the battle and looks like the war. not of you all has posted observed measured evidence, and look at the count in the thread. I'll take my bow now.

you think that what, embarrasses me?

No, your idiocy doesn't embarrass you.

you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me.

Well, it's clear you didn't understand the link.

I'll take my bow now.

Don't bump your head again, you can't afford another concussion.

and yet still no observed measured evidence. checkmate.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 239044
Further down the page, another refutation of your silly claim.

more laundry.

dude, you think that what, embarrasses me? naw, it's all you got. you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me. if your laundry is so important that you need to continually wash it in here, I ain't gonna rinse for you. you lost the battle and looks like the war. not of you all has posted observed measured evidence, and look at the count in the thread. I'll take my bow now.

you think that what, embarrasses me?

No, your idiocy doesn't embarrass you.

you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me.

Well, it's clear you didn't understand the link.

I'll take my bow now.

Don't bump your head again, you can't afford another concussion.

and yet still no observed measured evidence. checkmate.

Yeah, all the evidence is on my side.
Don't you worry, SSDD will find some evidence to help you...….any day now.

 

[jc456]

more laundry.

dude, you think that what, embarrasses me? naw, it's all you got. you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me. if your laundry is so important that you need to continually wash it in here, I ain't gonna rinse for you. you lost the battle and looks like the war. not of you all has posted observed measured evidence, and look at the count in the thread. I'll take my bow now.

you think that what, embarrasses me?

No, your idiocy doesn't embarrass you.

you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me.

Well, it's clear you didn't understand the link.

I'll take my bow now.

Don't bump your head again, you can't afford another concussion.

and yet still no observed measured evidence. checkmate.

Yeah, all the evidence is on my side.
Don't you worry, SSDD will find some evidence to help you...….any day now.

still none, thanks for the vote of confidence in your stupidity. any day now you'll post something observed to back your claim. you're melting

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

dude, you think that what, embarrasses me? naw, it's all you got. you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me. if your laundry is so important that you need to continually wash it in here, I ain't gonna rinse for you. you lost the battle and looks like the war. not of you all has posted observed measured evidence, and look at the count in the thread. I'll take my bow now.

you think that what, embarrasses me?

No, your idiocy doesn't embarrass you.

you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me.

Well, it's clear you didn't understand the link.

I'll take my bow now.

Don't bump your head again, you can't afford another concussion.

and yet still no observed measured evidence. checkmate.

Yeah, all the evidence is on my side.
Don't you worry, SSDD will find some evidence to help you...….any day now.

still none, thanks for the vote of confidence in your stupidity. any day now you'll post something observed to back your claim. you're melting

Dude.....

 

[jc456]

dude, you think that what, embarrasses me? naw, it's all you got. you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me. if your laundry is so important that you need to continually wash it in here, I ain't gonna rinse for you. you lost the battle and looks like the war. not of you all has posted observed measured evidence, and look at the count in the thread. I'll take my bow now.

you think that what, embarrasses me?

No, your idiocy doesn't embarrass you.

you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me.

Well, it's clear you didn't understand the link.

I'll take my bow now.

Don't bump your head again, you can't afford another concussion.

and yet still no observed measured evidence. checkmate.

Yeah, all the evidence is on my side.
Don't you worry, SSDD will find some evidence to help you...….any day now.

still none, thanks for the vote of confidence in your stupidity. any day now you'll post something observed to back your claim. you're melting

Dude.....

Dude, I don’t do laundry

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

you think that what, embarrasses me?

No, your idiocy doesn't embarrass you.

you can't back your claim that cold moves warm spontaneously and I've proved your link backs me.

Well, it's clear you didn't understand the link.

I'll take my bow now.

Don't bump your head again, you can't afford another concussion.

and yet still no observed measured evidence. checkmate.

Yeah, all the evidence is on my side.
Don't you worry, SSDD will find some evidence to help you...….any day now.

still none, thanks for the vote of confidence in your stupidity. any day now you'll post something observed to back your claim. you're melting

Dude.....

Dude, I don’t do laundry

Or science.

 

[SSDD]

The instruments are cooled so that energy will move to them...you don't even get a degraded energy signature when the instrument is warmer than the radiator...cool the instrument to just a degree below the temperature of the radiator and what do you know...measurments of discrete wavelengths.. Why do you suppose that is?

Cool the instrument to just a degree below the radiator and you get a very noisy signal that degrades the measurement.

At 80 F, for an instrument at 1 degree below the radiator the signal to noise ratio would be

(300 +1) / 300.

For an instrument at 1 degree above the radiator the SNR would be

(300 -1) / 300

Both cases would have an SNR of almost 1 to 1. That is why the instrument is cooled.

.

You don't seem to grasp the concept of no signal at all...you can't measure any discrete wavelength of energy with an instrument that is warmer than the radiator... That is because there is no energy moving from the radiator to a warmer instrument...A degraded signal would at least be a signal.....there is none.

 

[SSDD]

Of course you get such a signature. Again, cheap IR cameras work uncooled. Observed reality says you're totally cuckoobananas.

Been through that already...and gave you the specs on the cameras....sorry you are to stupid to understand....they aren't receiving energy from the cooler object...they are measuring the amount, and rate of energy loss from the sensor to the cooler object...

Assume the camera's photoreceptors are at 20C. Explain to us, in detail what happens as the camera looks at a 21C background, and then that background cools to 19C.

Already have...over and over since you go to the same flawed understanding over and over...the instrument only measures the rate of change and amount of change in the sensor array...if it is warming, it is receiving energy from the object it is pointed at...if it is cooling, it is losing energy to the object it is pointed at...cooling doesn't happen as rapidly as warming, therefore the image of a cooler object isn't as sharp as that of a warmer object...which is why the high end instruments are cooled...to get a sharper image across a wider range of temperatures.

 

[Billy_Bob]

We are currently dealing with a few so called 'scientists' from NOAA who are challenging our findings and we are jointly recreating one series of experiments to prove them wrong. These people are serious about disproving what we found but so far they are batting 0 for 150.. Were done recreating the experiment and they have nothing.. Monday they were speechless when we looked at the automated tracking and found no warming in 38 sensors after 36 hours. 3 times as long as the original experiment and no warming of the gases... The output monitor and the target pad monitored the pass through energy, showing no power loss during the test. They were unhappy about that bit of information.

Yesterday they wanted us to move the target pad into the tube, We had to remind them the whole point was to remove conduction and convection from the problem and isolate the atmospheric gases. These people are dense, attempting to insert every item we did to isolate the gases in an effort to get a warming result..