Northern nations warming faster than global average

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, it is you who are trying to get around the second law. You are the one who said that energy from the cooler part of the sun can move toward the hotter corona because "the molecules in the corona were so far apart." You are giving an exception to your own (false) idea that photons from black body radiation can't move from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object. The corona density is about 2 mg/m³. So you in essence are amending your version of the law. I have simply written your version of the law in a more formal way. It's sarcasm.

Furthermore, you should consider this statement superfluous: "Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object". Because your (false) definition of spontaneous leads you to the result that no process is spontaneous.

I'm just showing you that there are lots of inconsistencies in your theories of thermodynamics.


.

You really are a moron aren't you...energy from the sun moves through the area of the corona because it is mostly empty space...just as radiation from the surface of the earth goes through the thermosphere because it is mostly empty space...you really do have problems with the simplest of concepts...

And since the second law of thermodynamics says that energy can't move spontaneously from cool to warm, it isn't a false idea...all ground that has been covered before...if you must relive your defeat, refer to any of the previous versions of this conversation.

energy from the sun moves through the area of the corona because it is mostly empty space..

Energy from the Sun is spontaneous? You're disagreeing with yourself again.

hmmm interesting that the subject wasn't mentioned, yet you said it was. odd person wash, rinse repeat!!!

hmmm interesting that the subject wasn't mentioned

SSDD's amusement at the idea that "photons from the Sun are spontaneous" has been mentioned
multiple times in this thread. Short term memory failing you again? Ring the nurse.

she's been in your head for quite some time.

SSDD is a chick?

 

[SSDD]

Jeeze. More ill-tempered ad hominem. Everyone would agree that a very low density of matter in a vacuum has little influence on radiation or anything else. Physics is a hard science. Let's drop playing games and look at the physics involved.

Were you less stupid, I would be more patient...but after all this time, you are still just as stupid and dishonest as you ever were...perhaps more of both.

You have stated that, Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object and use that to say radiation can't move from cool to warm.

No...the second law of thermodynamics has stated that...I simply provided the law for you..and the quantity of matter present is not a factor in whether energy can move spontaneously from cool to warm..just more bullshit from you...same as it ever was.

And all I have to do is quote the second law of thermodynamics and watch you squirm and come up with stupidity upon stupidity in an attempt to get around it...the tedium never ends with you...

 

[Wuwei]

Jeeze. More ill-tempered ad hominem. Everyone would agree that a very low density of matter in a vacuum has little influence on radiation or anything else. Physics is a hard science. Let's drop playing games and look at the physics involved.

Were you less stupid, I would be more patient...but after all this time, you are still just as stupid and dishonest as you ever were...perhaps more of both.

You have stated that, Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object and use that to say radiation can't move from cool to warm.

No...the second law of thermodynamics has stated that...I simply provided the law for you..and the quantity of matter present is not a factor in whether energy can move spontaneously from cool to warm..just more bullshit from you...same as it ever was.

And all I have to do is quote the second law of thermodynamics and watch you squirm and come up with stupidity upon stupidity in an attempt to get around it...the tedium never ends with you...

I see you are deflecting from the major point. You can't come up with a rational process for deciding at what specific density a hot gas must have to allow colder radiation to penetrate. Remember you clearly stated that the rays from the photosphere could penetrate the much hotter corona because the gas in the corona is too thin. You are violating your own interpretation of the second law. Now you are saying the quantity of matter present is not a factor. That is an amazing flip flop.

Again, you have absolutely no understanding of the second law. You have not given any rational on why you think black body radiation fails near a hotter substance.

I can see why you are ill-tempered. I keep reminding you what the science is that is understood by all physics textbooks, lectures and scientists. And you disagree with all of it.

Again, you can't insult me. You are continually flip flopping and insulting the entire body of science.


.

 

[IanC]

Furthermore, you should consider this statement superfluous: "Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object". Because your (false) definition of spontaneous leads you to the result that no process is spontaneous.

I'm just showing you that there are lots of inconsistencies in your theories of thermodynamics

I like it! A much more succinct way of saying he ignores entropy so his interpretation is useless. It no longer matters whether he is right or wrong because it doesn't apply to any real world situations.

Entropy describes the movement of energy from a more organized state to a less organized state...it doesn't go from less organized to more organized on its own...ever...cool is less organized than warm..

Your bizarroland version of the SLoT says objects throttle back emissions if there are nearby objects.

All objects emit in accordance to their temperatures, all the time. They are attempting to increase their entropy by expelling energy. If two objects are facing each other, they both radiate at each other. Every time a photon is created, it has a small amount of momentum in its direction of movement. The particle that created it receives the exact opposite momentum.

According to you, two objects at the same temperature would stop radiating towards each other. The momentum created on the opposite side would push thr objects together. According to me, the inside faces would get two sets of momentum, one from emitting and one from receiving, and would therefore be pushed apart.

.

 

[IanC]

I see you are deflecting from the major point. You can't come up with a rational process for deciding at what specific density a hot gas must have to allow colder radiation to penetrate.

You wont get a straight answer out of him. He knows that any attempt to address your question will simply add to the already large list of contradictions associated with his personalized version of physics.

 

[Wuwei]

I see you are deflecting from the major point. You can't come up with a rational process for deciding at what specific density a hot gas must have to allow colder radiation to penetrate.

You wont get a straight answer out of him. He knows that any attempt to address your question will simply add to the already large list of contradictions associated with his personalized version of physics.

Right, I'm just exploring bizarroland. We have heard many times one small failure in a theory will break the theory. So far the bizarre theory of one way radiation has been broken quite a few times.

.

 

[IanC]

I see you are deflecting from the major point. You can't come up with a rational process for deciding at what specific density a hot gas must have to allow colder radiation to penetrate.

You wont get a straight answer out of him. He knows that any attempt to address your question will simply add to the already large list of contradictions associated with his personalized version of physics.

Right, I'm just exploring bizarroland. We have heard many times one small failure in a theory will break the theory. So far the bizarre theory of one way radiation has been broken quite a few times.

.

Hahahahaha. Exactly. SSDD doesn't even agree with Stefan's original experiment but he takes umbrage with the S-B equation being subject to distributive law of mathematics. Wasnt it you that posted up one of their original papers?

 

[Wuwei]

Hahahahaha. Exactly. SSDD doesn't even agree with Stefan's original experiment but he takes umbrage with the S-B equation being subject to distributive law of mathematics. Wasnt it you that posted up one of their original papers?

Yes. I posted an excerpt where Stefan distinguished between heat inflow and outflow. He had amazing patience to conduct the experiment with no modern instrumentation. And he had amazing insight in interpreting the results.


.

 

[SSDD]

All objects emit in accordance to their temperatures, all the time.

.

No they don't...they only emit in accordance to their temperatures if they are in a vacuum...I provided emails from several top shelf physicists who stated exactly that. The fact that you prefer to believe in your misunderstanding says volumes... If objects emitted in accordance to their temperatures all the time, there would only be a need for one version of the SB law since nothing would change if the object were in the presence of other objects...

 

[SSDD]

I love watching you warmers stroke each other's delicate egos and assure each other that you are right and mean old SSDD is wrong...even if you can't provide any actual evidence that supports your beliefs...

Care to provide some more instances of being fooled by instrumentation...or falling for quaint 18th or 19th century hobby science experiments and thinking that they prove the existence of a non existent greenhouse effect? Those are my favorites...

 

[SSDD]

Hahahahaha. Exactly. SSDD doesn't even agree with Stefan's original experiment but he takes umbrage with the S-B equation being subject to distributive law of mathematics. Wasnt it you that posted up one of their original papers?

Yes. I posted an excerpt where Stefan distinguished between heat inflow and outflow. He had amazing patience to conduct the experiment with no modern instrumentation. And he had amazing insight in interpreting the results.


.

You can't even measure heat inflow and outflow with modern instruments...again...willingness to be duped so long as it is in accord with your beliefs...what a laugh...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All objects emit in accordance to their temperatures, all the time.

.

No they don't...they only emit in accordance to their temperatures if they are in a vacuum...I provided emails from several top shelf physicists who stated exactly that. The fact that you prefer to believe in your misunderstanding says volumes... If objects emitted in accordance to their temperatures all the time, there would only be a need for one version of the SB law since nothing would change if the object were in the presence of other objects...

I provided emails from several top shelf physicists who stated exactly that.

Any emails that back up your one-way only claims?
Or your "no emissions at equilibrium" claim?

If objects emitted in accordance to their temperatures all the time, there would only be a need for one version of the SB law since nothing would change if the object were in the presence of other objects...

And there is your confusion. Emission doesn't change in the presence of other objects.
But since energy is being absorbed from the other objects, net energy loss is lower (or negative even).

 

[Wuwei]

You can't even measure heat inflow and outflow with modern instruments...again...willingness to be duped so long as it is in accord with your beliefs...what a laugh...

Stefan wasn't duped.


.

 

[SSDD]

You can't even measure heat inflow and outflow with modern instruments...again...willingness to be duped so long as it is in accord with your beliefs...what a laugh...

Stefan wasn't duped.


.

He didn't measure spontaneous two way energy movement since there is no such thing...you are a true blue top shelf dupe...

 

[Wuwei]

He didn't measure spontaneous two way energy movement since there is no such thing...you are a true blue top shelf dupe...

Again you are essentially calling all scientists top shelf dupes.

Black body radiation is exchanged between any two objects in proximity at any temperatures. If you don't believe that you don't believe quantum mechanics.


.

 

[SSDD]

He didn't measure spontaneous two way energy movement since there is no such thing...you are a true blue top shelf dupe...

Again you are essentially calling all scientists top shelf dupes.

Black body radiation is exchanged between any two objects in proximity at any temperatures. If you don't believe that you don't believe quantum mechanics.


.

I believe evidence...since there is none, you have placed your faith in an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model over reality in which no such spontaneous energy movement has ever been observed or measured...You have faith..I have every observation and measurement ever made...

 

[Wuwei]

I believe evidence...since there is none, you have placed your faith in an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model over reality in which no such spontaneous energy movement has ever been observed or measured...You have faith..I have every observation and measurement ever made...

You were given several types of experimental evidence that radiation from a cold object is unaffected by a hotter object, but you choose to disbelieve basic physics, and refer to all scientists as dupes.


.

 

[IanC]

All objects emit in accordance to their temperatures, all the time.

.

No they don't...they only emit in accordance to their temperatures if they are in a vacuum...I provided emails from several top shelf physicists who stated exactly that. The fact that you prefer to believe in your misunderstanding says volumes... If objects emitted in accordance to their temperatures all the time, there would only be a need for one version of the SB law since nothing would change if the object were in the presence of other objects...

You didn't ask those physicists if the temperature of the radiation bath stopped or slowed the internal production of radiation in the object. You didnt ask whether the change in energy for the object was the net result of output minus input.

Why don't you put up all of the replies? Not just the ambiguous one you showed us?

 

[IanC]

He didn't measure spontaneous two way energy movement since there is no such thing...you are a true blue top shelf dupe...

Again you are essentially calling all scientists top shelf dupes.

Black body radiation is exchanged between any two objects in proximity at any temperatures. If you don't believe that you don't believe quantum mechanics.


.

I believe evidence...since there is none, you have placed your faith in an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model over reality in which no such spontaneous energy movement has ever been observed or measured...You have faith..I have every observation and measurement ever made...

Physics already has a pretty good handle on how radiation is produced and transfered.

You want them to find some esoteric means by which the temperature of a distant object controls the internal atomic scale conditions of the near object. It's not going to happen because it's absurd and no one is looking for it. Why would they?

 

[IanC]

Hahahahaha. Exactly. SSDD doesn't even agree with Stefan's original experiment but he takes umbrage with the S-B equation being subject to distributive law of mathematics. Wasnt it you that posted up one of their original papers?

Yes. I posted an excerpt where Stefan distinguished between heat inflow and outflow. He had amazing patience to conduct the experiment with no modern instrumentation. And he had amazing insight in interpreting the results.


.

You can't even measure heat inflow and outflow with modern instruments...again...willingness to be duped so long as it is in accord with your beliefs...what a laugh...

Stefan's equation is perfect but Stefan was duped by his instrumentation. How does that make sense even in your bizarroland of physics?