Warmest March on record according to the Japanese Meteorological Agency

[Crick]

I have no interest in your stupidity.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes. If you have a reliable source that says it is, provide it.

Apply the lorentz relativity equation to a photon from any point in the universe to any other point in the universe. The answer will be zero distance to that point and zero time to get there. Sorry you are having such a hard time wrapping your mind around this...maybe that is why you find that you must invent smart photons, and smart radiation....you are trying to cram everything into your reference point with no realization that your reference point is meaningless to the entities in question. You are unmoving scenery...as animated as the print on wallpaper.

So the only source is your imagination?

No argument...just more defensive sarcasm. Gotcha. Working on some more fantasy arguments like your smart photons in an effort to compensate the failure of your intellect to grasp this?

Interesting that Wuwei shows up just when you are feeling some pressure here and makes 11 of his 14 total posts in a three way discussion between you and me....can you spell sock. This must really be stressful to you to feel the need to bring in an alternate personality who can no more answer the questions being asked than you.

So the only source is your imagination?

 

[jc456]

I addressed the original question with the fact that the second law was written before particles were theorized....the second law has not been rewritten or altered for theoretical particles.

I agree with that.

...the second law is about energy movement and it doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen.

That is not true. You have one critical word wrong. This is a rewording, more consistent to what was written long ago.:

"...the second law is about heat movement and it (heat energy) doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen."

I hope that clears up your confusion.

so are you saying that cold photons can make warm photons warmer with heat energy? It seems everyone on here, except SSDD, are avoiding answering the main question, can cold radiated waves make warm radiated waves warmer? I thought, and I'm no expert, but I thought the theory of back radiation would make something warmer? And, I have not seen or read about any experiment that proves back radiation.

 

[jc456]

That is not true. You have one critical word wrong. This is a rewording, more consistent to what was written long ago.:

"...the second law is about heat movement and it (heat energy) doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen."

I hope that clears up your confusion.

Is heat a form of energy, or is heat evidence of another form of energy moving from one place to another?

I see it as he believes that cool photons make warm photons warmer producing heat energy.

 

[SSDD]

So the only source is your imagination?

My source is the Lorentz relativity equations....feel free to apply them to a photon moving at the speed of light and see if you get an answer other than zero distance and zero time to anywhere.

 

[SSDD]

so are you saying that cold photons can make warm photons warmer with heat energy? It seems everyone on here, except SSDD, are avoiding answering the main question, can cold radiated waves make warm radiated waves warmer? I thought, and I'm no expert, but I thought the theory of back radiation would make something warmer? And, I have not seen or read about any experiment that proves back radiation.

And if you don't have back radiation, the whole AGW hoax falls flat on its face.

 

[SSDD]

That is not true. You have one critical word wrong. This is a rewording, more consistent to what was written long ago.:

"...the second law is about heat movement and it (heat energy) doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen."

I hope that clears up your confusion.

Is heat a form of energy, or is heat evidence of another form of energy moving from one place to another?

I see it as he believes that cool photons make warm photons warmer producing heat energy.

What they believe makes no sense if you think the second law of thermodynamics means what it says.

 

[jc456]

Is heat a form of energy, or is heat evidence of another form of energy moving from one place to another?

The reason you get no answers is the abysmal form of your question.

The word "heat" is a symbol to which meaning is attached by the user. A very strong majority of such users intend it to convey a form of energy, which, like all energy, certainly has the ability to move. But in the second part of your question, you bring up "another form of energy" moving. So to answer your question we get to choose between one completely unidentified form of energy and the MOVEMENT of some OTHER form of completely unidentified energy.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

dude rubbing two sticks together will create heat, so energy is what produces heat.

 

[jc456]

I have no interest in your stupidity.

so you can't or won't answer whether cold photons make heat energy?

 

[SSDD]

Is heat a form of energy, or is heat evidence of another form of energy moving from one place to another?

The reason you get no answers is the abysmal form of your question.

The word "heat" is a symbol to which meaning is attached by the user. A very strong majority of such users intend it to convey a form of energy, which, like all energy, certainly has the ability to move. But in the second part of your question, you bring up "another form of energy" moving. So to answer your question we get to choose between one completely unidentified form of energy and the MOVEMENT of some OTHER form of completely unidentified energy.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

dude rubbing two sticks together will create heat, so energy is what produces heat.

It is apparently an undecided issue in the world of science....I have found credible sources that state flatly that heat is a form of energy and equally credible sources that say flatly that heat is not a form of energy but the fingerprint, if you will, of the movement of energy from one place to another.

It is an important distinction because the whole heat/energy thing is their go to argument regarding the second law.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So the only source is your imagination?

My source is the Lorentz relativity equations....feel free to apply them to a photon moving at the speed of light and see if you get an answer other than zero distance and zero time to anywhere.

The only source of this unique interpretation is you?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have no interest in your stupidity.

so you can't or won't answer whether cold photons make heat energy?

You should probably stop.

 

[IanC]

I addressed the original question with the fact that the second law was written before particles were theorized....the second law has not been rewritten or altered for theoretical particles.

I agree with that.

...the second law is about energy movement and it doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen.

That is not true. You have one critical word wrong. This is a rewording, more consistent to what was written long ago.:

"...the second law is about heat movement and it (heat energy) doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen."

I hope that clears up your confusion.

so are you saying that cold photons can make warm photons warmer with heat energy? It seems everyone on here, except SSDD, are avoiding answering the main question, can cold radiated waves make warm radiated waves warmer? I thought, and I'm no expert, but I thought the theory of back radiation would make something warmer? And, I have not seen or read about any experiment that proves back radiation.

jc - you, and many others, simply dont understand that you are framing the question incorrectly. the Sun is warming the surface. back radiation is changing the local conditions so that less energy can leave the surface. the equilibrium temperature of the surface depends on energy in but also energy out. if the atmosphere above the surface increases in temperature then the surface below will also increase in temperature (everything else remaining the same).

does CO2 increase the atmosphere's temp? yes! why do I say that? CO2 absorbs 15 micron IR which is roughly 8% of the surface's emission. that IR is completely absorbed in about 10 meters. if you add more CO2 then the extinction length decreases to less than 10 meters. therefore that 8% of the surface energy has been absorbed by less volume of air. same energy in a smaller volume translates into higher temperature.

there are dozens of angles to look at this problem from. all the ones I see lead to warming from CO2. how much warming? much less than we are being told. that is why a legitimate 120 ppm CO2 increase experiment is nowhere to be found. I should clarify that. CO2 increase from 280- 400 ppm. CO2 increase from 0-120 ppm would be much more significant.

 

[jc456]

I have no interest in your stupidity.

so you can't or won't answer whether cold photons make heat energy?

You should probably stop.

nope, you're wrong. And you fail to answer the question. Does cold make warm warmer.? Still haven't answered, fifteen flippin pages and you beat around the question. Answer it then.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have no interest in your stupidity.

so you can't or won't answer whether cold photons make heat energy?

You should probably stop.

nope, you're wrong. And you fail to answer the question. Does cold make warm warmer.? Still haven't answered, fifteen flippin pages and you beat around the question. Answer it then.

You're even dumber than SSDD.

 

[jc456]

I addressed the original question with the fact that the second law was written before particles were theorized....the second law has not been rewritten or altered for theoretical particles.

I agree with that.

...the second law is about energy movement and it doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen.

That is not true. You have one critical word wrong. This is a rewording, more consistent to what was written long ago.:

"...the second law is about heat movement and it (heat energy) doesn't flow uphill unless you do some work to make it happen."

I hope that clears up your confusion.

so are you saying that cold photons can make warm photons warmer with heat energy? It seems everyone on here, except SSDD, are avoiding answering the main question, can cold radiated waves make warm radiated waves warmer? I thought, and I'm no expert, but I thought the theory of back radiation would make something warmer? And, I have not seen or read about any experiment that proves back radiation.

jc - you, and many others, simply dont understand that you are framing the question incorrectly. the Sun is warming the surface. back radiation is changing the local conditions so that less energy can leave the surface. the equilibrium temperature of the surface depends on energy in but also energy out. if the atmosphere above the surface increases in temperature then the surface below will also increase in temperature (everything else remaining the same).

does CO2 increase the atmosphere's temp? yes! why do I say that? CO2 absorbs 15 micron IR which is roughly 8% of the surface's emission. that IR is completely absorbed in about 10 meters. if you add more CO2 then the extinction length decreases to less than 10 meters. therefore that 8% of the surface energy has been absorbed by less volume of air. same energy in a smaller volume translates into higher temperature.

there are dozens of angles to look at this problem from. all the ones I see lead to warming from CO2. how much warming? much less than we are being told. that is why a legitimate 120 ppm CO2 increase experiment is nowhere to be found. I should clarify that. CO2 increase from 280- 400 ppm. CO2 increase from 0-120 ppm would be much more significant.

aren't I then in the majority of the population? How do you convince someone of something if you can't figure it out? I can read, I can go to internet site after site, and as of yet, this morning april 20, 2015 no one has any evidence of back radiation causing warming. None.

Edit; so you want me to believe that if you have a jar with a temperature at 90 degrees F and add CO2 that the jar will automatically get warmer. Nope i don't believe it. I need proof. Dude, I've stated that over and over again in this forum. Frank has too. Yet, none. Tell me how I'm wrong. Just someone with all this special knowledge produce one simple friggin experiment proving it?

 

[jc456]

I have no interest in your stupidity.

so you can't or won't answer whether cold photons make heat energy?

You should probably stop.

nope, you're wrong. And you fail to answer the question. Does cold make warm warmer.? Still haven't answered, fifteen flippin pages and you beat around the question. Answer it then.

You're even dumber than SSDD.

yes I am, he's way over my head. I'm logical, and you fail logic. And, to the dummy me, you still haven't answered the question. Can we go fifteen more pages or you can simply acknowledge you have no proof?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have no interest in your stupidity.

so you can't or won't answer whether cold photons make heat energy?

You should probably stop.

nope, you're wrong. And you fail to answer the question. Does cold make warm warmer.? Still haven't answered, fifteen flippin pages and you beat around the question. Answer it then.

You're even dumber than SSDD.

yes I am, he's way over my head. I'm logical, and you fail logic. And, to the dummy me, you still haven't answered the question. Can we go fifteen more pages or you can simply acknowledge you have no proof?

Does cold make warm warmer.?

Of course not. Put an ice cube in your warm Coke. See for yourself.

 

[jc456]

so you can't or won't answer whether cold photons make heat energy?

You should probably stop.

nope, you're wrong. And you fail to answer the question. Does cold make warm warmer.? Still haven't answered, fifteen flippin pages and you beat around the question. Answer it then.

You're even dumber than SSDD.

yes I am, he's way over my head. I'm logical, and you fail logic. And, to the dummy me, you still haven't answered the question. Can we go fifteen more pages or you can simply acknowledge you have no proof?

Does cold make warm warmer.?

Of course not. Put an ice cube in your warm Coke. See for yourself.

well son, my argument is that the cooler atmosphere cannot warm the surface. I ask for proof. None is given.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You should probably stop.

nope, you're wrong. And you fail to answer the question. Does cold make warm warmer.? Still haven't answered, fifteen flippin pages and you beat around the question. Answer it then.

You're even dumber than SSDD.

yes I am, he's way over my head. I'm logical, and you fail logic. And, to the dummy me, you still haven't answered the question. Can we go fifteen more pages or you can simply acknowledge you have no proof?

Does cold make warm warmer.?

Of course not. Put an ice cube in your warm Coke. See for yourself.

well son, my argument is that the cooler atmosphere cannot warm the surface. I ask for proof. None is given.

well son, my argument is that the cooler atmosphere cannot warm the surface.

Yes, we're all aware of your low IQ.

I ask for proof. None is given.

Does the 70 degree blanket you cover yourself with at night make you feel warmer? Why?