Empirical Falsification Of the CAGW meme.

[SSDD]

Radiation is created, must be created, by a physical process related to internal conditions and the available energy that can be converted to radiation. Energy is shed by the radiation produced and the object cools.

No ian....radiation is not created...radiation is energy and we all know...or should know that energy can neither be created nor destroyed..

If you are starting with the assumption that some energy is created, then everything that follows is as wrong as the initial assumption.

Now you are just being retarded. Of course radiation is created. A particle takes internal/local energy and converts it into photons which carry the energy away. That is how things cool. The opposite is also happening, photons from different sources are absorbed and annihilated, adding energy. That is how things warm.

Radiation is created by certain specific movements of charged particles. Everytime one of those movements happen a photon must be created. Must be created.

That is why your crackpot idea that internally produced radiation is controlled by external conditions is simply wrong. The only way to stop radiation is to stop movement of charged particles. The only way to stop movement is to cool the particles to absolute zero.

All things radiate according to their temperature and emmisivity, all the time. Just like the S-B law states.

Sorry ian....that is just one form of energy being converted into another form...again...till you get the basics..all you derive from your confusion is going to be wrong.

 

[SSDD]

Funny, when you look up the word science..even in the science dictionary, it is still defined as observation, measurement, and experiment....your belief that models are reality is something....but not science. refer to the word that describes belief in a thing without proof.

The observations, measurements, and experiments, have lead to mathematical models. Physics has two major disciplines: Theoretical and experimental. All you have done is focus on the experimental aspect but with disdain the theoretical aspect. Believe me both are equally important in order to have developed the computer you are now playing with.

Actually SSDD is adamant that the first, naive and immature, theories from 150 years ago are the only correct ones. Even though it was already known at the time that they were insufficient to explain the experimental data.

So did some measurement or observation of two way energy movement happen while I wasn't looking?...Did they rewrite the 2nd law to state that energy can, in fact, move spontaneously from a less ordered state to a more ordered state? Can you provide a link to the research?

Didn't think so...imagine being so naïve as to ask for evidence to support the theories? What was I thinking?

 

[SSDD]

My own conclusion is that today there is no interpretation of quantum mechanics that does not have serious flaws. This view is not universally shared. Indeed, many physicists are satisfied with their own interpretation of quantum mechanics. But different physicists are satisfied with different interpretations. In my view, we ought to take seriously the possibility of finding some more satisfactory other theory, to which quantum mechanics is only a good approximation. Steven Weinberg,

Exactly.

Classical thermodynamics was flawed. QM was discovered, and answered more questions.

Will QM be replaced? Maybe. But QM is better than classical thermodynamics. Anything that replaces QM will also be better and answer more questions.

Only if your faith is strong enough to disregard reality in favor of models.

 

[SSDD]

My position is that energy movement is a one way, gross movement, because that is what the 2nd law of thermodynamics says....it states quite clearly that energy can only move spontaneously from a state of more order to a state of less order...two way energy movement would have energy moving spontaneously from a state of less order to a state of more order..

The SLoT is a statistical description of systems containing large numbers of particles.

According to your interpretation even such mundane things like evaporation could not happen. How does a water molecule attain the threshold energy to break free of the liquid if adding additional energy to an already fast moving molecule is prohibited? The escaping water molecule has more energy than the molecules left behind. How does it get the extra energy?

Radiation has different properties because it is not matter. Once created it exists until it is absorbed by another bit of matter. There is no 'cancelling out'. A warmer object produces more radiation than a cooler one, but they both radiate fully. The net difference between absorbed and emitted radiation is what causes change.

Again...making up arguments and claiming that they are from me when I never made them...then railing against them...weak ian...very weak.

 

[SSDD]

you can't grasp the difference between IR which is what CMB is and a resonant radio frequency which correlates to,

Your resonant invention is silly.

Those words in that silly phrase say nothing. If I understand his bizarre thinking, we can't measure heat with a thermistor, because that is just a change in resistance, it's not heat. We can't measure light levels with a photo detector because it just gives a voltage, and a voltage is not light.... etc.

So now you are taking your que from ian and making up arguments for me and then railing against your own fantasy?

 

[Wuwei]

Science does not know what work is moving energy from the surface to the corona..but they know that it isn't a spontaneous movement of energy from the cooler surface to the corona...and as to CMB...it isn' my fault that you can't grasp the difference between IR which is what CMB is and a resonant radio frequency which correlates to, but is neither CMB, nor IR.

Displaying your ignorance again.

Really? What work is being performed to move the energy from the cooler surface to the warmer corona? You seem to know something that science does not....I am all ears...lets hear it? What work?

Or are you just talking out your ass again?

No work. Just spontaneous radiant energy exchange.

 

[Wuwei]

Funny, when you look up the word science..even in the science dictionary, it is still defined as observation, measurement, and experiment....your belief that models are reality is something....but not science. refer to the word that describes belief in a thing without proof.

The observations, measurements, and experiments, have lead to mathematical models. Physics has two major disciplines: Theoretical and experimental. All you have done is focus on the experimental aspect but with disdain the theoretical aspect. Believe me both are equally important in order to have developed the computer you are now playing with.

Look up theory....just an idea till observations bear it out.

Look up theoretical physics.

 

[Wuwei]

Can't bring yourself to admit to reality...the answer is no...you can not show any actual measured evidence of two way energy flow...is that so difficult?

One way energy flow seriously violates several laws of physics and QM. But you are ignorant of QM so my argument is moot to you.

Do tell...which laws of physics does the 2nd law of thermodynamics violate?

There are none. But one way energy flow violates the fact that all accelerating charges must radiate.

 

[Wuwei]

you can't grasp the difference between IR which is what CMB is and a resonant radio frequency which correlates to,

Your resonant invention is silly.

Those words in that silly phrase say nothing. If I understand his bizarre thinking, we can't measure heat with a thermistor, because that is just a change in resistance, it's not heat. We can't measure light levels with a photo detector because it just gives a voltage, and a voltage is not light.... etc.

So now you are taking your que from ian and making up arguments for me and then railing against your own fantasy?

No. It's just a simile to illustrate your fantasies.

 

[IanC]

My position is that energy movement is a one way, gross movement, because that is what the 2nd law of thermodynamics says....it states quite clearly that energy can only move spontaneously from a state of more order to a state of less order...two way energy movement would have energy moving spontaneously from a state of less order to a state of more order..

The SLoT is a statistical description of systems containing large numbers of particles.

According to your interpretation even such mundane things like evaporation could not happen. How does a water molecule attain the threshold energy to break free of the liquid if adding additional energy to an already fast moving molecule is prohibited? The escaping water molecule has more energy than the molecules left behind. How does it get the extra energy?

Radiation has different properties because it is not matter. Once created it exists until it is absorbed by another bit of matter. There is no 'cancelling out'. A warmer object produces more radiation than a cooler one, but they both radiate fully. The net difference between absorbed and emitted radiation is what causes change.

Again...making up arguments and claiming that they are from me when I never made them...then railing against them...weak ian...very weak.

Hahahaha. How is it weak?

You claim that every spontaneous exchange of energy must go from warm to cool, from order to disorder, even down to the atomic emission of radiation.

If that is true then no water molecule would ever attain the escape velocity necessary to break free from the liquid state.

How does evaporation happen under the rules of your interpretation of the second law?

 

[SSDD]

Science does not know what work is moving energy from the surface to the corona..but they know that it isn't a spontaneous movement of energy from the cooler surface to the corona...and as to CMB...it isn' my fault that you can't grasp the difference between IR which is what CMB is and a resonant radio frequency which correlates to, but is neither CMB, nor IR.

Displaying your ignorance again.

Really? What work is being performed to move the energy from the cooler surface to the warmer corona? You seem to know something that science does not....I am all ears...lets hear it? What work?

Or are you just talking out your ass again?

No work. Just spontaneous radiant energy exchange.

Really? You believe that energy is spontaneously moving from the 6000C surface to the million degree corona...you believe that the 6000C surface is heating the corona to a million degrees. What happened to your belief that energy could go both ways so long as the net result was that the energy radiating from the radiator was greater than that radiating to the surroundings?

Better think some more...that answer was so wrong that it violates your own beliefs.

 

[SSDD]

Funny, when you look up the word science..even in the science dictionary, it is still defined as observation, measurement, and experiment....your belief that models are reality is something....but not science. refer to the word that describes belief in a thing without proof.

The observations, measurements, and experiments, have lead to mathematical models. Physics has two major disciplines: Theoretical and experimental. All you have done is focus on the experimental aspect but with disdain the theoretical aspect. Believe me both are equally important in order to have developed the computer you are now playing with.

Look up theory....just an idea till observations bear it out.

Look up theoretical physics.

Like I said...just an idea till observations bear it out....funny how that works....you may be just making a lucky guess till such time as you can actually see what is going on....look to the past at the number of times the outcome of the experiment was predictable but they had the actual mechanism completely wrong.

 

[IanC]

My own conclusion is that today there is no interpretation of quantum mechanics that does not have serious flaws. This view is not universally shared. Indeed, many physicists are satisfied with their own interpretation of quantum mechanics. But different physicists are satisfied with different interpretations. In my view, we ought to take seriously the possibility of finding some more satisfactory other theory, to which quantum mechanics is only a good approximation. Steven Weinberg,

Exactly.

Classical thermodynamics was flawed. QM was discovered, and answered more questions.

Will QM be replaced? Maybe. But QM is better than classical thermodynamics. Anything that replaces QM will also be better and answer more questions.

Only if your faith is strong enough to disregard reality in favor of models.

Reality pointed out the insufficiency of classical thermodynamics. That is why QM was discovered. If classical thermodynamics actually worked in all cases we would have stopped looking. But it didn't.

 

[Wuwei]

How does evaporation happen under the rules of your interpretation of the second law?

Yes, hot water exposed to still cold air would have to emit energetic hot molecules of H₂O into the colder surrounding air.

 

[SSDD]

Can't bring yourself to admit to reality...the answer is no...you can not show any actual measured evidence of two way energy flow...is that so difficult?

One way energy flow seriously violates several laws of physics and QM. But you are ignorant of QM so my argument is moot to you.

Do tell...which laws of physics does the 2nd law of thermodynamics violate?

There are none. But one way energy flow violates the fact that all accelerating charges must radiate.

So you just made up an answer.....got it. And the number of times you have been dead wrong on the basics, it seems that is normal for you.

 

[Wuwei]

.you believe that the 6000C surface is heating the corona to a million degrees.

Nobody believes that. Energy still goes both ways.

 

[SSDD]

you can't grasp the difference between IR which is what CMB is and a resonant radio frequency which correlates to,

Your resonant invention is silly.

Those words in that silly phrase say nothing. If I understand his bizarre thinking, we can't measure heat with a thermistor, because that is just a change in resistance, it's not heat. We can't measure light levels with a photo detector because it just gives a voltage, and a voltage is not light.... etc.

So now you are taking your que from ian and making up arguments for me and then railing against your own fantasy?

No. It's just a simile to illustrate your fantasies.

Arguing against your own fantasies has what to do with me?

 

[Wuwei]

Can't bring yourself to admit to reality...the answer is no...you can not show any actual measured evidence of two way energy flow...is that so difficult?

One way energy flow seriously violates several laws of physics and QM. But you are ignorant of QM so my argument is moot to you.

Do tell...which laws of physics does the 2nd law of thermodynamics violate?

There are none. But one way energy flow violates the fact that all accelerating charges must radiate.

So you just made up an answer.....got it. And the number of times you have been dead wrong on the basics, it seems that is normal for you.

No. That answer was discovered over a hundred years ago.

 

[Wuwei]

Arguing against your own fantasies has what to do with me?

That is a trollish remark that ignores the point.

 

[SSDD]

How does evaporation happen under the rules of your interpretation of the second law?

Yes, hot water exposed to still cold air would have to emit energetic hot molecules of H₂O into the colder surrounding air.

Yeah...that's how energy movement works...warm to cool. Evaporation happens when the water molecule has absorbed enough energy for a phase change from water to vapor...then when that vapor is carried high enough in the atmosphere, it freezes into crystals and in doing so releases exactly the same amount of energy that was required to cause it to evaporate...that energy radiates on out into space.