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.
no, the question is what is the corona doing. again, unless you've visited it and sampled it, do you know what it is actually doing? science doesn't, but I see now you and todd do. wow outstanding, got that Nobel prize yet?I am simply pointing out that science isn't making the claim that the corona of the sun is an example of energy moving spontaneously from a cool region to a warm region as he believes.
You are the one who said photons cannot be emitted in the direction towards a warmer object. Repeatedly.
Why is the Sun's surface visible if it cannot radiate outwards towards the corona? That is Todd's question, although it has been repeated so often that it is meaningless. If you ever gave him a cogent answer, I must have missed it.
Why does the Sun's surface emit towards the hotter corona, contradicting your bizarroland interpretation of the second law? Be specific.
Your link has four areas covered by the SLoT. Your definition goes to the refrigeration section which then states-
You think that there are special physics at work that only apply to refrigerators?
It is important to note that when it is stated that energy will not spontaneously flow from a cold object to a hot object, that statement is referring to net transfer of energy. Energy can transfer from the cold object to the hot object either by transfer of energetic particles or electromagnetic radiation, but the net transfer will be from the hot object to the cold object in any spontaneous process. Work is required to transfer net energy to the hot object
I note that that statement is a footnote....it isn't found in the statement of the second law that they provide...it is an opinion, not supported by observed measured evidence...if it were, then it would be within the statement of the second law.
Why do your links always end up as evidence for my position?
They don't....it is your willingness to reinterpret what is said to whatever it needs to say to support you that gives you that impression.
naw, you're just making that up, we know. you derps know all about how the corona works when science doesn't.you implied you knew when science doesn't. so what is it?is it?when the experts figure it out. name one scientist that says it's spontaneous.
The Sun shining isn't spontaneous?
You don't know? Ask SSDD.
I know the Sun's surface shines toward the hotter corona.
That seems to contradict SSDD's claims about the 2nd Law.
no, the question is what is the corona doing. again, unless you've visited it and sampled it, do you know what it is actually doing? science doesn't, but I see now you and todd do. wow outstanding, got that Nobel prize yet?I am simply pointing out that science isn't making the claim that the corona of the sun is an example of energy moving spontaneously from a cool region to a warm region as he believes.
You are the one who said photons cannot be emitted in the direction towards a warmer object. Repeatedly.
Why is the Sun's surface visible if it cannot radiate outwards towards the corona? That is Todd's question, although it has been repeated so often that it is meaningless. If you ever gave him a cogent answer, I must have missed it.
Why does the Sun's surface emit towards the hotter corona, contradicting your bizarroland interpretation of the second law? Be specific.
I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.no, the question is what is the corona doing. again, unless you've visited it and sampled it, do you know what it is actually doing? science doesn't, but I see now you and todd do. wow outstanding, got that Nobel prize yet?I am simply pointing out that science isn't making the claim that the corona of the sun is an example of energy moving spontaneously from a cool region to a warm region as he believes.
You are the one who said photons cannot be emitted in the direction towards a warmer object. Repeatedly.
Why is the Sun's surface visible if it cannot radiate outwards towards the corona? That is Todd's question, although it has been repeated so often that it is meaningless. If you ever gave him a cogent answer, I must have missed it.
Why does the Sun's surface emit towards the hotter corona, contradicting your bizarroland interpretation of the second law? Be specific.
Are you arguing that SSDD didnt repeatedly claim that photons cannot be emitted at warmer objects than the temperature of the emitter?
No one gives a shit about the corona other than it is yet another discrepancy in SSDDs vetsion of physics.
naw, you're just making that up, we know. you derps know all about how the corona works when science doesn't.you implied you knew when science doesn't. so what is it?is it?The Sun shining isn't spontaneous?
You don't know? Ask SSDD.
I know the Sun's surface shines toward the hotter corona.
That seems to contradict SSDD's claims about the 2nd Law.
How the Sun's Corona Gets So Hot | DiscoverMagazine.com
"The solar corona, our sun’s energetic atmosphere, has long baffled scientists who don’t understand how it gets all that energy. “We call it the coronal heating problem,” says Jonathan Cirtain, an astrophysicist at NASA’s Marshall Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. “Why is the surface of the sun 6,000 Kelvin while the corona is 7 million Kelvin?” Cirtain and a team of researchers have helped solve the mystery using the highest-resolution images ever taken of the corona."
you should call NASA and let em know you figured it out.
I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.no, the question is what is the corona doing. again, unless you've visited it and sampled it, do you know what it is actually doing? science doesn't, but I see now you and todd do. wow outstanding, got that Nobel prize yet?I am simply pointing out that science isn't making the claim that the corona of the sun is an example of energy moving spontaneously from a cool region to a warm region as he believes.
You are the one who said photons cannot be emitted in the direction towards a warmer object. Repeatedly.
Why is the Sun's surface visible if it cannot radiate outwards towards the corona? That is Todd's question, although it has been repeated so often that it is meaningless. If you ever gave him a cogent answer, I must have missed it.
Why does the Sun's surface emit towards the hotter corona, contradicting your bizarroland interpretation of the second law? Be specific.
Are you arguing that SSDD didnt repeatedly claim that photons cannot be emitted at warmer objects than the temperature of the emitter?
No one gives a shit about the corona other than it is yet another discrepancy in SSDDs vetsion of physics.
or you could post the # he did that. that would be white of you
For at least the 30th time, my point has nothing to do with why the corona is so hot.naw, you're just making that up, we know. you derps know all about how the corona works when science doesn't.you implied you knew when science doesn't. so what is it?is it?
You don't know? Ask SSDD.
I know the Sun's surface shines toward the hotter corona.
That seems to contradict SSDD's claims about the 2nd Law.
How the Sun's Corona Gets So Hot | DiscoverMagazine.com
"The solar corona, our sun’s energetic atmosphere, has long baffled scientists who don’t understand how it gets all that energy. “We call it the coronal heating problem,” says Jonathan Cirtain, an astrophysicist at NASA’s Marshall Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. “Why is the surface of the sun 6,000 Kelvin while the corona is 7 million Kelvin?” Cirtain and a team of researchers have helped solve the mystery using the highest-resolution images ever taken of the corona."
you should call NASA and let em know you figured it out.
you derps know all about how the corona works when science doesn't.
For at least the 30th time, my point has nothing to do with why the corona is so hot.
My point is that SSDD said matter won't emit photons toward warmer matter.
If you agree that the Sun's surface does in fact emit toward the hotter corona, you'd see his error.
you should call NASA
You should call NASA and see what they think of SSDD's claims. Post their response here.
well dude, you could just show the observed empirical evidence that proves your magic photons. why won't you?I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.no, the question is what is the corona doing. again, unless you've visited it and sampled it, do you know what it is actually doing? science doesn't, but I see now you and todd do. wow outstanding, got that Nobel prize yet?I am simply pointing out that science isn't making the claim that the corona of the sun is an example of energy moving spontaneously from a cool region to a warm region as he believes.
You are the one who said photons cannot be emitted in the direction towards a warmer object. Repeatedly.
Why is the Sun's surface visible if it cannot radiate outwards towards the corona? That is Todd's question, although it has been repeated so often that it is meaningless. If you ever gave him a cogent answer, I must have missed it.
Why does the Sun's surface emit towards the hotter corona, contradicting your bizarroland interpretation of the second law? Be specific.
Are you arguing that SSDD didnt repeatedly claim that photons cannot be emitted at warmer objects than the temperature of the emitter?
No one gives a shit about the corona other than it is yet another discrepancy in SSDDs vetsion of physics.
or you could post the # he did that. that would be white of you
I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.
Now photons are allowed to move from cold to warm as long as no energy moves? LOL!
For at least the 30th time, my point has nothing to do with why the corona is so hot.naw, you're just making that up, we know. you derps know all about how the corona works when science doesn't.you implied you knew when science doesn't. so what is it?You don't know? Ask SSDD.
I know the Sun's surface shines toward the hotter corona.
That seems to contradict SSDD's claims about the 2nd Law.
How the Sun's Corona Gets So Hot | DiscoverMagazine.com
"The solar corona, our sun’s energetic atmosphere, has long baffled scientists who don’t understand how it gets all that energy. “We call it the coronal heating problem,” says Jonathan Cirtain, an astrophysicist at NASA’s Marshall Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. “Why is the surface of the sun 6,000 Kelvin while the corona is 7 million Kelvin?” Cirtain and a team of researchers have helped solve the mystery using the highest-resolution images ever taken of the corona."
you should call NASA and let em know you figured it out.
you derps know all about how the corona works when science doesn't.
For at least the 30th time, my point has nothing to do with why the corona is so hot.
My point is that SSDD said matter won't emit photons toward warmer matter.
If you agree that the Sun's surface does in fact emit toward the hotter corona, you'd see his error.
you should call NASA
You should call NASA and see what they think of SSDD's claims. Post their response here.
for the 30th time, sure you are. otherwise you wouldn't mention 30 times. you're obsessed with the sun and its corona. OBSESSED
well dude, you could just show the observed empirical evidence that proves your magic photons. why won't you?I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.no, the question is what is the corona doing. again, unless you've visited it and sampled it, do you know what it is actually doing? science doesn't, but I see now you and todd do. wow outstanding, got that Nobel prize yet?You are the one who said photons cannot be emitted in the direction towards a warmer object. Repeatedly.
Why is the Sun's surface visible if it cannot radiate outwards towards the corona? That is Todd's question, although it has been repeated so often that it is meaningless. If you ever gave him a cogent answer, I must have missed it.
Why does the Sun's surface emit towards the hotter corona, contradicting your bizarroland interpretation of the second law? Be specific.
Are you arguing that SSDD didnt repeatedly claim that photons cannot be emitted at warmer objects than the temperature of the emitter?
No one gives a shit about the corona other than it is yet another discrepancy in SSDDs vetsion of physics.
or you could post the # he did that. that would be white of you
I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.
Now photons are allowed to move from cold to warm as long as no energy moves? LOL!
again, so you know what the science doesn't know. got your nobel prize there bubba?well dude, you could just show the observed empirical evidence that proves your magic photons. why won't you?I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.no, the question is what is the corona doing. again, unless you've visited it and sampled it, do you know what it is actually doing? science doesn't, but I see now you and todd do. wow outstanding, got that Nobel prize yet?
Are you arguing that SSDD didnt repeatedly claim that photons cannot be emitted at warmer objects than the temperature of the emitter?
No one gives a shit about the corona other than it is yet another discrepancy in SSDDs vetsion of physics.
or you could post the # he did that. that would be white of you
I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.
Now photons are allowed to move from cold to warm as long as no energy moves? LOL!
No magic needed.
Why does the surface have to be cooler?Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?
Sure it can. why couldn't it? but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.
Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR. It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.
What is it you think happens? seems you always avoid letting the class know what you think happens.
Sure it can. why couldn't it?
Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.
but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.
Yup. Sometimes it emits, sometimes it collides.
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR.
Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.
It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.
It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.
What is it you think happens?
The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too (And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere)
If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?
Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.
It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.
nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.
The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too
Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction. If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?
Conduction isn't emit, last I looked.
If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?
Why does the surface have to be cooler?
nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.
After it's absorbed, it's "heat".
Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction.
If it's heat after the CO2 conducts it, it's heat before CO2 conducts it.
If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?
You've discovered the 2 step process. Don't tell SSDD
You missed that in physics
If it's heat after the CO2 conducts it, it's heat before CO2 conducts it.
It’s not IR.
You've discovered the 2 step process. Don't tell SSDD
What we’ve known is IR doesn’t warm shit
You missed that in physics
Because I took real physics.
It’s not IR.
It's random kinetic energy now (heat).
What we’ve known is IR doesn’t warm shit
Except for GHGs and anything they collide with.
again, so you know what the science doesn't know. got your nobel prize there bubba?well dude, you could just show the observed empirical evidence that proves your magic photons. why won't you?I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.Are you arguing that SSDD didnt repeatedly claim that photons cannot be emitted at warmer objects than the temperature of the emitter?
No one gives a shit about the corona other than it is yet another discrepancy in SSDDs vetsion of physics.
or you could post the # he did that. that would be white of you
I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.
Now photons are allowed to move from cold to warm as long as no energy moves? LOL!
No magic needed.
Why does the surface have to be cooler?Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.Sure it can. why couldn't it?
Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.
but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.
Yup. Sometimes it emits, sometimes it collides.
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR.
Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.
It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.
It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.
What is it you think happens?
The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too (And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere)
If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?
Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.
It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.
nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.
The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too
Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction. If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?
Conduction isn't emit, last I looked.
If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?
Why does the surface have to be cooler?
nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.
After it's absorbed, it's "heat".
Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction.
If it's heat after the CO2 conducts it, it's heat before CO2 conducts it.
If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?
You've discovered the 2 step process. Don't tell SSDD
You missed that in physics
If it's heat after the CO2 conducts it, it's heat before CO2 conducts it.
It’s not IR.
You've discovered the 2 step process. Don't tell SSDD
What we’ve known is IR doesn’t warm shit
You missed that in physics
Because I took real physics.
It’s not IR.
It's random kinetic energy now (heat).
What we’ve known is IR doesn’t warm shit
Except for GHGs and anything they collide with.
"Except for GHGs and anything they collide with."
Wrong again...
Is the wavelength correct? The diepole moment correct? Can the molecule actually warm?
As with 98% of all atmospheric gases the answers are no 99.9% f the time. The atmosphere, absent water vapor, can not warm by LWIR.
Can you give an example of what you think is a spontaneous process? Didn't think so.A spontaneous process is one that will occur without any energy input from the surroundings. It is a process that will occur on its own.
I would rather refer to the science literature rather than your incantations. Jeez you don't understand entropy. You are confusing entropy with radiation exchange. They are different. You are just picking scientific words and putting them in sentences that don't make sense.Entropy is described as time's arrow...entropy is a one way process. It is only your wild interpretation that suggests that entropy is a two way street... Been through it all before...if you must relive your defeat...refer to any of the previous incarnations of this discussion.
You must know by now that your posts are so far off the wall that it is not possible to figure out if you are attempting to talk science or not. Your thinking that radiation exchange means entropy is a "two way street" is one example of your misplaced science.Still picking fly shit out of the pepper in an attempt gain some sense of winning a point? Rolling downhill is a figure of speech...sorry it went over your head...
Spontaneous process is defined as a process that will occur without any energy input from the surroundings. It is a process that will occur on its own.
Prove they doagain, so you know what the science doesn't know. got your nobel prize there bubba?well dude, you could just show the observed empirical evidence that proves your magic photons. why won't you?I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.
or you could post the # he did that. that would be white of you
I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.
Now photons are allowed to move from cold to warm as long as no energy moves? LOL!
No magic needed.
Science doesn't know that the Sun's surface radiates through the hotter corona?
You're lying.
Can you give an example of what you think is a spontaneous process? Didn't think so.A spontaneous process is one that will occur without any energy input from the surroundings. It is a process that will occur on its own.
I would rather refer to the science literature rather than your incantations. Jeez you don't understand entropy. You are confusing entropy with radiation exchange. They are different. You are just picking scientific words and putting them in sentences that don't make sense.Entropy is described as time's arrow...entropy is a one way process. It is only your wild interpretation that suggests that entropy is a two way street... Been through it all before...if you must relive your defeat...refer to any of the previous incarnations of this discussion.
You must know by now that your posts are so far off the wall that it is not possible to figure out if you are attempting to talk science or not. Your thinking that radiation exchange means entropy is a "two way street" is one example of your misplaced science.Still picking fly shit out of the pepper in an attempt gain some sense of winning a point? Rolling downhill is a figure of speech...sorry it went over your head...
.
Prove they doagain, so you know what the science doesn't know. got your nobel prize there bubba?well dude, you could just show the observed empirical evidence that proves your magic photons. why won't you?I think he spoke of energy moving from cold to warm.
Now photons are allowed to move from cold to warm as long as no energy moves? LOL!
No magic needed.
Science doesn't know that the Sun's surface radiates through the hotter corona?
You're lying.
