AGW: atmospheric physics

[gslack]

Yes a ridiculous man-child that would be you we know this..Know what a laser oscillator is? Or what it does? Does make an infinity laser? Or a laser that can be reflected over and over suffering no energy loss?

Why should I care about your crazy claims?

Kook, I know how to handle you, and that frustrates you to no end. It's a given that you'll lie about what everyone else says, and use to the lies to try to drag them down into a pissing match. But I don't have to play that game. I just keep laughing and returning to the point you're running from, to watch you have a meltdown over it.

Your kook theory says that a white room can't possibly be brighter than a dark room with the same light source, because it would be "multiplying energy". That's the point. Can you explain to us how the white room manages to be brighter without having more light flux than the black room?

No junior you can't "handle" me or any body else. What you do is make a claim and then keep talking even though it's proven false. You think its witty or smart or funny, but all it does is make a fool out of you.

Your selective editing won't save you...

 

[RollingThunder]

Yes a ridiculous man-child that would be you we know this..Know what a laser oscillator is? Or what it does? Does make an infinity laser? Or a laser that can be reflected over and over suffering no energy loss?

Why should I care about your crazy claims?

Kook, I know how to handle you, and that frustrates you to no end. It's a given that you'll lie about what everyone else says, and use to the lies to try to drag them down into a pissing match. But I don't have to play that game. I just keep laughing and returning to the point you're running from, to watch you have a meltdown over it.

Your kook theory says that a white room can't possibly be brighter than a dark room with the same light source, because it would be "multiplying energy". That's the point. Can you explain to us how the white room manages to be brighter without having more light flux than the black room?

This thread has gotten pretty hilarious. I think PeanutBrain and the slackjawedidiot wiil next claim that ice is invisible because their eyeballs are warmer than the ice, therefore no radiation can travel from the cold ice to anything warmer without 'violating' the 2nd law of thermodynamics. LOLOLOL. It's like watching some kind of Special mental Olympics for complete retards. They try so hard but they 'run' in circles and trip over their own tongues and in the end, they're still utterly confused and massively retarded.

 

[gslack]

Yes a ridiculous man-child that would be you we know this..Know what a laser oscillator is? Or what it does? Does make an infinity laser? Or a laser that can be reflected over and over suffering no energy loss?

Why should I care about your crazy claims?

Kook, I know how to handle you, and that frustrates you to no end. It's a given that you'll lie about what everyone else says, and use to the lies to try to drag them down into a pissing match. But I don't have to play that game. I just keep laughing and returning to the point you're running from, to watch you have a meltdown over it.

Your kook theory says that a white room can't possibly be brighter than a dark room with the same light source, because it would be "multiplying energy". That's the point. Can you explain to us how the white room manages to be brighter without having more light flux than the black room?

This thread has gotten pretty hilarious. I think PeanutBrain and the slackjawedidiot wiil next claim that ice is invisible because their eyeballs are warmer than the ice, therefore no radiation can travel from the cold ice to anything warmer without 'violating' the 2nd law of thermodynamics. LOLOLOL. It's like watching some kind of Special mental Olympics for complete retards. They try so hard but they 'run' in circles and trip over their own tongues and in the end, they're still utterly confused and massively retarded.

Keep burying it troll... I will re-post as needed..

 

[gslack]

Quote: Originally Posted by mamooth
Quote: Originally Posted by SSDD
The energy flux between the mirrors never even reaches the output of the flashlight..much less become many times greater.
And thus SSDD proves that a laser oscillator can't exist.

Fascinating, how the conspiracy just keeps growing and growing, all because a group of manchildren can't admit to getting anything wrong, ever. Thus, ever deeper into the stupid hole they dig.

Yes a ridiculous man-child that would be you we know this..Know what a laser oscillator is? Or what it does? Does make an infinity laser? Or a laser that can be reflected over and over suffering no energy loss? No..LOL

Read up on things for once will ya? Seriously you have a history of making bold claims based on little to no understanding of it. This should be a lesson to you...

Laser Oscillators

Quote:
Pulsed Laser Oscillator

The Neodynium-YAG laser consists of a rod of the material which can be pumped by a flash lamp at a rate of about 15 Hz. The output is Q-switched and mode-locked with the use of a saturable absorber and an acoustooptical modulator. The output consists of an envelope of pulses which can be tuned for optimization by adjusting the mirrors, adjusting the prisms to change optical pathlength, adjusting the crystal in the acoustooptic modulator, and adjusting the frequency of the modulator.

Q-Switching

Q-switching for a laser refers to techniques for obtaining brief, high-energy pulses rather than continuous wave operation. This helps the operation of a pulsed laser oscillator. The basic idea is that for only a brief time is the beam allowed to pass back and forth between the mirrors to achieve the laser action, but the pumping action is continuous so that a large population inversion is waiting when the lasing condition is satisfied. The Q-switching is typically accomplished with an acoustooptic coupler or an electrooptical device.

MORON!!! Lasers, the type of laser you are referring to is pulsed. Meaning the beam is pulsed at a very fast rate, appearing to be a constant and continuous beam to the naked eye. They are done this way because perfect reflectors do not exist and at every transfer or redirection of a beam there will be some energy loss in that transfer. By pulsing the beam they can get the near same effect visually, meaning you won't see a separation in the beam under normal conditions, despite the fact there is not actually one continuous beam but rather a series of very fast pulses of light, grouped so quickly together you won't see the difference.

Imagine taking your flashlight and turning it on and off at a rate so fast it appears as if its constantly on.. Ever wave a flashlight back forth quickly? Why? Because it made the light look like it was a streak of light, a little kid laser of sorts.

There is a loss at each transfer, but it is continually replenished by another pulse of light, quicker than you can see with the naked eye and given the impression of a solid and continuous beam. IDIOT!

STOP CITING THINGS YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!!!!!!

Quote:mamooth
Anyways, let's get back to common sense. If I hang a light bulb in a room with mirrors on all sides, it's going to get very bright in there, as the light reflects from the mirrors many times. Much brighter than the bulb alone could make. A sane person would not call that "creating energy", and an honest person would not claim it won't get brighter than a bulb alone.

Again??? LOL, dude you are too stupid for words... Best shut up and wait for Ian to save you. Frankly I think he has learned the depths of your ignorance and has forsaken you.. What you are doing is changing your claim again.. Grow up admiral...

Quote: Originally Posted by gslack
Energy flux is a rate of energy transfer, either by density as in per unit area, or used for a total rate.. Thats energy transfer dipshit.. Get it yet? Hence energy is being transferred, and unless you have a perfect mirror you have been hiding from the rest of the scientific community, there is a loss in that transfer.

Quote:mamooth
Well sure, there's a "loss", because the total heat flow is from hot to cool, as the second law demands. But, contrary to your retard version of the second law -- the one that contradicts the last century of science -- there's no problem with some heat flowing back to hot, just as long as more heat flows out to cold.

DUDE STOP CHANGING YOUR ARGUMENT WE SAW WHAT YOU SAID BEFORE.. Everyone saw it, pretending it's something else now is too late..

Quote:mamooth
You can't get 117% work out of the that system, beyond a short term where you use up the stored energy. Hence, like the light bouncing between mirrors, it's not creating energy, it's just storing previously generated energy. If you think it's creating energy, then simply show us your system that would harvest that 117% energy beyond the short-term. If you can't, have the decency to slither away in disgrace. Or admit you're wrong, but since you toddlers can't admit an error, ever, slinking away seems your best option.

Blah, blah, blah... All I see is you trying to BS your way out of your previous claim...You can't moron,you already proved your an imbecile... NEXT!

Now care to explain why you ignored the post? LOL we know junior we know...

Re-posted because the trolls keep trying to cover it up... I will do so repeatedly until the dishonest mamooth responds to it, or goes away.

All trolling tactics to bury this will make me repost it again and again...

 

[RollingThunder]

Why should I care about your crazy claims?

Kook, I know how to handle you, and that frustrates you to no end. It's a given that you'll lie about what everyone else says, and use to the lies to try to drag them down into a pissing match. But I don't have to play that game. I just keep laughing and returning to the point you're running from, to watch you have a meltdown over it.

Your kook theory says that a white room can't possibly be brighter than a dark room with the same light source, because it would be "multiplying energy". That's the point. Can you explain to us how the white room manages to be brighter without having more light flux than the black room?

This thread has gotten pretty hilarious. I think PeanutBrain and the slackjawedidiot wiil next claim that ice is invisible because their eyeballs are warmer than the ice, therefore no radiation can travel from the cold ice to anything warmer without 'violating' the 2nd law of thermodynamics. LOLOLOL. It's like watching some kind of Special mental Olympics for complete retards. They try so hard but they 'run' in circles and trip over their own tongues and in the end, they're still utterly confused and massively retarded.

Keep burying it troll... I will re-post as needed..

LOLOLOLOLOLOL......oh, slackjawed, all you ever post or repost is just more evidence of your own insanity and retarded ignorance.

 

[gslack]

This thread has gotten pretty hilarious. I think PeanutBrain and the slackjawedidiot wiil next claim that ice is invisible because their eyeballs are warmer than the ice, therefore no radiation can travel from the cold ice to anything warmer without 'violating' the 2nd law of thermodynamics. LOLOLOL. It's like watching some kind of Special mental Olympics for complete retards. They try so hard but they 'run' in circles and trip over their own tongues and in the end, they're still utterly confused and massively retarded.

Keep burying it troll... I will re-post as needed..

LOLOLOLOLOLOL......oh, slackjawed, all you ever post or repost is just more evidence of your own insanity and retarded ignorance.

Yes and your attempt to bury juniors screw up is painfully obvious... Keep going, and I will keep re-posting.

 

[RollingThunder]

Keep burying it troll... I will re-post as needed..

LOLOLOLOLOLOL......oh, slackjawed, all you ever post or repost is just more evidence of your own insanity and retarded ignorance.

Yes and your attempt to bury juniors screw up is painfully obvious... Keep going, and I will keep re-posting.

I have no idea what you're raving about, slackjawed. Your drivel is exceptionally incoherent and pointless today.

But, please, tell us, do you think ice is invisible? If you can see it, does that violate the 2nd law?

 

[ScienceRocks]

What degree in science do you have? I mean serious back ground within physics and the atmosphere....

Unless you're sitting next to James Hansen no one will listen to you.

 

[gslack]

What degree in science do you have? I mean serious back ground within physics and the atmosphere....

Unless you're sitting next to James Hansen no one will listen to you.

What degrees do you have ins science or climate science? None? Didn't think so..

My credentials to debate this obviously surpass those of you and the troll brigade, and most certainly surpass mamooth the admiral.

Trying the "you don't have the credentials to debate this" excuse is weak. Your pals get caught being ignorant about what they're debating, and they first resort to attacking, neg-repping, and incessant crying, and when that fails you pull this nonsense? ROFL..

Frankly my credentials have been more than adequate to show through your fake admiral, your fake physicist, and your pseudo-science. I'm a Data Analyst, I get paid to spot BS in complex and often differing information and sources. That's all you need to know about me.

What about you? Besides trolling forums under many names what are your credentials?

 

[gslack]

Quote: Originally Posted by mamooth
Quote: Originally Posted by SSDD
The energy flux between the mirrors never even reaches the output of the flashlight..much less become many times greater.
And thus SSDD proves that a laser oscillator can't exist.

Fascinating, how the conspiracy just keeps growing and growing, all because a group of manchildren can't admit to getting anything wrong, ever. Thus, ever deeper into the stupid hole they dig.

Yes a ridiculous man-child that would be you we know this..Know what a laser oscillator is? Or what it does? Does make an infinity laser? Or a laser that can be reflected over and over suffering no energy loss? No..LOL

Read up on things for once will ya? Seriously you have a history of making bold claims based on little to no understanding of it. This should be a lesson to you...

Laser Oscillators

Quote:
Pulsed Laser Oscillator

The Neodynium-YAG laser consists of a rod of the material which can be pumped by a flash lamp at a rate of about 15 Hz. The output is Q-switched and mode-locked with the use of a saturable absorber and an acoustooptical modulator. The output consists of an envelope of pulses which can be tuned for optimization by adjusting the mirrors, adjusting the prisms to change optical pathlength, adjusting the crystal in the acoustooptic modulator, and adjusting the frequency of the modulator.

Q-Switching

Q-switching for a laser refers to techniques for obtaining brief, high-energy pulses rather than continuous wave operation. This helps the operation of a pulsed laser oscillator. The basic idea is that for only a brief time is the beam allowed to pass back and forth between the mirrors to achieve the laser action, but the pumping action is continuous so that a large population inversion is waiting when the lasing condition is satisfied. The Q-switching is typically accomplished with an acoustooptic coupler or an electrooptical device.

MORON!!! Lasers, the type of laser you are referring to is pulsed. Meaning the beam is pulsed at a very fast rate, appearing to be a constant and continuous beam to the naked eye. They are done this way because perfect reflectors do not exist and at every transfer or redirection of a beam there will be some energy loss in that transfer. By pulsing the beam they can get the near same effect visually, meaning you won't see a separation in the beam under normal conditions, despite the fact there is not actually one continuous beam but rather a series of very fast pulses of light, grouped so quickly together you won't see the difference.

Imagine taking your flashlight and turning it on and off at a rate so fast it appears as if its constantly on.. Ever wave a flashlight back forth quickly? Why? Because it made the light look like it was a streak of light, a little kid laser of sorts.

There is a loss at each transfer, but it is continually replenished by another pulse of light, quicker than you can see with the naked eye and given the impression of a solid and continuous beam. IDIOT!

STOP CITING THINGS YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!!!!!!

Quote:mamooth
Anyways, let's get back to common sense. If I hang a light bulb in a room with mirrors on all sides, it's going to get very bright in there, as the light reflects from the mirrors many times. Much brighter than the bulb alone could make. A sane person would not call that "creating energy", and an honest person would not claim it won't get brighter than a bulb alone.

Again??? LOL, dude you are too stupid for words... Best shut up and wait for Ian to save you. Frankly I think he has learned the depths of your ignorance and has forsaken you.. What you are doing is changing your claim again.. Grow up admiral...

Quote: Originally Posted by gslack
Energy flux is a rate of energy transfer, either by density as in per unit area, or used for a total rate.. Thats energy transfer dipshit.. Get it yet? Hence energy is being transferred, and unless you have a perfect mirror you have been hiding from the rest of the scientific community, there is a loss in that transfer.

Quote:mamooth
Well sure, there's a "loss", because the total heat flow is from hot to cool, as the second law demands. But, contrary to your retard version of the second law -- the one that contradicts the last century of science -- there's no problem with some heat flowing back to hot, just as long as more heat flows out to cold.

DUDE STOP CHANGING YOUR ARGUMENT WE SAW WHAT YOU SAID BEFORE.. Everyone saw it, pretending it's something else now is too late..

Quote:mamooth
You can't get 117% work out of the that system, beyond a short term where you use up the stored energy. Hence, like the light bouncing between mirrors, it's not creating energy, it's just storing previously generated energy. If you think it's creating energy, then simply show us your system that would harvest that 117% energy beyond the short-term. If you can't, have the decency to slither away in disgrace. Or admit you're wrong, but since you toddlers can't admit an error, ever, slinking away seems your best option.

Blah, blah, blah... All I see is you trying to BS your way out of your previous claim...You can't moron,you already proved your an imbecile... NEXT!

Now care to explain why you ignored the post? LOL we know junior we know...

One more time because the troll army keeps trying to bury it..

 

[polarbear]

Quote: Originally Posted by mamooth
Quote: Originally Posted by SSDD
The energy flux between the mirrors never even reaches the output of the flashlight..much less become many times greater.
And thus SSDD proves that a laser oscillator can't exist.

Fascinating, how the conspiracy just keeps growing and growing, all because a group of manchildren can't admit to getting anything wrong, ever. Thus, ever deeper into the stupid hole they dig.

Yes a ridiculous man-child that would be you we know this..Know what a laser oscillator is? Or what it does? Does make an infinity laser? Or a laser that can be reflected over and over suffering no energy loss? No..LOL

Read up on things for once will ya? Seriously you have a history of making bold claims based on little to no understanding of it. This should be a lesson to you...

Laser Oscillators

Quote:
Pulsed Laser Oscillator

The Neodynium-YAG laser consists of a rod of the material which can be pumped by a flash lamp at a rate of about 15 Hz. The output is Q-switched and mode-locked with the use of a saturable absorber and an acoustooptical modulator. The output consists of an envelope of pulses which can be tuned for optimization by adjusting the mirrors, adjusting the prisms to change optical pathlength, adjusting the crystal in the acoustooptic modulator, and adjusting the frequency of the modulator.

Q-Switching

Q-switching for a laser refers to techniques for obtaining brief, high-energy pulses rather than continuous wave operation. This helps the operation of a pulsed laser oscillator. The basic idea is that for only a brief time is the beam allowed to pass back and forth between the mirrors to achieve the laser action, but the pumping action is continuous so that a large population inversion is waiting when the lasing condition is satisfied. The Q-switching is typically accomplished with an acoustooptic coupler or an electrooptical device.

MORON!!! Lasers, the type of laser you are referring to is pulsed. Meaning the beam is pulsed at a very fast rate, appearing to be a constant and continuous beam to the naked eye. They are done this way because perfect reflectors do not exist and at every transfer or redirection of a beam there will be some energy loss in that transfer. By pulsing the beam they can get the near same effect visually, meaning you won't see a separation in the beam under normal conditions, despite the fact there is not actually one continuous beam but rather a series of very fast pulses of light, grouped so quickly together you won't see the difference.

Imagine taking your flashlight and turning it on and off at a rate so fast it appears as if its constantly on.. Ever wave a flashlight back forth quickly? Why? Because it made the light look like it was a streak of light, a little kid laser of sorts.

There is a loss at each transfer, but it is continually replenished by another pulse of light, quicker than you can see with the naked eye and given the impression of a solid and continuous beam. IDIOT!

STOP CITING THINGS YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!!!!!!



Again??? LOL, dude you are too stupid for words... Best shut up and wait for Ian to save you. Frankly I think he has learned the depths of your ignorance and has forsaken you.. What you are doing is changing your claim again.. Grow up admiral...

Quote:mamooth
Well sure, there's a "loss", because the total heat flow is from hot to cool, as the second law demands. But, contrary to your retard version of the second law -- the one that contradicts the last century of science -- there's no problem with some heat flowing back to hot, just as long as more heat flows out to cold.

DUDE STOP CHANGING YOUR ARGUMENT WE SAW WHAT YOU SAID BEFORE.. Everyone saw it, pretending it's something else now is too late..

Quote:mamooth
You can't get 117% work out of the that system, beyond a short term where you use up the stored energy. Hence, like the light bouncing between mirrors, it's not creating energy, it's just storing previously generated energy. If you think it's creating energy, then simply show us your system that would harvest that 117% energy beyond the short-term. If you can't, have the decency to slither away in disgrace. Or admit you're wrong, but since you toddlers can't admit an error, ever, slinking away seems your best option.

Blah, blah, blah... All I see is you trying to BS your way out of your previous claim...You can't moron,you already proved your an imbecile... NEXT!

Now care to explain why you ignored the post? LOL we know junior we know...

One more time because the troll army keeps trying to bury it..

That`s what we call a "Rohrkrepierer"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/279415-agw-atmospheric-physics-99.html#post7208795

I'll keep mocking you for it, you'll cry about how mean I am, and I'll laugh hard. Isn't life grand?

Don`t forget to re-post this :
http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/279415-agw-atmospheric-physics-81.html#post7128364

Any other 'tards here want to back up PolarBear's nutty claim about how a dark object radiates more at the same temperature?

If only the world knew that they could make heat sinks more effective by painting them flat black. Once more, PolarBear has made an amazing new discovery in physics that the rest of humanity had somehow missed.

Why are car radiators painted black

Why are car radiators painted black?

Car radiators are painted black because it emits the most heat through radiation (highest emissivity). This improves the heat transfer out of the radiator when air isn't moving through the radiator.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/279415-agw-atmospheric-physics-98.html#post7206966

I stand in front of mirror, holding a flashlight and another mirror at my chest. I shine a flashlight into the mirror. Photons start bouncing back and forth between the two mirrors. After multiple bounces between the two mirrors, the "energy flux" between the two mirrors becomes many times greater than that of the flashlight beam alone.

But if you do then the freaks reply:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/279415-agw-atmospheric-physics-88.html#post7138024

Quote: Originally Posted by polarbear
Figure that one out.
If the "Nuclear Admiral" switches the


Reported for spamming. Enough is enough

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/279415-agw-atmospheric-physics-88.html#post7140363

I actually suggested yesterday
Reporting is probably the best option - along with neg repping.

Isn't life grand?
Yes it is and a lot of fun to boot. The last time I laughed as much was when my neighbor tied a burlap sack to his rim and one of these annoying yapping dogs caught up to his pick up and bit that sack.

More than makes up for this:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65GOvvxndZs&feature=youtu.be"]Manitoba Maydays - YouTube[/ame]
"Spring" in the rest of Canada ain`t much better:
https://twitter.com/Cmdr_Hadfield/status/325378775980326913

Tonight's Finale: Newfoundland glowing on a lovely Spring evening.

We sure could use some of that "back radiation" between that white stuff on the ground and these white clouds.
Or the "Nuclear Admiral`s hall of mirrors" that multiplies energy flux by at least 5 times:

That visible light is going to hit the walls, and 80% will bounce off. And that reflected light will hit the walls again, and 64% will bounce. And so on. By the infinite summation formula, we can calculate the final light flux at 1/(1-.8) = 5 times the luminous flux

I wonder if that gem came from "skeptical science" or straight out of the shit for brains kitty litter box

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_intensity

Luminous intensity should not be confused with another photometric unit, luminous flux, which is the total perceived power emitted in all directions. Luminous intensity is the perceived power per unit solid angle. Luminous intensity is also not the same as the radiant intensity, the corresponding objective physical quantity used in the measurement science of radiometry.
In photometry, luminous flux or luminous power is the measure of the perceived power of light. It differs from radiant flux, the measure of the total power of light emitted, in that luminous flux is adjusted to reflect the varying sensitivity of the human eye to different wavelengths of light.

So if she uses white cream:

According to the mamooth photon multiplier using the infinite summation formula this could happen

Unbelievable how stupid some people can be...that`s now 3 times that this moron has been told that:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminance

Luminance is a photometric measure of the luminous intensity per unit area of light travelling in a given direction. It describes the amount of light that passes through or is emitted from a particular area, and falls within a given solid angle. The SI unit for luminance is candela per square metre (cd/m2).
The candela is the luminous intensity, in a given direction, of a source that emits monochromatic radiation of frequency 540×1012 hertz and that has a radiant intensity in that direction of 1⁄683 watt per steradian.

Luminous intensity should not be confused with another photometric unit, luminous flux, which is the total perceived power emitted in all directions. Luminous intensity is the perceived power per unit solid angle. Luminous intensity is also not the same as the radiant intensity, the corresponding objective physical quantity used in the measurement science of radiometry.

 

[polarbear]

That visible light is going to hit the walls, and 80% will bounce off. And that reflected light will hit the walls again, and 64% will bounce. And so on. By the infinite summation formula, we can calculate the final light flux at 1/(1-.8) = 5 times the luminous flux

Unbelievable how stupid some people can be...that`s now 3 times that this moron has been told that:

Luminance is a photometric measure of the luminous intensity per unit area of light travelling in a given direction. It describes the amount of light that passes through or is emitted from a particular area, and falls within a given solid angle. The SI unit for luminance is candela per square metre (cd/m2).
The candela is the luminous intensity, in a given direction, of a source that emits monochromatic radiation of frequency 540×1012 hertz and that has a radiant intensity in that direction of 1⁄683 watt per steradian.

Luminous intensity should not be confused with another photometric unit, luminous flux, which is the total perceived power emitted in all directions. Luminous intensity is the perceived power per unit solid angle. Luminous intensity is also not the same as the radiant intensity, the corresponding objective physical quantity used in the measurement science of radiometry

According to

It makes no difference...:

Using a 100 watt light bulb in a room designed by "mamooth" can be pumped up in 1 second with 500 watt seconds instead of 100 watt seconds....and that`s whats happening just between 2 walls.
On all 3 axis according to "mamooth" it would be 1500 watts after just one second....and the other 20 % of the light that does not get reflected by the white walls should be in there as heat....as another 500 watt seconds worth of heat, after just one second = 2000 watt seconds ...and all that with a 100 watt light bulb.
"By the infinite summation formula, calculating the final light flux at 1/(1-.8)" any occupant would be incinerated in less than 5 minutes

Makes you wonder how a conventional power plant can make any money.
And all the while this shit for brains claims

Me?...I used to run nuclear reactors

Meooow

 

[mamooth]

Gslack, spamming is against board rules. Cut it out.

Plus, there's the matter that no one can figure out what you're babbling about. Only your fellow psychostalker PolarBear wants anything to do with you. The saner denialists don't want to be associated with your stalking, that's how bad you've gotten.

Anyways, if you can locate your balls, try addressing the way I ripped about your retarded "117% flux means multiplying energy!" stupidity with my simple white room example. I correctly take the fact you won't even try as your admission of surrender on that point.

 

[mamooth]

Unbelievable how stupid some people can be ...

Indeed. polarbear is a retard on this topic. Nothing unusual, as he's equally stupid in all science he tries to talk about, hence why most of his posts now consist of crazy stalking. In this case, he just can't seem to grasp how it makes no difference to the example whether you use luminous intensity or radiant intensity. No matter how much I try to dumb it down for him, it's just nearly impossible to dumb something down enough for polarbear to understand it.

Using a 100 watt light bulb in a room designed by "mamooth" can be pumped up in 1 second with 500 watt seconds instead of 100 watt seconds....and that`s whats happening just between 2 walls.

No, six walls, dumbass. You truly suck at problem setup, as I keep mentioning. The light scatters in all directions, but since it always hits another wall, direction doesn't really matter. Much. Sure, a little less bright in the corners, but we can say the room is spherical to fix that issue. Not really relevant to the point, which is that higher local energy density only means you're storing energy, not multiplying it.

Anyways, as any non-retard can understand, 500 watts would be flying through the air, if you had a 100 watt bulb in a white room with a .8 across-the-whole-spectrum albedo. However, since albedo is .8, only 20% of that would be getting absorbed. That is, 100 watts. Exactly what the bulb puts out. Equilibrium. How about that. 500% flux locally, but the same net energy output.

It's the same situation with the earth and the 117% backradiation. Extra stored energy inside the system is irrelevant. In the equilibrium state, the energy radiated to space is still the same as energy incoming to the earth, no matter what's happening inside the system.

This is sophomore level physics, but poor polarbear can't grasp it. He might be able to struggle through freshman physics with a "C", but he'd fail hard in electromagnetism class of the sophomore year.

 

[gslack]

Gslack, spamming is against board rules. Cut it out.

Plus, there's the matter that no one can figure out what you're babbling about. Only your fellow psychostalker PolarBear wants anything to do with you. The saner denialists don't want to be associated with your stalking, that's how bad you've gotten.

Anyways, if you can locate your balls, try addressing the way I ripped about your retarded "117% flux means multiplying energy!" stupidity with my simple white room example. I correctly take the fact you won't even try as your admission of surrender on that point.

Don't talk to me about board rules weasel, you are dodging the post again... I will re-post as I feel schmuck, and you can go cry to a mod again.

You have been caught ONCE AGAIN, talking about things you do not understand, and making bold claims you don't have the knowledge on..

If you could have made an excuse for it you would have by now,you don't and can't so now you resort to appeals to authority and crying about the rules.

You're done admiral.. You're a proven fraud, a fake, and a liar, and completely dishonest, and now we can add incessant, whiny little punk to that.. Good day admiral, your credibility is zero..

 

[polarbear]

Gslack, spamming is against board rules. Cut it out.

Plus, there's the matter that no one can figure out what you're babbling about. Only your fellow psychostalker PolarBear wants anything to do with you. The saner denialists don't want to be associated with your stalking, that's how bad you've gotten.

Anyways, if you can locate your balls, try addressing the way I ripped about your retarded "117% flux means multiplying energy!" stupidity with my simple white room example. I correctly take the fact you won't even try as your admission of surrender on that point.

Don't talk to me about board rules weasel, you are dodging the post again... I will re-post as I feel schmuck, and you can go cry to a mod again.

You have been caught ONCE AGAIN, talking about things you do not understand, and making bold claims you don't have the knowledge on..

If you could have made an excuse for it you would have by now,you don't and can't so now you resort to appeals to authority and crying about the rules.

You're done admiral.. You're a proven fraud, a fake, and a liar, and completely dishonest, and now we can add incessant, whiny little punk to that.. Good day admiral, your credibility is zero..

Talk about babbling...
this moron paints his room white so it`s a "photon capacitor" which tanks up with 5 times more photons than what`s coming at any time from the light bulb in his room....and starts squealing if you quote his crap in another thread where he`s grandstanding "Me, I used to run nuclear reactors".

 

[mamooth]

You have been caught ONCE AGAIN, talking about things you do not understand, and making bold claims you don't have the knowledge on..

You'd look less crazy if your magnum opus post that supposedly skewered me didn't closely resemble the Unibomber Manifesto.

I don't have to respond line-by-line to any Unibomber Manifesto to refute it. I just need to point out that it's crank nonsense created by a craven retard, and laugh my ass off at it. Oh, I'm sure you think it's a truly impressive piece of work, but so did the Unibomber.

If you could have made an excuse for it you would have by now, you don't and can't so now you resort to appeals to authority and crying about the rules.

I just politely asked you to behave like a grownup for once. Clearly, that was too much to expect of you.

You're done admiral.. You're a proven fraud, a fake, and a liar, and completely dishonest, and now we can add incessant, whiny little punk to that.. Good day admiral, your credibility is zero..

You realize you're comic relief now, right? I just sit here pulling your strings, and watching how my happy little puppet dances.

And again, when you locate your balls, you can start talking about the science. I'll keep trying to bring you back to the point that you're running from. Which is that your "117% flux means multiplying energy!" claim is really stupid, as my simple example showed. Even you know that by now, as your refusal to discuss the issue indicates.

 

[mamooth]

this moron paints his room white so it`s a "photon capacitor" which tanks up with 5 times more photons than what`s coming at any time from the light bulb in his room...

Yep. If you're not a retard, you understand why that's the case. Being that I dumbed it down to a sixth grade level should have helped, but that wasn't simple enough to help polarbear.

In polarbear's fantasy physics kingdom, the bulb in the white room puts out 100 watts. The energy hits the wall, 20 watts is absorbed, and the other 80 watts ... just magically vanishes. A wild violation of conservation of energy, but this is polarbear, who has unilaterally declared much of the physics of the past century to be a liberal plot. Our new Einstein, polarbear, has created a new politically correct physics where conservation of energy only has to hold when it's convenient for his political beliefs.

 

[IanC]

mamooth- gslack is on the wrong side of the bell curve so it is of little use trying to communicate with him. polarbear is different though. his whole schtick here is to make debating points or something. he purposely misunderstands the idea that you are trying to put forward, then replies with some non sequitor with a lot of numbers and equations. or sometimes he just picks a poorly chosen phrase and ridicules it, endlessly.

anyone with half a brain knows that a mirrored, or even just white, room is brighter than a dark room. anyone with half a brain knows that a 1000w gold smelter uses heat sinks to produce a high temperature but a 1000w room heater doesnt melt the room.

anybody with half a brain knows that the earth's surface is a heat sink that is a higher temp because the atmosphere interferes with energy loss, allowing the Sun's energy to warm the surface until it is radiating and conducting energy at a high enough rate to force energy through the atmosphere so that it matches the incoming energy. just because the heat sink changes temperature that does not mean that the input or output has changed.

 

[gslack]

You have been caught ONCE AGAIN, talking about things you do not understand, and making bold claims you don't have the knowledge on..

You'd look less crazy if your magnum opus post that supposedly skewered me didn't closely resemble the Unibomber Manifesto.

I don't have to respond line-by-line to any Unibomber Manifesto to refute it. I just need to point out that it's crank nonsense created by a craven retard, and laugh my ass off at it. Oh, I'm sure you think it's a truly impressive piece of work, but so did the Unibomber.

If you could have made an excuse for it you would have by now, you don't and can't so now you resort to appeals to authority and crying about the rules.

I just politely asked you to behave like a grownup for once. Clearly, that was too much to expect of you.

You're done admiral.. You're a proven fraud, a fake, and a liar, and completely dishonest, and now we can add incessant, whiny little punk to that.. Good day admiral, your credibility is zero..

You realize you're comic relief now, right? I just sit here pulling your strings, and watching how my happy little puppet dances.

And again, when you locate your balls, you can start talking about the science. I'll keep trying to bring you back to the point that you're running from. Which is that your "117% flux means multiplying energy!" claim is really stupid, as my simple example showed. Even you know that by now, as your refusal to discuss the issue indicates.

So we can just call you coward and liar and be done then? Good... Once again when faced with your BS you cower and run.. Grow up junior, you have gone beyond being a simple lying idiot to a full fledged cowardly scumbag..