Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

[jc456]

all you need to do is post that experiment that shows that 10C object radiating at the 20C object.

Stefan-Boltzmann says they both radiate.
Feel free to post your proof that they don't.

and on the sun and flashlight thingy, are you instead saying the flashlight is cooling off the sun

Sorry that the Stefan-Boltzmann Law is too complex for you.
If you understood it, you wouldn't make AOC level comments when discussing it.

again, I agree they both radiate. I've always said that. your analogy is the issue, not the object radiating.

Only a fool would say they don't. what isn't true is that the 10C will radiate at the 20C object when they are next to each other. And I've asked you for the experiment that shows it. fk dude, how hard can that be for you to post?

Heat flows to cold and that's it. Radiate = heat, another thing you can't seem to grasp. 20C radiates at 10C and that's it.

He simply doesn't get it... If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy, as colder areas would be getting colder and warmer areas would be getting warmer... That denies thermodynamics. Heat ONLY flows from hot to cold. Entropy increases. Hotter areas cool off and colder areas warm up...

If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy,

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions, but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards. We are speaking about a continuous process, not a sequence of processes. The Sun heats the surface, the surface heats the atmosphere, and the atmosphere heats space. Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

Excellent!

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards.

Obviously.

Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

But photons from the atmosphere can move toward the surface. Right?

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

tell us what? I stated photons can be emitted in all directions. hmmm you should post that quote where i said that didn't happen.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

again, I agree they both radiate. I've always said that. your analogy is the issue, not the object radiating.

Only a fool would say they don't. what isn't true is that the 10C will radiate at the 20C object when they are next to each other. And I've asked you for the experiment that shows it. fk dude, how hard can that be for you to post?

Heat flows to cold and that's it. Radiate = heat, another thing you can't seem to grasp. 20C radiates at 10C and that's it.

He simply doesn't get it... If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy, as colder areas would be getting colder and warmer areas would be getting warmer... That denies thermodynamics. Heat ONLY flows from hot to cold. Entropy increases. Hotter areas cool off and colder areas warm up...

If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy,

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions, but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards. We are speaking about a continuous process, not a sequence of processes. The Sun heats the surface, the surface heats the atmosphere, and the atmosphere heats space. Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

Excellent!

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards.

Obviously.

Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

But photons from the atmosphere can move toward the surface. Right?

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

tell us what? I stated photons can be emitted in all directions. hmmm you should post that quote where i said that didn't happen.

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

 

[jc456]

He simply doesn't get it... If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy, as colder areas would be getting colder and warmer areas would be getting warmer... That denies thermodynamics. Heat ONLY flows from hot to cold. Entropy increases. Hotter areas cool off and colder areas warm up...

If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy,

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions, but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards. We are speaking about a continuous process, not a sequence of processes. The Sun heats the surface, the surface heats the atmosphere, and the atmosphere heats space. Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

Excellent!

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards.

Obviously.

Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

But photons from the atmosphere can move toward the surface. Right?

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

tell us what? I stated photons can be emitted in all directions. hmmm you should post that quote where i said that didn't happen.

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

flowing? hmmmmm too funny.

 

[ReinyDays]

I try and avoid using the word "heat" in this context, that's such an 18th Century concept ... I'm fine if folks want to use the words "heat" and "energy" interchangeably ... but some use "heat" exclusively and seem to rely on caloric flow ... the notion of the caloric particle was mostly abandoned 200 years ago, along with the alchemy that relied on caloric flow ...

If we want to use "heat = energy" ... please keep in mind that energy can flow without any change in temperature ... and it sounds stupid to say heat flows without temperature change ... just saying ...

Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again

This is true for caloric flow, the magic only allows flow in one direction depending on the specific hand motions of the alchemist and how much money the king is paying for the magic ... energy certainly can, and can be demonstrated by tracking radionuclides as they move from the surface to the air and back again ... remember, energy can flow without changing temperature ... caloric particles cannot ...

 

[Wuwei]

I agree. Heat and temperature are very misunderstood concepts in this forum. Two people here even posted that a single molecule can have a temperature.

The ancients didn't differentiate between heat and EM radiation. That was before the idea of radiation.

To prevent confusion in some cases I use the phrase "thermal energy" because it implies the form of energy is random motion.
.

 

[jc456]

I agree. Heat and temperature are very misunderstood concepts in this forum. Two people here even posted that a single molecule can have a temperature.

The ancients didn't differentiate between heat and EM radiation. That was before the idea of radiation.

To prevent confusion in some cases I use the phrase "thermal energy" because it implies the form of energy is random motion.
.

wow, amazing. just post something that backs your statement. go ahead, name a group that backs your confusion.

 

[jc456]

He simply doesn't get it... If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy, as colder areas would be getting colder and warmer areas would be getting warmer... That denies thermodynamics. Heat ONLY flows from hot to cold. Entropy increases. Hotter areas cool off and colder areas warm up...

If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy,

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions, but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards. We are speaking about a continuous process, not a sequence of processes. The Sun heats the surface, the surface heats the atmosphere, and the atmosphere heats space. Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

Excellent!

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards.

Obviously.

Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

But photons from the atmosphere can move toward the surface. Right?

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

tell us what? I stated photons can be emitted in all directions. hmmm you should post that quote where i said that didn't happen.

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

hey yo, here's another using the word 'flow'. hmmmmmm

Heat and Thermal Energy
Heat always flows from the system with a higher temperature towards the system or systems with a lower temperature.

Shut up!! no way huh? Only jc uses that term 'flow'. hey todd, what's that thing in your hand?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If heat COULD flow from 10C to 20C, then that would be decreasing entropy,

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions, but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards. We are speaking about a continuous process, not a sequence of processes. The Sun heats the surface, the surface heats the atmosphere, and the atmosphere heats space. Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

Excellent!

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards.

Obviously.

Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

But photons from the atmosphere can move toward the surface. Right?

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

tell us what? I stated photons can be emitted in all directions. hmmm you should post that quote where i said that didn't happen.

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

hey yo, here's another using the word 'flow'. hmmmmmm

Heat and Thermal Energy
Heat always flows from the system with a higher temperature towards the system or systems with a lower temperature.

Shut up!! no way huh? Only jc uses that term 'flow'. hey todd, what's that thing in your hand?

Only jc uses that term 'flow'.

Only jc uses that term 'hot flows'.

Only jc uses that term 'cold flows'.

DURR

 

[jc456]

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions, but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards. We are speaking about a continuous process, not a sequence of processes. The Sun heats the surface, the surface heats the atmosphere, and the atmosphere heats space. Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

Excellent!

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

but that does not magickally make heat flow backwards.

Obviously.

Heat cannot suddenly and magickally flow from the atmosphere to the surface again...

But photons from the atmosphere can move toward the surface. Right?

Don't tell SSDD and jc456.

tell us what? I stated photons can be emitted in all directions. hmmm you should post that quote where i said that didn't happen.

What about photons flowing from 10C to 20C? Is that allowed?

Yes, photons can be emitted in all directions

hey yo, here's another using the word 'flow'. hmmmmmm

Heat and Thermal Energy
Heat always flows from the system with a higher temperature towards the system or systems with a lower temperature.

Shut up!! no way huh? Only jc uses that term 'flow'. hey todd, what's that thing in your hand?

Only jc uses that term 'flow'.

Only jc uses that term 'hot flows'.

Only jc uses that term 'cold flows'.

DURR

Bam

 

[SSDD]

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

 

[Wuwei]

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

That is one statement of the second law, but there are many others in the references which are different.

These various statements of the second law do not use the words "spontaneous" nor "net" nor "energy". They are the Clausius form, Carnot's form and the entropy form.
Do you disagree with any of the following references of the second law?

• Clausius Statement of the Second Law of Thermodynamics
  “It is impossible to construct a device which operates on a cycle and whose sole effect is the transfer of heat from a cooler body to a hotter body”.
  Carnot’s principle states:
  1. No engine can be more efficient than a reversible engine (a Carnot heat engine) operating between the same high temperature and low temperature reservoirs.
  2. The efficiencies of all reversible engines (Carnot heat engines) operating between the same constant temperature reservoirs are the same, regardless of the working substance employed or the operation details.
• Thermodynamics - The second law of thermodynamics
  A cyclic transformation whose only final result is to transfer heat from a body at a given temperature to a body at a higher temperature is impossible.
• Second Law of Thermodynamics
  It is impossible to extract an amount of heat QH from a hot reservoir and use it all to do work W. Some amount of heat QC must be exhausted to a cold reservoir. This precludes a perfect heat engine.
• Second Law of Thermodynamics: In any cyclic process the entropy will either increase or remain the same.
• 5.1 Concept and Statements of the Second Law
  No process is possible whose sole result is the absorption of heat from a reservoir and the conversion of this heat into work. [Kelvin-Planck statement of the second law.]
• No process is possible whose sole result is the transfer of heat from a cooler to a hotter body. [Clausius statement of the second law]
• Second Law of Thermodynamics
  The final entropy must be greater than the initial entropy for an irreversible process.

Do you think any of those references are wrong?

.

 

[ReinyDays]

Perhaps if SSDD posted his walk-through of how energy moves through the atmosphere, then we could better understand how he's using the 2nd law ... and why he's using it that way ...

Solar energy is absorbed by the Earth's surface ... now what happens? ...

 

[jc456]

Perhaps if SSDD posted his walk-through of how energy moves through the atmosphere, then we could better understand how he's using the 2nd law ... and why he's using it that way ...

Solar energy is absorbed by the Earth's surface ... now what happens? ...

you don't know? wow, you act like such a brain in here. wow!!!

 

[SSDD]

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

That is one statement of the second law, but there are many others in the references which are different.

These various statements of the second law do not use the words "spontaneous" nor "net" nor "energy". They are the Clausius form, Carnot's form and the entropy form.
Do you disagree with any of the following references of the second law?

• Clausius Statement of the Second Law of Thermodynamics
  “It is impossible to construct a device which operates on a cycle and whose sole effect is the transfer of heat from a cooler body to a hotter body”.
  Carnot’s principle states:
  1. No engine can be more efficient than a reversible engine (a Carnot heat engine) operating between the same high temperature and low temperature reservoirs.
  2. The efficiencies of all reversible engines (Carnot heat engines) operating between the same constant temperature reservoirs are the same, regardless of the working substance employed or the operation details.
• Thermodynamics - The second law of thermodynamics
  A cyclic transformation whose only final result is to transfer heat from a body at a given temperature to a body at a higher temperature is impossible.
• Second Law of Thermodynamics
  It is impossible to extract an amount of heat QH from a hot reservoir and use it all to do work W. Some amount of heat QC must be exhausted to a cold reservoir. This precludes a perfect heat engine.
• Second Law of Thermodynamics: In any cyclic process the entropy will either increase or remain the same.
• 5.1 Concept and Statements of the Second Law
  No process is possible whose sole result is the absorption of heat from a reservoir and the conversion of this heat into work. [Kelvin-Planck statement of the second law.]
• No process is possible whose sole result is the transfer of heat from a cooler to a hotter body. [Clausius statement of the second law]
• Second Law of Thermodynamics
  The final entropy must be greater than the initial entropy for an irreversible process.

Do you think any of those references are wrong?



.

They all say the same thing....energy doesn't move spontaneously from a lower state to a higher state..

 

[Wuwei]

They all say the same thing....energy doesn't move spontaneously from a lower state to a higher state..

That is a grossly wrong interpretation. None say the same thing. None of those statements I quoted use the words "spontaneous" nor "net" nor "energy".

Furthermore you have not defined what you mean by "state".
.

 

[Wuwei]

Perhaps if SSDD posted his walk-through of how energy moves through the atmosphere, then we could better understand how he's using the 2nd law ... and why he's using it that way ...

Solar energy is absorbed by the Earth's surface ... now what happens? ...

I have asked him that "what happens next" question countless times but he avoids it.

The average earth temperature is around 15C. That means the earth radiates around 396 Watts per square meter. He doesn't believe that CO2 turns that into thermal energy; and he believes that the absorbed energy is lost through collisions.

My basic question is where does that 396 Watts per square meter go?
It doesn't all go to outer space.

The whole contradiction becomes more obvious when it comes to Venus where the surface temperature is 462 degrees C (hot enough to melt zinc and lead) and radiates 16500 Watts per square meter.

He won't answer that question either -- "Where does that radiation go?"

.

 

[ReinyDays]

That's sad ... here he has his own thread pinned to the top on the Environment forum all for his special use to tell everyone why the greenhouse effect doesn't exist ... he's gotten as far as claiming that the 100 years of scientific research is bogus all started by that charlatan Alessandro Volta and his clever use of unicorn pee ...

 

[SSDD]

I have asked him that "what happens next" question countless times but he avoids it.


.

What a liar....we have been through it more than once on this thread alone...It begins with the fact that conduction and convection are the primary modes of energy movement through the troposphere... Your penchant for lying...and reinterpreting everything that passes into your mind is why I don't care much for talking to you...i find repeating myself ad nauseam tedious in the extreme...

 

[Wuwei]

I have asked him that "what happens next" question countless times but he avoids it..

What a liar....we have been through it more than once on this thread alone...It begins with the fact that conduction and convection are the primary modes of energy movement through the troposphere... Your penchant for lying...and reinterpreting everything that passes into your mind is why I don't care much for talking to you...i find repeating myself ad nauseam tedious in the extreme...

So you want to cover your ignorance and shame by calling me a liar. Misinterpretation is one way you have of avoiding the question again: Where does the hot surface radiation go?

The surface of Earth and Venus are respectively radiating 396 and 16500 Watts per square meter.
That LWIR radiation has nowhere to go but upward through the atmosphere.
You said that the presence of CO2 in the air does not cause absorption of LWIR energy.
Countless times you said the proof was in heating company literature.
Yes, yes convection and a minor amount of conduction can move thermal energy.
But conduction and convection cannot move surface radiation!
It can only move thermal energy.

So, again where does the radiation go?
If you think I'm lying or misinterpreting anything. Tell me where.
Simply calling me a liar just doesn't work anymore.
.

 

[ReinyDays]

What a liar....we have been through it more than once on this thread alone...It begins with the fact that conduction and convection are the primary modes of energy movement through the troposphere... Your penchant for lying...and reinterpreting everything that passes into your mind is why I don't care much for talking to you...i find repeating myself ad nauseam tedious in the extreme...

Air is an insulator ... we use it in our homes and businesses ... energy conducts very slowly in most gases, and air is cheap ... go ahead and pick up a bat of fiberglass insulation, see how light it is, that's because it's mostly air ... same with styrofoam insulation ... there's an immense body of literature, both scientific and lay, that confirms these claims I've made ... I wish you would try to inform yourself about conduction ...

Convection is a different matter and this does transport a non-trivial amount of energy through the troposphere ... unfortunately, this energy has to be released as the air parcel rises in the atmosphere as part of cloud formation ... so this won't transport the energy from the surface to the top-of-troposphere (a.k.a. "tropopause") ...

You'll have to keep repeating yourself because you're wrong ... and you know it ... "it's the liar who calls others 'liars' first" ... so be careful ...

Solar energy is absorbed by the Earth's surface ... now what happens? ...