Grand Solar Minimum.... And Cooling....

[Billy_Bob]

Very Interesting... No equatorial ocean warming in over 40 years....

Bob Tisdale put up a post earlier today over at WUWT. While he was discussing the reasons others are ignoring the ENSO perturbations and why they are at step increases without incline during the ocean recharge phase (indicating no CO2 induced warming during the recharge phase of the ENSO), one of his charts took me by surprise. The chart above shows no warming of the equatorial oceans. Essentially a zero anomaly over 40 years.

This intrigued me to over lay the solar spectral shift of 0.2um to 0.8um and where it shifted to, obtained from the ACE and GRACE satellite's. Solar output preceded the ENSO by 2-3 months and there was fairly good correlation to the overall spectral drop or increase over time. The record is far to short to draw conclusions, but it looks very promising.

Back to topic; With no warming of the ocean there can be no warming of the land masses. And if there is no warming then someones records have been altered to show warming... We have seen this problem before, haven't we?

Still looking for your "photons are magnetic" source?

Duck, dodge and weave.... Your doing it well..

Why wont you answer the question? Ignorant of molecular theory?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Very Interesting... No equatorial ocean warming in over 40 years....

Bob Tisdale put up a post earlier today over at WUWT. While he was discussing the reasons others are ignoring the ENSO perturbations and why they are at step increases without incline during the ocean recharge phase (indicating no CO2 induced warming during the recharge phase of the ENSO), one of his charts took me by surprise. The chart above shows no warming of the equatorial oceans. Essentially a zero anomaly over 40 years.

This intrigued me to over lay the solar spectral shift of 0.2um to 0.8um and where it shifted to, obtained from the ACE and GRACE satellite's. Solar output preceded the ENSO by 2-3 months and there was fairly good correlation to the overall spectral drop or increase over time. The record is far to short to draw conclusions, but it looks very promising.

Back to topic; With no warming of the ocean there can be no warming of the land masses. And if there is no warming then someones records have been altered to show warming... We have seen this problem before, haven't we?

Still looking for your "photons are magnetic" source?

Duck, dodge and weave.... Your doing it well..

Why wont you answer the question? Ignorant of molecular theory?

You want me to answer a question about your magnetic photons? DERP!

Keep dodging. LOL!

 

[SSDD]

No...the RADIO ANTENNA received a resonant frequency which could not be explained...it led to the discovery of CMB which is BB radiation....the resonant radio frequency the RADIO ANTENNA received was not BB radiation.

It is unfortunate that you have the tendency to interpret everything with the aim of supporting your narrative...it is why you will never learn anything new...

Nope, you can't fool us anymore. You really do believe the CMB as full black body spectrum hit the antenna.

It is unfortunate that you are pretending to interpret everything with the aim of supporting your narrative to salve your ego.

You have already been fooled...that is why you believe that CMB itself was received by that radio antenna rather than a resonant radio frequency.

It is funny that you are accusing me of interpreting when you interpret everything that you see...typical of liberals to accuse their opponents of the very thing they are doing...did the hairball teach you that? She is a champ at it,...a regular projector.

If I thought CMB BB radiation hit the antenna, I would say it..it didn't...that antenna picked up a resonant radio frequency...being a radio telescope and all..

 

[Wuwei]

You have already been fooled...that is why you believe that CMB itself was received by that radio antenna rather than a resonant radio frequency.

It is funny that you are accusing me of interpreting when you interpret everything that you see...typical of liberals to accuse their opponents of the very thing they are doing...did the hairball teach you that? She is a champ at it,...a regular projector.

If I thought CMB BB radiation hit the antenna, I would say it..it didn't...that antenna picked up a resonant radio frequency...being a radio telescope and all..

Nope you are still dodging. For sure you think the CMB does not change to resonant radio frequencies while traversing the atmosphere and hitting the antenna.

"If I thought CMB BB radiation hit the antenna, I would say it..it didn't."​

Nope. If you thought that, you definitely would not admit to it.

If you trace the path of CMB from space to the top down to the bottom of the atmosphere, and then to the antenna, and finally to the input of the detector, and then tell us at what point the CMB became resonant frequencies, you wouldn't be dodging. But as it is, you are definitely dodging.

.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Very Interesting... No equatorial ocean warming in over 40 years....

Bob Tisdale put up a post earlier today over at WUWT. While he was discussing the reasons others are ignoring the ENSO perturbations and why they are at step increases without incline during the ocean recharge phase (indicating no CO2 induced warming during the recharge phase of the ENSO), one of his charts took me by surprise. The chart above shows no warming of the equatorial oceans. Essentially a zero anomaly over 40 years.

This intrigued me to over lay the solar spectral shift of 0.2um to 0.8um and where it shifted to, obtained from the ACE and GRACE satellite's. Solar output preceded the ENSO by 2-3 months and there was fairly good correlation to the overall spectral drop or increase over time. The record is far to short to draw conclusions, but it looks very promising.

Back to topic; With no warming of the ocean there can be no warming of the land masses. And if there is no warming then someones records have been altered to show warming... We have seen this problem before, haven't we?

What a baldfaced liar you are. Tisdale's article shows ocean warming with step ups that coincide with strong El Nino events.

This does not preclude a CO2 influence but it does show that natural factors are capable of swamping it with much larger changes.

I suppose this would fall into a category of non understood natural factors. As such it is not on Crick' s IPCC chart of anthropogenic forcing, although it seems to be making large contributions to global warming.

Your the one lying.... Let me help you..

"Thus, El Niño and La Niña events act together as a chaotic, naturally occurring, sunlight-fueled, recharge-discharge oscillator, with El Niño events acting as the discharge phase and La Niña events acting as the recharge phase."

With the cause clearly defined and no continuing up slope after the step increase CO2 is not causing a gradual warm up. There is no signal noted that would even suggest it is.

Had you read further you would have found this;
"The explanation for the upward steps for the most part has been overlooked…or the explanation might have been purposely ignored by the climate-science industry, because the financial foundation of their livelihoods is human-induced global warming not naturally occurring global warming. When you see how simple the explanation is for those naturally caused upward steps, you might conclude that the climate-science industry has, in fact, purposely ignored Mother Nature’s handiwork and willfully misled the public about the cause of global warming."

Now where are your CO2 superpowers?

 

[SSDD]

Nope you are still dodging. For sure you think the CMB does not change to resonant radio frequencies while traversing the atmosphere and hitting the antenna.

If you are going to fantasize about what you think I believe...and fabricate arguments from me to argue against, then I really don't need to talk to you at all, do I? That's good because you are becoming as boring, if not more boring than toddster.

I would say it has been nice talking to you...but it really hasn't....and unlike you, I am not a liar so I feel obligated to say what I really think.

​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nope you are still dodging. For sure you think the CMB does not change to resonant radio frequencies while traversing the atmosphere and hitting the antenna.

If you are going to fantasize about what you think I believe...and fabricate arguments from me to argue against, then I really don't need to talk to you at all, do I? That's good because you are becoming as boring, if not more boring than toddster.

I would say it has been nice talking to you...but it really hasn't....and unlike you, I am not a liar so I feel obligated to say what I really think.

​

So you'll be running away again?
Running away without explaining the magic behind your "detectable at a distance, no need to actually touch the antenna" microwaves?

 

[Wuwei]

Nope you are still dodging. For sure you think the CMB does not change to resonant radio frequencies while traversing the atmosphere and hitting the antenna.

If you are going to fantasize about what you think I believe...and fabricate arguments from me to argue against, then I really don't need to talk to you at all, do I? That's good because you are becoming as boring, if not more boring than toddster.

I would say it has been nice talking to you...but it really hasn't....and unlike you, I am not a liar so I feel obligated to say what I really think.

Define what you mean by boring. Does that mean running off and hiding because you were caught with your pants down after painting yourself into a corner?

 

[SSDD]

Nope you are still dodging. For sure you think the CMB does not change to resonant radio frequencies while traversing the atmosphere and hitting the antenna.

If you are going to fantasize about what you think I believe...and fabricate arguments from me to argue against, then I really don't need to talk to you at all, do I? That's good because you are becoming as boring, if not more boring than toddster.

I would say it has been nice talking to you...but it really hasn't....and unlike you, I am not a liar so I feel obligated to say what I really think.

Define what you mean by boring. Does that mean running off and hiding because you were caught with your pants down after painting yourself into a corner?

Boring is watching a hamster run around on a wheel as if he were getting somewhere. You are the hamster...trying all the tricks you can think of (boring as they are) in an attempt to get around the second law of thermodynamics...and the SB law and anything else that challenges your belief...

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Till this law changes, it states my position...precisely as it is written...when the law changes, my position will change with it...watching you run round on the wheel endlessly trying to get around that statement is...quite frankly....boring...and when you start recycling the same old shit that failed the first time...it is very very boring...and the very idea that you believe you chased me anywhere is both funny and terribly boring...

The truth of the matter is that the word tedious describes what it is like talking to you better than the word boring.

Boring -to weary by dullness

Tedious - marked by monotony or tedium; long and tiresome

 

[Wuwei]

Nope you are still dodging. For sure you think the CMB does not change to resonant radio frequencies while traversing the atmosphere and hitting the antenna.

If you are going to fantasize about what you think I believe...and fabricate arguments from me to argue against, then I really don't need to talk to you at all, do I? That's good because you are becoming as boring, if not more boring than toddster.

I would say it has been nice talking to you...but it really hasn't....and unlike you, I am not a liar so I feel obligated to say what I really think.

Define what you mean by boring. Does that mean running off and hiding because you were caught with your pants down after painting yourself into a corner?

Boring is watching a hamster run around on a wheel as if he were getting somewhere. You are the hamster...trying all the tricks you can think of (boring as they are) in an attempt to get around the second law of thermodynamics...and the SB law and anything else that challenges your belief...

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Till this law changes, it states my position...precisely as it is written...when the law changes, my position will change with it...watching you run round on the wheel endlessly trying to get around that statement is...quite frankly....boring...and when you start recycling the same old shit that failed the first time...it is very very boring...and the very idea that you believe you chased me anywhere is both funny and terribly boring...

The truth of the matter is that the word tedious describes what it is like talking to you better than the word boring.

Boring -to weary by dullness

Tedious - marked by monotony or tedium; long and tiresome

Naw. I think you are using boredom as an excuse to run off because you can't justify why you think the CMB miraculously changes into a "resonance frequency" before it hits the earth. I understand. You can go in shame if you want.


.

 

[SSDD]

Nope you are still dodging. For sure you think the CMB does not change to resonant radio frequencies while traversing the atmosphere and hitting the antenna.

If you are going to fantasize about what you think I believe...and fabricate arguments from me to argue against, then I really don't need to talk to you at all, do I? That's good because you are becoming as boring, if not more boring than toddster.

I would say it has been nice talking to you...but it really hasn't....and unlike you, I am not a liar so I feel obligated to say what I really think.

Define what you mean by boring. Does that mean running off and hiding because you were caught with your pants down after painting yourself into a corner?

Boring is watching a hamster run around on a wheel as if he were getting somewhere. You are the hamster...trying all the tricks you can think of (boring as they are) in an attempt to get around the second law of thermodynamics...and the SB law and anything else that challenges your belief...

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Till this law changes, it states my position...precisely as it is written...when the law changes, my position will change with it...watching you run round on the wheel endlessly trying to get around that statement is...quite frankly....boring...and when you start recycling the same old shit that failed the first time...it is very very boring...and the very idea that you believe you chased me anywhere is both funny and terribly boring...

The truth of the matter is that the word tedious describes what it is like talking to you better than the word boring.

Boring -to weary by dullness

Tedious - marked by monotony or tedium; long and tiresome

Naw. I think you are using boredom as an excuse to run off because you can't justify why you think the CMB miraculously changes into a "resonance frequency" before it hits the earth. I understand. You can go in shame if you want.


.

I don't make excuses...I find you tedious...whatever we are talking about at any given post...if you go back though the forum...that same conversation can be found over and over and over...the very definition of tedium...look in the Oxford English dictionary...next to tedious is a picture of you.

 

[Wuwei]

I don't make excuses...I find you tedious...whatever we are talking about at any given post...if you go back though the forum...that same conversation can be found over and over and over...the very definition of tedium...look in the Oxford English dictionary...next to tedious is a picture of you.

Nope. Your tedium permeates this forum. Many here have shown you many references, excerpts from texts, original papers, and references. We have shown you mechanisms and counter examples to your bizarre physics such as,

Chemical light stick.
Slow decay phosphorescence
Gamma decay of technetium, et al.
Luminescence from plants and animals
Cosmic microwave background
Sunlight passing through hotter corona.
Molecules of a cold gas hitting a warm surface.

What have you shown us? Tedium. The same recitation of the second law and the SB equation without any observed, measured experiments on why radiation from a cold must not hit a hotter object. You have not showed us a mechanism how (smart) photons can can avoid hitting a hotter object. You have not showed where you think the BB CMB is turned into resonance frequencies in their path to the earth. You have not shown how sunlight can get past the hotter corona.

You have not shown us anything but your tedious mantra of the second law and SB equation, which you don't understand at all.

That is tedium.

.

 

[SSDD]

Chemical light stick.

Man made...work went into production...not spontaneous....same old thing..

Slow decay phosphorescence

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics and radioactive decay....apparenlty some nutty argument that radioactivity is not subject to the second law of thermodynamics. Attempt to equate radioactivity with infrared radiation

Gamma decay of technetium, et al.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics and radioactive decay....apparenlty some nutty argument that radioactivity is not subject to the second law of thermodynamics. Attempt to equate radioactivity with infrared radiation

Luminescence from plants and animals

Living creature...body is doing work to produce luminescence...luminescence stops shortly after death...not spontaneous.

Cosmic microwave background

Initially discovered via resonant radio frequency....later actual BB CMB was studied using properly cooled instruments

Sunlight passing through hotter corona.

Multiple theories on what sort of work is being done to move the energy from the surface to the corona...only you and toddster seem to think it is spontaneous.

Molecules of a cold gas hitting a warm surface.

Molecules are neither energy, nor radiation..any actual evidence that the molecule is imparting energy to the warmer surface? Didn't think so? Plenty of observational evidence that the gas warms as a result of conduction from the wall..

Same Shit Different Day.

In the future, before you bring up the same shit....refer to the first time the topic was covered..or the second...or the third...or the fourth...I won't be going over it again...nor will I be looking up the original arguments for you. I will prepare a stock cut and paste referral back to any of the multiple times the topic has been discussed for when you get the idea in your nutty brain that somehow you have won the discussion via sheer tedium.

When you get something new, let me know....or when they change the second law of thermodynamics to state that energy can spontaneously move from a less organized state to a more organized state...do let me know.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Chemical light stick.

Man made...work went into production...not spontaneous....same old thing..

Slow decay phosphorescence

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics and radioactive decay....apparenlty some nutty argument that radioactivity is not subject to the second law of thermodynamics. Attempt to equate radioactivity with infrared radiation

Gamma decay of technetium, et al.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics and radioactive decay....apparenlty some nutty argument that radioactivity is not subject to the second law of thermodynamics. Attempt to equate radioactivity with infrared radiation

Luminescence from plants and animals

Living creature...body is doing work to produce luminescence...luminescence stops shortly after death...not spontaneous.

Cosmic microwave background

Initially discovered via resonant radio frequency....later actual BB CMB was studied using properly cooled instruments

Sunlight passing through hotter corona.

Multiple theories on what sort of work is being done to move the energy from the surface to the corona...only you and toddster seem to think it is spontaneous.

Molecules of a cold gas hitting a warm surface.

Molecules are neither energy, nor radiation..any actual evidence that the molecule is imparting energy to the warmer surface? Didn't think so? Plenty of observational evidence that the gas warms as a result of conduction from the wall..

Same Shit Different Day.

In the future, before you bring up the same shit....refer to the first time the topic was covered..or the second...or the third...or the fourth...I won't be going over it again...nor will I be looking up the original arguments for you. I will prepare a stock cut and paste referral back to any of the multiple times the topic has been discussed for when you get the idea in your nutty brain that somehow you have won the discussion via sheer tedium.

When you get something new, let me know....or when they change the second law of thermodynamics to state that energy can spontaneously move from a less organized state to a more organized state...do let me know.

Initially discovered via resonant radio frequency....later actual BB CMB was studied using properly cooled instruments

If you cool the receiver, you can "trick" CMB photons to move through the much warmer atmosphere?
Is there anything your magic photons can't do?

You never did explain how an antenna detects something that never actually touches it...BTW.

 

[Wuwei]

Man made...work went into production...not spontaneous....same old thing..

No work is happening when the light stick is glowing. If you think work prior to the event is a criteria for spontaneity, then there is no possible experiment or event by man on earth that is spontaneous.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics and radioactive decay....apparenlty some nutty argument that radioactivity is not subject to the second law of thermodynamics. Attempt to equate radioactivity with infrared radiation

Phosphorescence is not radio active decay! It is spontaneous release of atomic energy after work was done to raise the energy levels. No work is done by glowing mineral phosphors.

Living creature...body is doing work to produce luminescence...luminescence stops shortly after death...not spontaneous.

It is spontaneous shortly after death then, while the chemicals are still reacting on their own.

Initially discovered via resonant radio frequency....later actual BB CMB was studied using properly cooled instruments

The cosmic microwave background hit the warmer earth, and you are lying about it again.

Multiple theories on what sort of work is being done to move the energy from the surface to the corona...only you and toddster seem to think it is spontaneous.

Really? Tell us about it then. Don't just run away.

Molecules are neither energy, nor radiation..any actual evidence that the molecule is imparting energy to the warmer surface? Didn't think so? Plenty of observational evidence that the gas warms as a result of conduction from the wall..

Molecules of any gas adjacent to a warmer surface must strike the surface with kinetic energy. The observed evidence is easy. If the molecules are in a warmer box, there would be no pressure from the gas and the box would collapse under atmospheric pressure. Read about the kinetic theory of gases for god sake. How do you think conduction from the walls of a warm surface could even happen if the gas molecules never come into contact.

When you get something new, let me know....or when they change the second law of thermodynamics to state that energy can spontaneously move from a less organized state to a more organized state...do let me know.

Hold on! Nobody here has ever stated or believed that energy can move from a less organized state to a more organized state. That is a straw-man. Is that the best you can come up with? You are failing fast. Any more comments on why you think photons from a cold surface cannot hit a warm surface? No? We are all waiting for your stock cut and paste.


.

 

[Wuwei]

Multiple theories on what sort of work is being done to move the energy from the surface to the corona...only you and toddster seem to think it is spontaneous.

So you think the sun's energy is not spontaneous but comes from work. Then no energy transfers on earth that are due to sun energy are likewise spontaneous. That means CO2 can backscatter because work was involved in heating it.

Man made...work went into production...not spontaneous....same old thing..

So if anything man-made involves work, then by your own reasoning, energy form a lower temperature light can strike a higher temperature light because work was done by man in creating the energy to power the lights.

You really don't need to cool detectors since they are man-made. By your own reasoning warm man-made detectors aiming up from the surface of the earth can actually receive energy from the colder CO2 since the CO2 was heated by a sun doing work.

Your self contradictory fizzics is fascinating, albeit stupid.

.

 

[SSDD]

No work is happening when the light stick is glowing. If you think work prior to the event is a criteria for spontaneity, then there is no possible experiment or event by man on earth that is spontaneous.

So let me guess...you believe that no work was done to make it happen...that wuwei is exactly how stupid you are.

Phosphorescence is not radio active decay! It is spontaneous release of atomic energy after work was done to raise the energy levels. No work is done by glowing mineral phosphors.

No...phosphorescence is the re emission of energy previously absorbed...not spontaneous...no absorption of energy...no later emission of energy...We have covered this all before.

What? Do you simply erase all your losses and actually believe you are starting with a clean slate and that you have a winning argument this time? Do you know the definition of insanity?

It is spontaneous shortly after death then, while the chemicals are still reacting on their own.

Nope...the effect after death is the result of work having been done...it is residual and soon stops when the energy stored by the work done runs out...not spontanoeus.. You really don't remember losing these points before? What makes you think these ridiculous examples are valid this time...

It is terribly tedious reminding you over and over and over again.

Really? Tell us about it then. Don't just run away.

Refer to any of the dozens of times it has been explained to both you and toddster...shouldn't be hard to find. Here is a hint..the latest theory begins with the letter A.

Molecules of any gas adjacent to a warmer surface must strike the surface with kinetic energy. The observed evidence is easy.

Yeah...the observed evidence is that the wall cools down because it is losing energy to the cooler gas...no evidence whatsoever that the wall gains any energy at all. Again..covered over and over...your ridiculous arguments lay shredded across the landscape of this board...look them up.

Hold on! Nobody here has ever stated or believed that energy can move from a less organized state to a more organized state.

Warm is more organized than cool...Low frequency is less organized than high frequency...the potential energy of a rock at the bottom of a hill is less organized than a rock at the top of a hill...the energy represented by pressurized air in a tire is more organized than the energy represented by the air in the atmosphere...energy never moves from a less organized state to a more organized state and yet every argument you make is trying to claim exactly that...that energy is moving spontaneously from a less organized state to a more organized state.

Therein lies the fundamental tedium of talking to you...the same stupid, poorly thought out, shitty examples of your lack of critical thinking skills over and over and over and over.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No work is happening when the light stick is glowing. If you think work prior to the event is a criteria for spontaneity, then there is no possible experiment or event by man on earth that is spontaneous.

So let me guess...you believe that no work was done to make it happen...that wuwei is exactly how stupid you are.

Phosphorescence is not radio active decay! It is spontaneous release of atomic energy after work was done to raise the energy levels. No work is done by glowing mineral phosphors.

No...phosphorescence is the re emission of energy previously absorbed...not spontaneous...no absorption of energy...no later emission of energy...We have covered this all before.

What? Do you simply erase all your losses and actually believe you are starting with a clean slate and that you have a winning argument this time? Do you know the definition of insanity?

It is spontaneous shortly after death then, while the chemicals are still reacting on their own.

Nope...the effect after death is the result of work having been done...it is residual and soon stops when the energy stored by the work done runs out...not spontanoeus.. You really don't remember losing these points before? What makes you think these ridiculous examples are valid this time...

It is terribly tedious reminding you over and over and over again.

Really? Tell us about it then. Don't just run away.

Refer to any of the dozens of times it has been explained to both you and toddster...shouldn't be hard to find. Here is a hint..the latest theory begins with the letter A.

Molecules of any gas adjacent to a warmer surface must strike the surface with kinetic energy. The observed evidence is easy.

Yeah...the observed evidence is that the wall cools down because it is losing energy to the cooler gas...no evidence whatsoever that the wall gains any energy at all. Again..covered over and over...your ridiculous arguments lay shredded across the landscape of this board...look them up.

Hold on! Nobody here has ever stated or believed that energy can move from a less organized state to a more organized state.

Warm is more organized than cool...Low frequency is less organized than high frequency...the potential energy of a rock at the bottom of a hill is less organized than a rock at the top of a hill...the energy represented by pressurized air in a tire is more organized than the energy represented by the air in the atmosphere...energy never moves from a less organized state to a more organized state and yet every argument you make is trying to claim exactly that...that energy is moving spontaneously from a less organized state to a more organized state.

Therein lies the fundamental tedium of talking to you...the same stupid, poorly thought out, shitty examples of your lack of critical thinking skills over and over and over and over.

No...phosphorescence is the re emission of energy previously absorbed...not spontaneous..

No...downward LWIR is the re emission of energy previously absorbed...not spontaneous..

And that's why back radiation happens, despite your confusion.

IanC Wuwei Crick

 

[Wuwei]

No work is happening when the light stick is glowing. If you think work prior to the event is a criteria for spontaneity, then there is no possible experiment or event by man on earth that is spontaneous.

So let me guess...you believe that no work was done to make it happen...that wuwei is exactly how stupid you are.

Phosphorescence is not radio active decay! It is spontaneous release of atomic energy after work was done to raise the energy levels. No work is done by glowing mineral phosphors.

No...phosphorescence is the re emission of energy previously absorbed...not spontaneous...no absorption of energy...no later emission of energy...We have covered this all before.

What? Do you simply erase all your losses and actually believe you are starting with a clean slate and that you have a winning argument this time? Do you know the definition of insanity?

It is spontaneous shortly after death then, while the chemicals are still reacting on their own.

Nope...the effect after death is the result of work having been done...it is residual and soon stops when the energy stored by the work done runs out...not spontanoeus.. You really don't remember losing these points before? What makes you think these ridiculous examples are valid this time...

It is terribly tedious reminding you over and over and over again.

Really? Tell us about it then. Don't just run away.

Refer to any of the dozens of times it has been explained to both you and toddster...shouldn't be hard to find. Here is a hint..the latest theory begins with the letter A.

Molecules of any gas adjacent to a warmer surface must strike the surface with kinetic energy. The observed evidence is easy.

Yeah...the observed evidence is that the wall cools down because it is losing energy to the cooler gas...no evidence whatsoever that the wall gains any energy at all. Again..covered over and over...your ridiculous arguments lay shredded across the landscape of this board...look them up.

Hold on! Nobody here has ever stated or believed that energy can move from a less organized state to a more organized state.

Warm is more organized than cool...Low frequency is less organized than high frequency...the potential energy of a rock at the bottom of a hill is less organized than a rock at the top of a hill...the energy represented by pressurized air in a tire is more organized than the energy represented by the air in the atmosphere...energy never moves from a less organized state to a more organized state and yet every argument you make is trying to claim exactly that...that energy is moving spontaneously from a less organized state to a more organized state.

Therein lies the fundamental tedium of talking to you...the same stupid, poorly thought out, shitty examples of your lack of critical thinking skills over and over and over and over.

Chemical light stick.

Man made...work went into production...not spontaneous....same old thing..

Slow decay phosphorescence

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics and radioactive decay....apparenlty some nutty argument that radioactivity is not subject to the second law of thermodynamics. Attempt to equate radioactivity with infrared radiation

Gamma decay of technetium, et al.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics and radioactive decay....apparenlty some nutty argument that radioactivity is not subject to the second law of thermodynamics. Attempt to equate radioactivity with infrared radiation

Luminescence from plants and animals

Living creature...body is doing work to produce luminescence...luminescence stops shortly after death...not spontaneous.

Cosmic microwave background

Initially discovered via resonant radio frequency....later actual BB CMB was studied using properly cooled instruments

Sunlight passing through hotter corona.

Multiple theories on what sort of work is being done to move the energy from the surface to the corona...only you and toddster seem to think it is spontaneous.

Molecules of a cold gas hitting a warm surface.

Molecules are neither energy, nor radiation..any actual evidence that the molecule is imparting energy to the warmer surface? Didn't think so? Plenty of observational evidence that the gas warms as a result of conduction from the wall..

Same Shit Different Day.

In the future, before you bring up the same shit....refer to the first time the topic was covered..or the second...or the third...or the fourth...I won't be going over it again...nor will I be looking up the original arguments for you. I will prepare a stock cut and paste referral back to any of the multiple times the topic has been discussed for when you get the idea in your nutty brain that somehow you have won the discussion via sheer tedium.

When you get something new, let me know....or when they change the second law of thermodynamics to state that energy can spontaneously move from a less organized state to a more organized state...do let me know.

I'm truly sorry you find physics so tedious. But let's analyze your idea of spontaneity in physics.

So you say that no process in physics is spontaneous if work was done prior to an energy release after all work is ended. That almost sounds like a new law in thermodynamics. That certainly gives new meaning to your oft quoted Clausius statement of the second law:

It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow.

(Note that the bold faced phrase is past tense.)​

Also you had said man-made devices cannot create a spontaneous process because of the manufacturing work. So you have given us some new concepts of applications.

As Tod indicated, you said light from the sun involves work (and is thereby not spontaneous.) So all earthly processes that rely on the sun are never spontaneous. CO2 can thereby emit back-radiation.

A warm man-made spectrometer can receive colder radiation.

Two objects heated by scientists in a lab can always exchange radiation no matter their temperature difference.

A cold person can radiate heat to a heater since the heater is man-made and doing work, and the person (who is woman-made) is doing work via his metabolism.

So, to me that sounds like no process in physics is ever spontaneous, unless you can name a spontaneous process that involves no prior work.

Don't let Billy or JC or polarbear or Skook or Frank or Westwall et. al. know your new concept of energy flow or they will be very disappointed in you.

You can go off in that direction if you want, but I will stick with the entropy statement of the second law.

.

 

[SSDD]

I'm truly sorry you find physics so tedious. But let's analyze your idea of spontaneity in physics.

I find physics endlessly interesting..you, on the other hand, are quite tedious.

So you say that no process in physics is spontaneous if work was done prior to an energy release after all work is ended. That almost sounds like a new law in thermodynamics. That certainly gives new meaning to your oft quoted Clausius statement of the second law:

I don't say it...physics says it. Here...one last attempt to provide you with a definition easy enough for you to understand.

What Is a Spontaneous Process?

A spontaneous process is one that will occur without any energy input from the surroundings. It is a process that will occur on its own. For example, a ball will roll down an incline, water will flow downhill, ice will melt into water, radioisotopes will decay, and iron will rust. No intervention is required because these processes are thermodynamically favorable. In other words, the initial energy is higher than the final energy.

is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow.

(Note that the bold faced phrase is past tense.)​

Also you had said man-made devices cannot create a spontaneous process because of the manufacturing work. So you have given us some new concepts of applications.

New to you perhaps...but not to science....or people who actually understand what the term spontaneous means...by the way...work being done..or work having been done is irrelevant...the speed at which a process occurs has nothing to do with whether or not it is spontaneous... Here...from the same link:

Note how quickly a process occurs has no bearing on whether or not it is spontaneous. It may take a long time for rust to become obvious, yet when iron is exposed to air the process will occur. A radioactive isotope may decay instantly or after thousands or millions or even billions of years.

As Tod indicated, you said light from the sun involves work (and is thereby not spontaneous.) So all earthly processes that rely on the sun are never spontaneous. CO2 can thereby emit back-radiation.[;/quote]

You know who is stupid? People who try to find a way around the second law of thermodynamics...

A warm man-made spectrometer can receive colder radiation.

So provide a measurement of a discrete wavelength of radiation from an object that is cooler than the instrument.

Two objects heated by scientists in a lab can always exchange radiation no matter their temperature difference.