Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

[SSDD]

Still no backup for your "objects at equilibrium cease all radiating"?
Or for your dimmer switch theory?
Weird.

Maybe you should contact Dr. Raeder again?

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Still no evidence disproving Stefan-Boltzmann? DURR......

I’m waiting loser still posting nothing

Can't remember my many examples? Is it dementia? Sorry.

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

He thinks his Home Depot IR thermometer is measuring cold radiation coming in from his leaky windows...He has no idea that all his thermometer is doing is recording and interpreting temperature changes of an internal thermopile...if he points it at a warmer object, it warms up because it is receiving energy from the warmer object and the rate and amount of warming is converted to a temperature...if he points it at a cooler object, the thermopile cools down because it is loosing energy to the cooler object and the amount and rate of cooling is converted into a temperature.

It is sad that someone who appears to be as bright as flacalten would be so blinded by dogma, that he would be fooled by such a simple instrument and have no idea what it it is actually measuring...he also thinks he has an instrument at work that counts theoretical particles...namely photons...I am sure that his instrument is measuring something...but not theoretical particles.

Being fooled by instrumentation should be embarrassing, but to these guys, apparently it is a badge of honor...it is as close to "evidence" as they are likely to get.

 

[SSDD]

Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..

Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.

That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...

HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.

The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...

NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....

You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.

by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

Yep, when it is pointed at cold, it loses energy to the cold object, it is the thermo coupler reading a loss of energy. What is the make, I’ll be happy to pull the explanation from their web site for you!

Dead on...what does it feel like to be the smartest guy in the room?

 

[SSDD]

Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.

That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...

HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.

The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...

NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....

You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.

by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

Yep, when it is pointed at cold, it loses energy to the cold object, it is the thermo coupler reading a loss of energy. What is the make, I’ll be happy to pull the explanation from their web site for you!

It's not a "thermocouple" dolt.. It's OPTICAL.. And it's reading specifically IR PHOTONS directed at it.. The optics are very narrow to allow you to descriminate the target area...

And there'd be NO POINT in you reading me the manual.. I've designed equipment to read IR photons....

Sorry guy...but your blind belief in dogma has made you selectively stupid...while it may not be a thermocouple..it is a thermopile...and the lens in the front of your thermometer focuses the object you point it at on said thermopile, and by the same token, focuses the thermopile on the object..

And I am embarrassed for you...claiming to design instruments when you have no idea how your simple Home Depot IR thermometer works...

You are right that it is probably useless for him to provide you with the information on how the instrument works...you are so blinded by dogma that you probably could't even see it...and as to a machine that counts theoretical particles?....could you possibly be more blinded by dogma and fooled by instrumentation? I am sure that you are measuring something..but it isn't theoretical particles that you are counting..it it were, then they wouldn't be theoretical any more...would they?

Yep...it becomes more and more clear why you would want to keep this discussion off the main boards...and give it a derogatory name...If I didn't know how a simple IR thermometer worked..I would not want everyone in creation to know about it either..

 

[SSDD]

How does "COOL" flow away from anything?

You sound like wuwei grasping for weasel words now...clearly, he has read a bit on how the instrument works and at least knows that the internal thermopile is losing energy to the cooler object and the rate and amount of cooling is converted to a temperature...he knows that your leaky windows aren't beaming cold radiation to your thermometer...you certainly don't know it and it probably never occurred to you to find out..your dogma tells you how it works and even though it is wrong...you believe...ALL HAIL THE DOGMA...

 

[jc456]

Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.

That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...

HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.

The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...

NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....

You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.

by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

Yep, when it is pointed at cold, it loses energy to the cold object, it is the thermo coupler reading a loss of energy. What is the make, I’ll be happy to pull the explanation from their web site for you!

It's not a "thermocouple" dolt.. It's OPTICAL.. And it's reading specifically IR PHOTONS directed at it.. The optics are very narrow to allow you to descriminate the target area...

And there'd be NO POINT in you reading me the manual.. I've designed equipment to read IR photons....

thermopile, I'm used to thermocouplers from my past experiences. same difference, and you should be ashamed you don't know how the device actually converts for temperature readings.

And, Ouch, you designed this type of equipment and don't know how it actually works, I'd be embarrassed.

 

[jc456]

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Still no evidence disproving Stefan-Boltzmann? DURR......

I’m waiting loser still posting nothing

Can't remember my many examples? Is it dementia? Sorry.

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

I always liked this one.

as you should, because you have no fking clue as to what it is showing you. It's been explained to you adnaussea too.

BTW, Why is it shown as blue if it's heat?

 

[jc456]

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Still no evidence disproving Stefan-Boltzmann? DURR......

I’m waiting loser still posting nothing

Can't remember my many examples? Is it dementia? Sorry.

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

The Sun shining through the corona, the Earth radiating through the thermosphere, the atmosphere radiating toward the surface. All examples of cooler matter radiating at warmer matter.

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun, are you saying you know more than any other scientist? wow!!! so you should write that text book

 

[jc456]

Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..

Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.

That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...

HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.

The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...

NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....

You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.

by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

JC is dumber than SSDD so finds it more difficult to defend the epicycles.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects, I'd say you have the lead on stupid.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Projecting your sessions! I don’t believe cold objects radiate to warmer objects like the 2nd law states, and if you feel they do post the radiating cold object at the warmer object, it must be simple to prove since you’re adamant about it

I don’t believe cold objects radiate to warmer objects

I know, you think Stefan-Boltzmann is wrong. Good for you!!

The fundamental assumption of the SB law is that the radiator is radiating into a cooler background...anyone who believes that the SB law deals with two way energy transfer is kidding themselves...the equations simply do not say any such thing.

Still no backup for your "objects at equilibrium cease all radiating"?
Or for your dimmer switch theory?
Weird.

Maybe you should contact Dr. Raeder again?

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...what they won't show you is actual evidence...that used to be what physics was all about...before the post modern age that is...now it is about protecting the dogma, and inventing particles and mechanics to explain away everything that contradicts the dogma..

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...

And then there is you, telling us what no one believes.

what they won't show you is actual evidence...

Did you ever find that evidence for "objects at equilibrium cease emissions"? No? Weird.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Still no evidence disproving Stefan-Boltzmann? DURR......

I’m waiting loser still posting nothing

Can't remember my many examples? Is it dementia? Sorry.

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

The Sun shining through the corona, the Earth radiating through the thermosphere, the atmosphere radiating toward the surface. All examples of cooler matter radiating at warmer matter.

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun, are you saying you know more than any other scientist? wow!!! so you should write that text book

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun,

Link?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.

That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...

HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.

The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...

NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....

You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.

by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

JC is dumber than SSDD so finds it more difficult to defend the epicycles.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects, I'd say you have the lead on stupid.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects,

I do? Nah. You're lying.

 

[jc456]

I don’t believe cold objects radiate to warmer objects

I know, you think Stefan-Boltzmann is wrong. Good for you!!

The fundamental assumption of the SB law is that the radiator is radiating into a cooler background...anyone who believes that the SB law deals with two way energy transfer is kidding themselves...the equations simply do not say any such thing.

Still no backup for your "objects at equilibrium cease all radiating"?
Or for your dimmer switch theory?
Weird.

Maybe you should contact Dr. Raeder again?

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...what they won't show you is actual evidence...that used to be what physics was all about...before the post modern age that is...now it is about protecting the dogma, and inventing particles and mechanics to explain away everything that contradicts the dogma..

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...

And then there is you, telling us what no one believes.

what they won't show you is actual evidence...

Did you ever find that evidence for "objects at equilibrium cease emissions"? No? Weird.

I'm letting everyone know that you have no observed evidence to support your dogma. Just so we're clear.

 

[jc456]

That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...

HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.

The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...

NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....

You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.

by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

JC is dumber than SSDD so finds it more difficult to defend the epicycles.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects, I'd say you have the lead on stupid.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects,

I do? Nah. You're lying.

nope, I am a very honest person. I admit my mistakes when I make one. So far I've been waiting for you to post the observation that proves me wrong. Until then it is what it is., you should learn how that's done.

 

[jc456]

I’m waiting loser still posting nothing

Can't remember my many examples? Is it dementia? Sorry.

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

The Sun shining through the corona, the Earth radiating through the thermosphere, the atmosphere radiating toward the surface. All examples of cooler matter radiating at warmer matter.

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun, are you saying you know more than any other scientist? wow!!! so you should write that text book

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun,

Link?

Why is the sun's corona the hottest layer when it is farther from the sun's core than other layers are?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The fundamental assumption of the SB law is that the radiator is radiating into a cooler background...anyone who believes that the SB law deals with two way energy transfer is kidding themselves...the equations simply do not say any such thing.

Still no backup for your "objects at equilibrium cease all radiating"?
Or for your dimmer switch theory?
Weird.

Maybe you should contact Dr. Raeder again?

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...what they won't show you is actual evidence...that used to be what physics was all about...before the post modern age that is...now it is about protecting the dogma, and inventing particles and mechanics to explain away everything that contradicts the dogma..

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...

And then there is you, telling us what no one believes.

what they won't show you is actual evidence...

Did you ever find that evidence for "objects at equilibrium cease emissions"? No? Weird.

I'm letting everyone know that you have no observed evidence to support your dogma. Just so we're clear.

Right. Stefan-Boltzmann was derived with no observed evidence...…..durr

 

[jc456]

Still no backup for your "objects at equilibrium cease all radiating"?
Or for your dimmer switch theory?
Weird.

Maybe you should contact Dr. Raeder again?

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...what they won't show you is actual evidence...that used to be what physics was all about...before the post modern age that is...now it is about protecting the dogma, and inventing particles and mechanics to explain away everything that contradicts the dogma..

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...

And then there is you, telling us what no one believes.

what they won't show you is actual evidence...

Did you ever find that evidence for "objects at equilibrium cease emissions"? No? Weird.

I'm letting everyone know that you have no observed evidence to support your dogma. Just so we're clear.

Right. Stefan-Boltzmann was derived with no observed evidence...…..durr

post it!!! the evidence.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.

by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

JC is dumber than SSDD so finds it more difficult to defend the epicycles.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects, I'd say you have the lead on stupid.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects,

I do? Nah. You're lying.

nope, I am a very honest person. I admit my mistakes when I make one. So far I've been waiting for you to post the observation that proves me wrong. Until then it is what it is., you should learn how that's done.

nope, I am a very honest person.

Excellent. Then you can link to the post where I said, "cold objects heat up warmer objects".

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Can't remember my many examples? Is it dementia? Sorry.

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

The Sun shining through the corona, the Earth radiating through the thermosphere, the atmosphere radiating toward the surface. All examples of cooler matter radiating at warmer matter.

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun, are you saying you know more than any other scientist? wow!!! so you should write that text book

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun,

Link?

Why is the sun's corona the hottest layer when it is farther from the sun's core than other layers are?

The corona is hotter than the surface?
That's weird, according to SSDD, that would prevent the surface from emitting.
Was he correct? Or does the surface emit?

 

[jc456]

I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..

And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??

JC is dumber than SSDD so finds it more difficult to defend the epicycles.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects, I'd say you have the lead on stupid.

you think cold objects heat up warmer objects,

I do? Nah. You're lying.

nope, I am a very honest person. I admit my mistakes when I make one. So far I've been waiting for you to post the observation that proves me wrong. Until then it is what it is., you should learn how that's done.

nope, I am a very honest person.

Excellent. Then you can link to the post where I said, "cold objects heat up warmer objects".

do you say that cold objects radiate when next to warmer objects? if so, there you go!!!

 

[jc456]

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

The Sun shining through the corona, the Earth radiating through the thermosphere, the atmosphere radiating toward the surface. All examples of cooler matter radiating at warmer matter.

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun, are you saying you know more than any other scientist? wow!!! so you should write that text book

no scientist on this planet knows what is happening on the sun,

Link?

Why is the sun's corona the hottest layer when it is farther from the sun's core than other layers are?

The corona is hotter than the surface?
That's weird, according to SSDD, that would prevent the surface from emitting.
Was he correct? Or does the surface emit?

let me know when the scientist understand what is happening and I will respond afterward.