Climate change: 2015 will be the hottest year on record 'by a mile', experts say

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, they detected the signal. By receiving the signal.
From a much colder source, thru our much warmer atmosphere.

They detected a microwave signal that corresponded to a thermal signal....not CMB itself...sorry if this is to difficult for you to understand.

You still haven't provided a source that explains the detection of this non-radiation frequency that they received without receiving.

Sorry you are unable to differentiate between a resonance signal and an actual signal....not my job to fix that sort of ignorance...there are plenty of sources out there where you can remedy your ignorance if you are so motivated.

They detected a microwave signal that corresponded to a thermal signal....not CMB itself

You'll have to explain how this works. Maybe provide a link?

Sorry you are unable to differentiate between a resonance signal and an actual signal

Sorry you are unable to explain it.

there are plenty of sources out there where you can remedy your ignorance

I've been unable to find a source that agrees with your claim, where is one of yours?

 

[Wuwei]

And if you bothered to read about the instruments you listed, you would also see that they are all cooled to just above absolute zero....

You didn't answer the question:
The bolometer was used in the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

That shows that very cold radiation can strike warmer objects without disobeying the second law. Do you disagree?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So all the IR emitted by the Earth's surface heads only in one direction, out to space, UNLESS we point a cooler detector toward the sky which causes these strictly out bound IR waves to suddenly reverse direction and travel toward the receiver?

Do ir thermometers state which direction the IR is moving?.....Are you under the impression that IR thermometers can't detect outbound radiation?

Do ir thermometers state which direction the IR is moving?.....

Well, an IR thermometer on the ground won't measure IR that is traveling toward space which does not impact the thermometer.

Are you under the impression that IR thermometers can't detect outbound radiation?

I'd love for you to show how they do.

 

[SSDD]

Well, an IR thermometer on the ground won't measure IR that is traveling toward space which does not impact the thermometer.

You clearly don't know how an IR thermometer works...ever look at one? Ever hold one in your hand? They typically look like this although there are variations.

See the big opening in the front?...It has a lens in there that focuses the target onto a thermopile inside....depending on what that lens is focused on, that thermopile is either gaining energy or losing it. If it is focused on a warmer object..will be gaining energy and the rate at which it is warming, via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the target....if the object is cooler, the thermopile will be losing energy and the rate at which it is cooling via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the object....the thermopile doesn't care whether energy is coming towards it or leaving...it is either warming or cooling based on what the lens is focused on....

I'd love for you to show how they do.

Just did....do I expect you to understand?....no....Do I expect more 5 year old level comments....yes....should you expect answers...no

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, an IR thermometer on the ground won't measure IR that is traveling toward space which does not impact the thermometer.

You clearly don't know how an IR thermometer works...ever look at one? Ever hold one in your hand? They typically look like this although there are variations.

See the big opening in the front?...It has a lens in there that focuses the target onto a thermopile inside....depending on what that lens is focused on, that thermopile is either gaining energy or losing it. If it is focused on a warmer object..will be gaining energy and the rate at which it is warming, via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the target....if the object is cooler, the thermopile will be losing energy and the rate at which it is cooling via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the object....the thermopile doesn't care whether energy is coming towards it or leaving...it is either warming or cooling based on what the lens is focused on....

I'd love for you to show how they do.

Just did....do I expect you to understand?....no....Do I expect more 5 year old level comments....yes....should you expect answers...no

See the big opening in the front?...It has a lens in there that focuses the target onto a thermopile inside....depending on what that lens is focused on, that thermopile is either gaining energy or losing it. If it is focused on a warmer object..will be gaining energy and the rate at which it is warming, via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the target...

When you point it at the sky, does it somehow measure the IR emitted by the ground?

 

[SSDD]

Well, an IR thermometer on the ground won't measure IR that is traveling toward space which does not impact the thermometer.

You clearly don't know how an IR thermometer works...ever look at one? Ever hold one in your hand? They typically look like this although there are variations.

See the big opening in the front?...It has a lens in there that focuses the target onto a thermopile inside....depending on what that lens is focused on, that thermopile is either gaining energy or losing it. If it is focused on a warmer object..will be gaining energy and the rate at which it is warming, via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the target....if the object is cooler, the thermopile will be losing energy and the rate at which it is cooling via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the object....the thermopile doesn't care whether energy is coming towards it or leaving...it is either warming or cooling based on what the lens is focused on....

I'd love for you to show how they do.

Just did....do I expect you to understand?....no....Do I expect more 5 year old level comments....yes....should you expect answers...no

See the big opening in the front?...It has a lens in there that focuses the target onto a thermopile inside....depending on what that lens is focused on, that thermopile is either gaining energy or losing it. If it is focused on a warmer object..will be gaining energy and the rate at which it is warming, via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the target...

When you point it at the sky, does it somehow measure the IR emitted by the ground?

Now that you know how one works...if you were able to apply just a bit of logic...that logic would tell you that when you point it at the sky during the day, you will be measuring the temperature of packets of warm air moving towards higher altitudes....point it at a cloud...you get the approximate temperature of the water in the cloud....point it towards the sky on a clear night...depending on the quality of the instrument, you may get the temperature of the upper troposphere....what you won't measure with it is back radiation because back radiation does not exist.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, an IR thermometer on the ground won't measure IR that is traveling toward space which does not impact the thermometer.

You clearly don't know how an IR thermometer works...ever look at one? Ever hold one in your hand? They typically look like this although there are variations.

See the big opening in the front?...It has a lens in there that focuses the target onto a thermopile inside....depending on what that lens is focused on, that thermopile is either gaining energy or losing it. If it is focused on a warmer object..will be gaining energy and the rate at which it is warming, via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the target....if the object is cooler, the thermopile will be losing energy and the rate at which it is cooling via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the object....the thermopile doesn't care whether energy is coming towards it or leaving...it is either warming or cooling based on what the lens is focused on....

I'd love for you to show how they do.

Just did....do I expect you to understand?....no....Do I expect more 5 year old level comments....yes....should you expect answers...no

See the big opening in the front?...It has a lens in there that focuses the target onto a thermopile inside....depending on what that lens is focused on, that thermopile is either gaining energy or losing it. If it is focused on a warmer object..will be gaining energy and the rate at which it is warming, via mathematical formula tells us the temperature of the target...

When you point it at the sky, does it somehow measure the IR emitted by the ground?

Now that you know how one works...if you were able to apply just a bit of logic...that logic would tell you that when you point it at the sky during the day, you will be measuring the temperature of packets of warm air moving towards higher altitudes....point it at a cloud...you get the approximate temperature of the water in the cloud....point it towards the sky on a clear night...depending on the quality of the instrument, you may get the temperature of the upper troposphere....what you won't measure with it is back radiation because back radiation does not exist.

Now that you know how one works...if you were able to apply just a bit of logic...that logic would tell you that when you point it at the sky during the day, you will be measuring the temperature of packets of warm air moving towards higher altitudes....point it at a cloud...you get the approximate temperature of the water in the cloud....point it towards the sky on a clear night.

So it isn't measuring outbound radiation. Makes your earlier statement sound stupid.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, they detected the signal. By receiving the signal.
From a much colder source, thru our much warmer atmosphere.

They detected a microwave signal that corresponded to a thermal signal....not CMB itself...sorry if this is to difficult for you to understand.

You still haven't provided a source that explains the detection of this non-radiation frequency that they received without receiving.

Sorry you are unable to differentiate between a resonance signal and an actual signal....not my job to fix that sort of ignorance...there are plenty of sources out there where you can remedy your ignorance if you are so motivated.

Sorry you are unable to differentiate between a resonance signal and an actual signal....

So the actual signal that's been traveling for billions of years, gets to the top of our atmosphere, realizes the Earth is warmer than 2.7K and somehow creates a resonance signal?

Wow! Any backup for this silly claim?

 

[SSDD]

So it isn't measuring outbound radiation. Makes your earlier statement sound stupid.

Not nearly as stupid as you first, not having a clue as to how IR thermometers work but still claiming that they only measure radiation that impacts them...as if they did something other than simply measure the rate, and direction of change within their internal thermopile. Such is the nature of the bulk of your conversation...so congratulations toddster....I have never put anyone on ignore before....not rocks...not dean...abraham or is crick reincarnation.....not the hairball....not even rolling thunder....but you have become so tedious and uninteresting that I have come to the conclusion that life is to short to squander it talking to the likes of you.

I will look at your posts occasionally and take you off ignore when you grow up a bit and find yourself able to engage a conversation with more than a sentence or two and make those sentences more interesting than that of a 5 year old constantly asking why.....and learn to use the quote function the board itself so graciously provides.

 

[SSDD]

And if you bothered to read about the instruments you listed, you would also see that they are all cooled to just above absolute zero....

You didn't answer the question:
The bolometer was used in the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

That shows that very cold radiation can strike warmer objects without disobeying the second law. Do you disagree?

You are something.....dumb as a post, but something. Even when it is suggested to you that perhaps you should read up a bit on the topic (in this case bolometers) you ignore the advice and just keep on talking....Even when it is pointed out to you that by definition, a bolometer does not detect microwave radiation...you just keep on talking.

Here....have a few facts.

Regarding the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope....As I pointed out it is the largest astronomical telescope that operates in submillimetre wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. There is a vital clue there that you should have picked up on if you were half as smart as you seem to think you are...and when I say vital...I mean, if you don't, it is obvious to everyone who knows..that you don't....we will get back to that...building suspense you understand (or maybe not)

The older continuum single pixel UKT14 bolometer receiver was replaced in the 1990s by the Submillimetre Common-User Bolometer Array (SCUBA). This instrument operated simultaneously at wavelengths of 450 and 850 micron (with 91 and 37 pixels, respectively), and was sensitive to the thermal emission from interstellar dust. It was retired from service in 2005.

Again...vital clue.

Then the SCUBA was succeeded by SCUBA-2, which was commissioned in 2011. This ground-breaking camera consists of large arrays of superconducting transition edge sensors with a mapping speed hundreds of times larger than SCUBA. It has 5120 array elements at both 450 and 850 micron wavelength (10,240 total pixels). It has been conducting the JCMT legacy surveys since November, 2011, including the SCUBA-2 All Sky Survey, and was made available for general astronomical observations in February, 2012.[3] Two ancillary instruments, FTS-2 and POL-2, add spectroscopic and polarimetric capabilities to SCUBA-2.

And yet again...vital clue.

Now, had you bothered to actually read about bolometers...specifically the super high tech variety such as SCUBA and SCUBA`2 which you referenced, you might have noticed that the term microwave was conspicuously absent from the write up while great verbiage was used to describe what it actually detects. I did find a mention of microwave after I visited several different locations describing this telescope. The SCUBA-2 bolometer, because of its extreme sensitivity to INFRARED radiation, is being used on the subtraction of the foreground and calibration of the Planck microwave background satellite...an instrument which actually does detect microwave radiation.

So what was that vital clue that you missed...and missed...and missed? Over and over in the write ups about the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope it was explicitly specified that the super high tech bling bling bolometer that was the heart of the telescope was a sub millimeter IR telescope....operating, oddly enough in the SUB MILLIMETER frequencies. By DEFINITION, this telescope does not, and can not detect microwave radiation. Why, you might ask? (because you didn't have any interest in actually learning about the telescope...you were just trying, unsuccessfully, to win a point) Had you actually bothered to take the opportunity to learn something you might have figured out that the term SUB MILLIMETER actually means something...especially when you were trying to claim that the instrument in question detects microwaves.

Question: What is microwave radiation?
Answer: It is electromagnetic radiation with a frequency range of 0.3 GHz to 300 Ghz.

Question: Where along the EM frequency range are microwaves found?
Answer: They are found between radio waves and IR radiation

Question: What is the wavelength of microwave radiation?
Answer: Between 1 meter and 1 millimeter.

By the way....radio waves...which are not microwaves have a wavelength between 1mm and 1 kilometer.

One last chance to figure it out yourself now that you have the whole thing spelled out for you....The wavelength of microwave radiation is, BY DEFINITION between 1 meter and 1 millimeter......the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope uses a bolometer that receives IR radiation with wavelengths of 450 and 850 MICRONS.....the wavelength of microwaves is between 1 meter and 1 millimeter....the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope detects radiation at two wavelengths 450 and 850 microns........

Question: Did the bolometer James Clerk Maxwell telescope which detects IR at wavelengths of 450 and 850 MICRONS detect CMB which peaks at about 1.9mm?

Think hard...answer the question...and grow up and admit that you were wrong......

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So it isn't measuring outbound radiation. Makes your earlier statement sound stupid.

Not nearly as stupid as you first, not having a clue as to how IR thermometers work but still claiming that they only measure radiation that impacts them...as if they did something other than simply measure the rate, and direction of change within their internal thermopile. Such is the nature of the bulk of your conversation...so congratulations toddster....I have never put anyone on ignore before....not rocks...not dean...abraham or is crick reincarnation.....not the hairball....not even rolling thunder....but you have become so tedious and uninteresting that I have come to the conclusion that life is to short to squander it talking to the likes of you.

I will look at your posts occasionally and take you off ignore when you grow up a bit and find yourself able to engage a conversation with more than a sentence or two and make those sentences more interesting than that of a 5 year old constantly asking why.....and learn to use the quote function the board itself so graciously provides.

Not nearly as stupid as you first, not having a clue as to how IR thermometers work but still claiming that they only measure radiation that impacts them

That's funny. Previously you've claimed that a sensor can't measure the temperature of an object unless it's been cooled below the temperature of that object. Now they can measure a cooler object by the speed at which the sensor loses energy? Hilarious!

I have come to the conclusion that life is to short to squander it talking to the likes of you.

I agree, pointing out the flaws in your idiotic claims is a waste of your time.

 

[Wuwei]

You didn't answer the question:
The bolometer was used in the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

That shows that very cold radiation can strike warmer objects without disobeying the second law. Do you disagree?

Blah blah blah.

Yes yes. We all know you can copy and paste stuff from the web. But then you do two things. You post a crap interpretation that you invent from your gut and then you embellish it with bitter insults.

And you do all that so you can evade the fundamental question. I gather it must be embarrassing to you. Here is the question for the fourth time:

The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope was used to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

That shows that very cold radiation can strike warmer objects without disobeying the second law. Do you disagree? I'm curious as to how you are going to evade the question for the fifth time.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You didn't answer the question:
The bolometer was used in the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

That shows that very cold radiation can strike warmer objects without disobeying the second law. Do you disagree?

Blah blah blah.

Yes yes. We all know you can copy and paste stuff from the web. But then you do two things. You post a crap interpretation that you invent from your gut and then you embellish it with bitter insults.

And you do all that so you can evade the fundamental question. I gather it must be embarrassing to you. Here is the question for the fourth time:

The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope was used to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

That shows that very cold radiation can strike warmer objects without disobeying the second law. Do you disagree? I'm curious as to how you are going to evade the question for the fifth time.

The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope was used to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

Don't you understand? They measured the CMB by seeing how quickly the sensor lost energy, because thermometers can detect outgoing radiation that never hits them.

 

[SSDD]

The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope was used to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

You just don't get any smarter do you? The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope sees IR radiation in the 450 and 850 MICRON wavelengths.....CMB is microwave and peaks at 1.9mm and by definition can not be detected by an instrument working in the SUB MILLIMETER range. How dense are you?

The James Clerk Maxwell telescope nor any other IR telescope detected microwave radiation.....find yourself a microwave telescope cooled to a temperature lower than 2.7K and you will have an instrument capable of detecting actual CMB and not just a resonant radio frequency which is also not microwave....

By the way...I didn't interpret anything...that is your prevue as the site you linked clearly stated that the telescope in question was an IR telescope and went on to provide links describing the differences between radio, microwave, and IR radiation and their respective wavelengths...then it explicitly stated that the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope operates in the SUB MILLIMETER range , 450 and 850 microns specifically, which makes it absolutely incapable of detecting microwave radiation.

Continuing to claim that microwave radiation was detected with an IR instrument working in the sub millimeter wavelength just brings your abject ignorance into sharp focus.

 

[Wuwei]

The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope was used to see the Cosmic Microwave Background at 2.7 degrees K. But those CMB waves still have to go through the atmosphere hundreds of degrees warmer and hit the reflector dish hundreds of degrees warmer in order to reflect to the the bolometer.

Don't you understand? They measured the CMB by seeing how quickly the sensor lost energy, because thermometers can detect outgoing radiation that never hits them.

Yeah, how silly of me. It takes a special kind of person to live in a wonderland and be able to dream up crap and truly believe your crap and then call everyone idiots that don't believe your crap.

Their motto is, “Reality is an OK place to visit, but I would not want to live there.”

 

[Wuwei]

CMB is microwave and peaks at 1.9mm and by definition can not be detected by an instrument working in the SUB MILLIMETER range.

The CMB peaks at 1.1 mm, not at 1.9 mm as you said. That is within the range of the CMT telescope.

So you are saying that the CMB never hit earth even though the paper is titled,

Using SCUBA to place upper limits on arcsecond-scale cosmic microwave background anisotropies at 850 μm​

It's amazing that they could look at anisotropies of the CMB without seeing the CMB at all. You better tell the authors that they are full of crap.

There are sixty five experiments in this reference that all think they saw the CMB:
List of cosmic microwave background experiments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Can you tell me how many of them you think are full of crap too?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

CMB is microwave and peaks at 1.9mm and by definition can not be detected by an instrument working in the SUB MILLIMETER range.

The CMB peaks at 1.1 mm, not at 1.9 mm as you said. That is within the range of the CMT telescope.

So you are saying that the CMB never hit earth even though the paper is titled,

Using SCUBA to place upper limits on arcsecond-scale cosmic microwave background anisotropies at 850 μm​

It's amazing that they could look at anisotropies of the CMB without seeing the CMB at all. You better tell the authors that they are full of crap.

There are sixty five experiments in this reference that all think they saw the CMB:
List of cosmic microwave background experiments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Can you tell me how many of them you think are full of crap too?

It's amazing that they could look at anisotropies of the CMB without seeing the CMB at all.

The CMB stops before it enters the atmosphere and pulls out a cell phone to call down to the antenna.
That's the best way to send a signal that the receiver doesn't receive.

 

[Wuwei]

It's amazing that they could look at anisotropies of the CMB without seeing the CMB at all.

The CMB stops before it enters the atmosphere and pulls out a cell phone to call down to the antenna.
That's the best way to send a signal that the receiver doesn't receive.

Yes, that's the only thing that makes sense. After all, the rays are mysteriously cosmic!
Who knows what kind of supernatural eeriness lurks at the edge of the universe ready to surprise us when after a 13.8 billion year journey the rays suddenly stop at the top of the atmosphere. I hope we are enlightened by the master of make-believe.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's amazing that they could look at anisotropies of the CMB without seeing the CMB at all.

The CMB stops before it enters the atmosphere and pulls out a cell phone to call down to the antenna.
That's the best way to send a signal that the receiver doesn't receive.

Yes, that's the only thing that makes sense. After all, the rays are mysteriously cosmic!
Who knows what kind of supernatural eeriness lurks at the edge of the universe ready to surprise us when after a 13.8 billion year journey the rays suddenly stop at the top of the atmosphere. I hope we are enlightened by the master of make-believe.

I just love the idea that the radiation doesn't penetrate our atmosphere, until the moment our sensor is cooled below 2.7K. Not only are the waves smart, they can see billions of years into the future, not to mention through warmer air.

That's a much better explanation than all matter above 0K emits all the time in all directions.

 

[SSDD]

Yeah, how silly of me. It takes a special kind of person to live in a wonderland and be able to dream up crap and truly believe your crap and then call everyone idiots that don't believe your crap.

Their motto is, “Reality is an OK place to visit, but I would not want to live there.”

From the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope site.....

SCUBA-2

• 850 and 450 micron continuum camera.
• 5120 bolometers (4 sub arrays x 1280 bolometers) at each wavelength band.
• Currently about 3500 bolometers are working at each wavelength band.

You, alas are the only one dreaming up crap...If you go to the web site of JCMT, and do a search for the term microwave, you will find 4 matches. They are as follows:

1. The search term itself.
2. A microwave field engineer
3. A reference to The Yuan-Tseh Lee Array for Microwave Background Anisotropy (AMiBA)
4. And a list of observed microwave lines from the NIST Physical Measurement Laboratory

In short..the James Clerk Maxwell telescope is not in the business of detecting microwaves...they are an infrared facility operating in the Sub Millimeter range...and by the way I said that CMB PEAKS at 1.9 mm....your 1.1mm wavelength is not its peak and is still far far far outside of the range of the JCMT.