Tropospheric Hot Spot- Why it does not exist...

[Wuwei]

Does that mean the vast amount never reaches the earth and remains in the atmosphere which then eventually is lost to space?

That's right.

 

[ding]

Does that mean the vast amount never reaches the earth and remains in the atmosphere which then eventually is lost to space?

That's right.

What percentage would you say?

 

[Wuwei]

Does that mean the vast amount never reaches the earth and remains in the atmosphere which then eventually is lost to space?

That's right.

What percentage would you say?

I haven't seen a site that estimates how much thermal energy is stored in the atmosphere. Think of a long slow river that is sourced by a lake and dumped in the ocean. There can be a lot of water in the river, but since it's slow you don't see much of it at the point it is being dumped.

 

[Crick]

About 29 percent of the solar energy that arrives at the top of the atmosphere is reflected back to space by clouds, atmospheric particles, or bright ground surfaces like sea ice and snow. This energy plays no role in Earth’s climate system. About 23 percent of incoming solar energy is absorbed in the atmosphere by water vapor, dust, and ozone, and 48 percent passes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the surface. Thus, about 71 percent of the total incoming solar energy is absorbed by the Earth system.
Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget : Feature Articles

 

[Crick]

The total heat capacity of the atmosphere is 5.92e21 J/C

The total heat capacity of the ocean is 5.30e24 J/C (this is where the 1000x difference between the two comes from Frank)

Climate Science for Everyone: How much heat can the air and ocean store?

 

[Billy_Bob]

A graph of spectral range is not a measurement of energy output..

It was output of a detector aimed directly upward and therefore was a measurement of energy.

It was not a measurement of energy. It was a measurement of the downward wavelength converted into a number which represents POTENTIAL ENERGY. A Thermopylae, aimed upward, can not differentiate the difference between POTENTIAL and Realized energy.

That doesn't make any sense at all. EM radiation can never be potential energy. Please clearly define what you mean by potential and realized energy with regard to long wave radiation.

Show me where all EM radiation (LWIR) is turned into 'work' and therefore heat.. Show me how you determined the ratios of heat generating and free floating.

 

[Billy_Bob]

About 29 percent of the solar energy that arrives at the top of the atmosphere is reflected back to space by clouds, atmospheric particles, or bright ground surfaces like sea ice and snow. This energy plays no role in Earth’s climate system. About 23 percent of incoming solar energy is absorbed in the atmosphere by water vapor, dust, and ozone, and 48 percent passes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the surface. Thus, about 71 percent of the total incoming solar energy is absorbed by the Earth system.
Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget : Feature Articles

Trenbreths calculations have been shown ludicrous.. He imply's that there is a self re-enforcing energy loop which can not exist..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Right and when I brought up heat from convection you seemed to say it was lost quickly. So if heat from co2 immediately heats up the surrounding atmosphere how would that loss be any different?

What I said was the heat from convection is quickly lost to the rest of the atmosphere. I didn't mean it was lost to outer space. CO2 heat from IR absorption is also quickly mixed with the atmosphere.

Ok. I'll come back to rates in a bit. Is all of the energy transfered from the co2 to o2 and n2 or does some go directly into land an ocean without heating o2 and n2? If so, how much, what percentage? Btw, I appreciate this discussion as it is helping me understand this process in simple terms.

The CO2 (and other GHG's including H2O) very close to the surface of earth radiate exactly half their energy downward to land. The other half radiates up. O2 and N2 and the rest of the atmosphere will quickly capture the upward energy.

CO2 that is a few meters higher will also radiate half their energy up to O2 and N2. It will also radiate half its energy downward, but not all that radiation will hit earth. Some will be captured by other CO2 molecules and immediately transferred to the O2 and N2 before it hits earth. The higher you go, the less CO2 radiation will actually reach the earth, but it will be absorbed by the atmosphere. A few dozen meters off the ground, none of the CO2 will reach the earth. So half the radiation will be absorbed in the atmosphere above, and the other half in the atmosphere below.

It is far from half. At best it is below 31% at just 10 meters. That is the kind of error which would render all of your calculations useless.

By "very close to the surface" I meant fractions of an inch. That should have been obvious to you. If you think "very close to the surface" is 10 meters, yes it would be quite obvious that less than half the energy would actually reach the surface.

Are you implying that the atmospheric hot spot should be 1 meter off the ground then?

 

[Wuwei]

Are you implying that the atmospheric hot spot should be 1 meter off the ground then?

Of course not.

 

[Wuwei]

Trenbreths calculations have been shown ludicrous.

Who showed they are ludicrous?

He imply's that there is a self re-enforcing energy loop which can not exist.

Which scientists say that?

 

[Crick]

A graph of spectral range is not a measurement of energy output..

It was output of a detector aimed directly upward and therefore was a measurement of energy.

It was not a measurement of energy. It was a measurement of the downward wavelength converted into a number which represents POTENTIAL ENERGY. A Thermopylae, aimed upward, can not differentiate the difference between POTENTIAL and Realized energy.

That doesn't make any sense at all. EM radiation can never be potential energy. Please clearly define what you mean by potential and realized energy with regard to long wave radiation.

Show me where all EM radiation (LWIR) is turned into 'work' and therefore heat.. Show me how you determined the ratios of heat generating and free floating.

An IR detector cannot detect potential energy. It sees IR coming in its aperture. The detector is able to measure the intensity level of the different frequencies and thus it IS a measurement of energy.

Your objections here Billy are simply crazy. You're spitting out terms that you heard somewhere that have no actual application to this discussion. It's commentary like this that makes us doubt your claim to be an atmospheric physicist.

 

[Wuwei]

Show me where all EM radiation (LWIR) is turned into 'work' and therefore heat.. Show me how you determined the ratios of heat generating and free floating.

Where did you read anything about LWIR turning into work? Exactly what is "Free floating" ? None of that makes sense. Tell me more clearly what ratios you are looking for.

 

[SSDD]

And still not a single measurement of all this back radiation with an instrument at ambient temperature.....more than twice the amount of energy coming in from the sun

Crick showed you the measurements dozens of times.

He never showed me a measurement of back radiation taken with an instrument at ambient temperature...every measurement he has shown was made with an instrument cooled to at least -80F and in that case it isn't energy moving from the cooler atmosphere to the warmer earth...it is energy moving from the warmer atmosphere to the cooler instrument...hardly back radiation..simply energy moving from warm to cool as predicted by the 2nd law.

 

[SSDD]

The force of gravity is not work. A rock falling to the ground can provide work. A rock laying on the ground can't.

Constant pressure isn't work? Do you mean that those heavy weights hanging on chains in my grandfather clock aren't providing work?

I already told you the experiment is corrupt. The authors believe that they can provide perpetual motion of the second kind.

Yeah..you said it...but that doesn't make it true...and it isn't perpetual motion if work is being applied to the system...

​

 

[SSDD]

What I said was the heat from convection is quickly lost to the rest of the atmosphere. I didn't mean it was lost to outer space. CO2 heat from IR absorption is also quickly mixed with the atmosphere.

Ok. I'll come back to rates in a bit. Is all of the energy transfered from the co2 to o2 and n2 or does some go directly into land an ocean without heating o2 and n2? If so, how much, what percentage? Btw, I appreciate this discussion as it is helping me understand this process in simple terms.

The CO2 (and other GHG's including H2O) very close to the surface of earth radiate exactly half their energy downward to land. The other half radiates up. O2 and N2 and the rest of the atmosphere will quickly capture the upward energy.

CO2 that is a few meters higher will also radiate half their energy up to O2 and N2. It will also radiate half its energy downward, but not all that radiation will hit earth. Some will be captured by other CO2 molecules and immediately transferred to the O2 and N2 before it hits earth. The higher you go, the less CO2 radiation will actually reach the earth, but it will be absorbed by the atmosphere. A few dozen meters off the ground, none of the CO2 will reach the earth. So half the radiation will be absorbed in the atmosphere above, and the other half in the atmosphere below.

It is far from half. At best it is below 31% at just 10 meters. That is the kind of error which would render all of your calculations useless.

By "very close to the surface" I meant fractions of an inch. That should have been obvious to you. If you think "very close to the surface" is 10 meters, yes it would be quite obvious that less than half the energy would actually reach the surface.

Are you implying that the atmospheric hot spot should be 1 meter off the ground then?

that's pretty low for an "upper" tropospheric hot spot isn't it?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Are you implying that the atmospheric hot spot should be 1 meter off the ground then?

Of course not.

If your premise were true than this is precisely where it would reside.

 

[Billy_Bob]

A graph of spectral range is not a measurement of energy output..

It was output of a detector aimed directly upward and therefore was a measurement of energy.

It was not a measurement of energy. It was a measurement of the downward wavelength converted into a number which represents POTENTIAL ENERGY. A Thermopylae, aimed upward, can not differentiate the difference between POTENTIAL and Realized energy.

That doesn't make any sense at all. EM radiation can never be potential energy. Please clearly define what you mean by potential and realized energy with regard to long wave radiation.

Show me where all EM radiation (LWIR) is turned into 'work' and therefore heat.. Show me how you determined the ratios of heat generating and free floating.

An IR detector cannot detect potential energy. It sees IR coming in its aperture. The detector is able to measure the intensity level of the different frequencies and thus it IS a measurement of energy.

Your objections here Billy are simply crazy. You're spitting out terms that you heard somewhere that have no actual application to this discussion. It's commentary like this that makes us doubt your claim to be an atmospheric physicist.

Ok Moron... Lets drag out the crayons.. Its the only way you understand anything..

An IR detector is only registering the IR flowing at that point in time into the receiver. IT DOES NOT IDENTIFY WHAT WORK IS BEING DONE IT ONLY IDENTIFIES THAT LWIR IS PRESENT and extrapolates the temperature from the wavelength.

How you morons go from the 'presence of' to 'heat work' is a jump of pure faith. And it can not determine its origin unless its focal point is known.

Pointing it up into the atmosphere is pure speculation as to what it is actually reading.. As far as I am aware, there are no IR detectors, uncooled, that can identify close spectral ranges. A generic IR detector can not tell what portion of our atmosphere is actually radiating.

All you have is a Wild Ass Guess.. no science is involved.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Show me where all EM radiation (LWIR) is turned into 'work' and therefore heat.. Show me how you determined the ratios of heat generating and free floating.

Where did you read anything about LWIR turning into work? Exactly what is "Free floating" ? None of that makes sense. Tell me more clearly what ratios you are looking for.

LWIR has to do one of two things.. Be absorbed and excite or be absorbed and re-emitted. If it is exciting a mass then work is being performed and heat is the result. If it is being passed from one molecule to the next, with little work and no heat being created, it is free floating in our atmosphere. There is little to no free floating energy.

Now explain what portions of LWIR are doing what and how did you define it ?

Current empirical evidence suggests that water vapor is absorbing CO2 LWIR and it is not allowing it to be trapped in Trenbreths self propelling energy loop. It is then released above cloud boundary where it is lost to space..

 

[Wuwei]

He never showed me a measurement of back radiation taken with an instrument at ambient temperature...every measurement he has shown was made with an instrument cooled to at least -80F and in that case it isn't energy moving from the cooler atmosphere to the warmer earth...it is energy moving from the warmer atmosphere to the cooler instrument...hardly back radiation..simply energy moving from warm to cool as predicted by the 2nd law.

Crick showed you the measurements dozens of times. Doesn't matter what the temperature is. It's back radiation.

 

[Wuwei]

Constant pressure isn't work? Do you mean that those heavy weights hanging on chains in my grandfather clock aren't providing work?

The weight is moving downward. When it gets to bottom you have to do work to reset it.

Yeah..you said it...but that doesn't make it true...and it isn't perpetual motion if work is being applied to the system...

Continual work was not being applied.