Paradoxical Earth.. Complex responses often misinterpreted...

[Wuwei]

Yes, I agree, but our local "doctoral candidate" is a brick wall.

They seem to think any particular temperature has only one emitted wavelength. SSDD wouldn't respond directly but he implies that water only has one velocity for molecules at a certain temperature even though that would preclude evaporation.

These guys don't understand that changing physics in one area causes big problems down the road in another area.

I think they are confusing a single frequency with the peak of BB radiation given by Wein's law. When SSDD made that mistake years ago I retorted that he would be saying the temperature of a blue LED is somewhere around 5700 C because that is the peak using Wein's law. To someone that doesn't know the first thing about physics Wein's law can be deceptive to them. Simply plug in a single frequency out comes a temperature.

Yes, changing physics in one area has unintended consequences.

.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, I agree, but our local "doctoral candidate" is a brick wall.

They seem to think any particular temperature has only one emitted wavelength. SSDD wouldn't respond directly but he implies that water only has one velocity for molecules at a certain temperature even though that would preclude evaporation.

These guys don't understand that changing physics in one area causes big problems down the road in another area.

Takes a lot of epicycles.....

 

[SSDD]

Quantum Mechanics (QM) theroy precludes this from happening. In fact it identifies the photon as a piece of matter which must be warmed by the higher energized state matter before it can be re-emitted at the higher energized state. This means it must consume energy cooling the matter. QM QUESTIONS HOWEVER a black-body being able to absorb matter resonating at a lower frequency than itself

Just look at the utter stupidity of this comment! Hahahahaha, this is not the first time that BillyBoob has loudly proclaimed that light is matter.

How do you converse with someone so profoundly stupid?

How long ago did you figure that you know everything there was to know and simply stopped learning?

 

[SSDD]

A stock cut and paste? How is that any different than what you have already been doing over the past years.

Hilarious...when it is you who keeps recycling the same old failed arguments over and over as if they were going to somehow produce a different outcome...if you are going to cover the same old shit...then simply review it the first several times you recycled it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A stock cut and paste? How is that any different than what you have already been doing over the past years.

Hilarious...when it is you who keeps recycling the same old failed arguments over and over as if they were going to somehow produce a different outcome...if you are going to cover the same old shit...then simply review it the first several times you recycled it.

And still no sources that back you up.
All alone.
Again.

 

[IanC]

How long ago did you figure that you know everything there was to know and simply stopped learning?

My position has evolved a great deal over the ten years that I have been posting here.

On the other hand, you seem to be refractory to any new data or ideas.

Motes and logs.

But to tell you the truth I don't want you to change. Who would we argue against?

 

[Wuwei]

Hilarious...when it is you who keeps recycling the same old failed arguments over and over as if they were going to somehow produce a different outcome...if you are going to cover the same old shit...then simply review it the first several times you recycled it.

I do not always recycle arguments. I and the people on this forum have also recycled questions that you have not or cannot answer. If you can answer these questions clearly and in a way that does not violate physics, then nobody will bother you with them again.

Where between the top of atmosphere and the surface of earth do you think the cosmic microwave background becomes "a resonance frequency"?

Where does the 16,000 W/m² Venus surface radiation go?

Is the inside of a red hot hollow sphere black or red hot?

What quantum mechanical mechanism do you think prevents a photon from a colder object from hitting a warmer object?

Most spontaneous processes such as chemical light sticks, luminescence, phosphorescence, CMB, voltaic discharge, sun energy, etc. involve prior work. You stated any energy release process that involves prior work is not spontaneous after the work is stopped. Can you name spontaneous processes that fall outside that category?

Yes we have argued many times against your reinvention of physics, but the reason for that is that you never have come up with an answer to the above questions.

.

 

[SSDD]

To date...not the first piece of observed, measured evidence to support your beliefs, while ever observation and measurement ever made supports my position....note that I have a position based on actual evidence while you hold a belief not based on anything other than unobservable, umeasureable, untestable models.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Quantum Mechanics (QM) theroy precludes this from happening. In fact it identifies the photon as a piece of matter which must be warmed by the higher energized state matter before it can be re-emitted at the higher energized state. This means it must consume energy cooling the matter. QM QUESTIONS HOWEVER a black-body being able to absorb matter resonating at a lower frequency than itself

Just look at the utter stupidity of this comment! Hahahahaha, this is not the first time that BillyBoob has loudly proclaimed that light is matter.

How do you converse with someone so profoundly stupid?

Yes, your profound stupidity is amazing... Good luck being a duped fool...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

To date...not the first piece of observed, measured evidence to support your beliefs, while ever observation and measurement ever made supports my position....note that I have a position based on actual evidence while you hold a belief not based on anything other than unobservable, umeasureable, untestable models.

while ever observation and measurement ever made supports my position....

If that's true, why can't you post a single real source that agrees with your "cooler photons" can't hit warmer matter claim?

 

[Wuwei]

To date...not the first piece of observed, measured evidence to support your beliefs, while ever observation and measurement ever made supports my position....note that I have a position based on actual evidence while you hold a belief not based on anything other than unobservable, umeasureable, untestable models.

That was not the point of my previous post, #327. I was not promoting any evidence. I was asking you 5 questions about your beliefs that you have not fully answered.

 

[SSDD]

Where between the top of atmosphere and the surface of earth do you think the cosmic microwave background becomes "a resonance frequency"?

Resonance is a phenomenon that occurs when a vibrating system or external force drives another system to oscillate with greater amplitude at a specific preferential frequency. Frequencies at which the response amplitude is a relative maximum are known as the system's resonant frequencies, or resonance frequencies. CMB resonance frequencies can exist anywhere there is CMB...The radio telescope that first picked up the resonance frequency could have picked it up pointing in any direction.

Where does the 16,000 W/m² Venus surface radiation go?

Be glad to tell you all about that radiation as soon as you state in plain english what this particular equation says. Not your nutty version..not the dartmouth paper...not any other version....this particular version. State what it says in plain english and I will gladly tell you about the 16,000W/m2 on venus that so interests you.

Is the inside of a red hot hollow sphere black or red hot?

Do the experiment and let me know...keep in mind however, that if you use a camera to look inside, the camera must be the same temperature as the rest of the sphere.

What quantum mechanical mechanism do you think prevents a photon from a colder object from hitting a warmer object?

No idea...what underlying mechanism causes a rock to fall when you drop it...gravity is far better understood than photons and yet, we have no real idea what mechanism is at work...the fact that one doesn't know the precise mechanism that causes rocks to fall doesn't alter the fact that rocks simply obey the laws of physics.

None of those are spontaneous processes...sorry you don't grasp what the term means..

All these have been answered before and this is the last time...in the future refer to any of the numerous times I have given the same answer.

 

[SSDD]

To date...not the first piece of observed, measured evidence to support your beliefs, while ever observation and measurement ever made supports my position....note that I have a position based on actual evidence while you hold a belief not based on anything other than unobservable, umeasureable, untestable models.

That was not the point of my previous post, #327. I was not promoting any evidence. I was asking you 5 questions about your beliefs that you have not fully answered.

Of course you aren't...because there is none.

 

[Wuwei]

Resonance is a phenomenon that occurs when a vibrating system or external force drives another system to oscillate with greater amplitude at a specific preferential frequency. Frequencies at which the response amplitude is a relative maximum are known as the system's resonant frequencies, or resonance frequencies.

You ran away and hid from the question and substituted well know Micky Mouse physics as a non-answer.

Be glad to tell you all about that radiation as soon as you state in plain english what this particular equation says. Not your nutty version..not the dartmouth paper...not any other version....this particular version. State what it says in plain english and I will gladly tell you about the 16,000W/m2 on venus that so interests you.

That particular equation states that the power output from an object is emissivity times sigma times the area times the fourth power object temperature minus the fourth power of a colder background.
Now where does the 16,000W/m2 from Venus's surface go.

Do the experiment and let me know...keep in mind however, that if you use a camera to look inside, the camera must be the same temperature as the rest of the sphere.

Another run and hide from the question.

Do the experiment and let me know...keep in mind however, that if you use a camera to look inside, the camera must be the same temperature as the rest of the sphere.

So your brand of physics gives you another run and hide. I can predict the inside temperature, but you can't.

None of those are spontaneous processes....

So you can't name any spontaneous process whatsoever. So if you think that no spontaneous process exists in nature, then all processes require work. Therefore your "physics" says all energy can flow without constraints as long as entropy is not violated.

Your physics isn't going very well.

 

[SSDD]

Glad you finally admitted that the Stefan-Boltzman equation says nothing about two way energy exchange...nor does it provide any expression from which "net" may be derived. Now...that wasn't so hard...was it?

So about Venus....Temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of the particles in a gas. Since the atmosphere of Venus is above 10kPa, convection occurs. Convection, and the action of auto-compression causes the potential energy to convert enthalpy, pressure and hence to kinetic energy the 50% of the gas that is descending in the atmosphere of Venus.

This happens in accord with the equation

H = PV=U

Where

H = enthalpy (J/kg)
P = pressure (Pa)
V - Specific Volume (m^3)
U = Specific internal energy (kinetic energy)

Half of the very large mass of the atmosphere of Venus holds a VERY large amount of potential energy.....hence the 16,000W/m2 at the surface.

 

[Wuwei]

So about Venus....Temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of the particles in a gas. Since the atmosphere of Venus is above 10kPa, convection occurs. Convection, and the action of auto-compression causes the potential energy to convert enthalpy, pressure and hence to kinetic energy the 50% of the gas that is descending in the atmosphere of Venus.

This happens in accord with the equation

H = PV=U

Where

H = enthalpy (J/kg)
P = pressure (Pa)
V - Specific Volume (m^3)
U = Specific internal energy (kinetic energy)

Half of the very large mass of the atmosphere of Venus holds a VERY large amount of potential energy.....hence the 16,000W/m2 at the surface

You didn't answer the question again. Enthalpy is used in the derivation of the lapse rate and has nothing to do with the question, What happens to the 16,000W/m2 radiation from the surface. It certainly doesn't all go to outer space. It must be absorbed by the atmosphere. Eh?

Are you going to run and hide again?

 

[SSDD]

So about Venus....Temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of the particles in a gas. Since the atmosphere of Venus is above 10kPa, convection occurs. Convection, and the action of auto-compression causes the potential energy to convert enthalpy, pressure and hence to kinetic energy the 50% of the gas that is descending in the atmosphere of Venus.

This happens in accord with the equation

H = PV=U

Where

H = enthalpy (J/kg)
P = pressure (Pa)
V - Specific Volume (m^3)
U = Specific internal energy (kinetic energy)

Half of the very large mass of the atmosphere of Venus holds a VERY large amount of potential energy.....hence the 16,000W/m2 at the surface

You didn't answer the question again. Enthalpy is used in the derivation of the lapse rate and has nothing to do with the question, What happens to the 16,000W/m2 radiation from the surface. It certainly doesn't all go to outer space. It must be absorbed by the atmosphere. Eh?

Are you going to run and hide again?

You got your answer....do the math. Sorry you don't grasp the significance.

And if the sort of mental masturbation required to actually believe I would ever need to hide from the likes of you gets you though the night...masturbate on...it is the only way you keep coming back here anyway.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Glad you finally admitted that the Stefan-Boltzman equation says nothing about two way energy exchange...nor does it provide any expression from which "net" may be derived. Now...that wasn't so hard...was it?

So about Venus....Temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of the particles in a gas. Since the atmosphere of Venus is above 10kPa, convection occurs. Convection, and the action of auto-compression causes the potential energy to convert enthalpy, pressure and hence to kinetic energy the 50% of the gas that is descending in the atmosphere of Venus.

This happens in accord with the equation

H = PV=U

Where

H = enthalpy (J/kg)
P = pressure (Pa)
V - Specific Volume (m^3)
U = Specific internal energy (kinetic energy)

Half of the very large mass of the atmosphere of Venus holds a VERY large amount of potential energy.....hence the 16,000W/m2 at the surface.

Glad you finally admitted that the Stefan-Boltzman equation says nothing about two way energy exchange...

Still no luck finding anyone to back up your "one way only" photon theory. So lonely.

 

[Wuwei]

You got your answer....do the math. Sorry you don't grasp the significance.

And if the sort of mental masturbation required to actually believe I would ever need to hide from the likes of you gets you though the night...masturbate on...it is the only way you keep coming back here anyway.

I got a non-answer. You didn't say what happens to the 16,000 W/m2 radiation from the surface of Venus like you promised. Just some of your usual non-sequitur.

It's very becoming when you talk dirty.

.

 

[SSDD]

Sorry you don't understand...Like I said...find an adult to help you.