Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out
You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.Funny, I’m still waiting for your observation of cold objects radiating towards hot object!I wonder if he'll laugh at you more than he laughed at SSDD
Let’s see it, or are you a liar?
Still waiting for you to refute Stefan-Boltzmann.
Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..
That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...
HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.
The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...
NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....
I’m waiting loser you’re still posting nothing
Just show how they observed it, cold radiating at warmer. Why isn’t in there? All those books and what no observation?Caviat: According to an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model....all hail the dogma...all bow before the dogma...the dogma is infallible...the dogma known all..
Not “proof” flacalten...nothing like proof and you sholld be ashamed and embarrassed for suggesting that it was...such is the power of dogma...it makes proof out of thin air...and people are expected to simply accept and believe..
As I've explained to you before -- the burden on TEXTBOOK is many times higher than the burden on any papers or theories or opinion that appear in Journals.. This explanation of radiative physics is in 5 textbooks on my shelf.. All the way from the 60s to the 2000s... And no group of bright physicists have challenged the math or the theory....
It's NOT abstract... While at Kennedy Space Center, I worked on modeling for skin heat distribution for SkyLab, the Space station and the Shuttle.. Helped develop the "vehicle rotation" regimes to avoid hot spots on the sun side and distribution of internal heat along the body of the craft..
It's also the same math and physics that applies to ANY electromagnetic heating. And it's USED in a wide variety of actual systems and projects...
You go with dogma... I'll wait for the textbook revisions and a REASON to doubt it...
You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.
Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..
That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...
HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.
The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...
NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....
by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!
You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.
Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..
That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...
HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.
The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...
NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....
by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!
I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..
And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??
Yep nothing observed, still waiting
Yep, when it is pointed at cold, it loses energy to the cold object, it is the thermo coupler reading a loss of energy. What is the make, I’ll be happy to pull the explanation from their web site for you!You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.
Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..
That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...
HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.
The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...
NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....
by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!
I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..
And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??
Yep, when it is pointed at cold, it loses energy to the cold object, it is the thermo coupler reading a loss of energy. What is the make, I’ll be happy to pull the explanation from their web site for you!You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..
That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...
HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.
The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...
NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....
by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!
I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..
And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??
Yep, when it is pointed at cold, it loses energy to the cold object, it is the thermo coupler reading a loss of energy. What is the make, I’ll be happy to pull the explanation from their web site for you!You didn’t read my whole post, why? I never said any such thing.Post #495. Thanks for the try, but that’s not observation and I asked for observed. Just in case you missed that part. And, i never said that the cold object doesn’t radiate, just not with a warmer object next to it. In your own post it states ‘depending’.Well wait no more JC, you're about to get straighten out about "IR heat" and radiative physics... DO ASK FOR HELP if you need it, but quite simply --- The amount of IR energy passed between any two bodies will exchange in BOTH directions, depending on the geometry of the surfaces and the temperatures of the objects.. A cold and hot body will BOTH "radiate" each other.. The hot one always wins the TOTAL transfer.. Here's you proof..
That science FACT in that textbook simply says that EVERYTHING is capable of radiating IR.. Even clouds and snow and ice.. And it actually SOLVES your complaint if you understood it.. A cold object facing a warm object is in a photon gunfight.. And the WARM object always wins.. Because it's the bigger IR photon flux... So NO LAW OF BASIC THERMODYNAMICS IS VIOLATED...
HOWEVER -- if you're talking about a massively distributed atmospheric shield of green house gases, that WEAK "back radiation" which is only maybe a fiftieth the earth's heat shedding, DOES happen to get reduce by a few WATTS out of HUNDREDS of watts.. Those gases act like a electromagnetic "blanket" to retard the loss to space and slow the heat loss.
The earth still LOSES HEAT every hour of the night and day to the cooler sky and space.. It just loses it at a rate reduced by the THERMAL DIFFERENCE between the atmosphere and the absolute cold of space...
NO SECOND LAW VIOLATION... Don't be a dummy.... Especially, if you don't understand the standard textbooks on the subject....
by the way, if they are in text books, they could say how they observed cold radiating with a warm object next to it. Just saying!
I do that experiment every time I point my Home Depot IR thermometer at my windows looking for leaks.. Can read window sills at 40DegF or so even tho the IR thermometer is at room temperature dude... Straighten up and fly right.. There are HUNDREDS of opportunities to hit on "climate science".. THIS --- aint one of them..
And if you did not deny that everything can radiate in the electromagnetic spectrum even IF its colder --- WTF was your issue??
