Physicist Offers $10,000 To Anyone Who Can Disprove Climate Change

[mamooth]

It takes a heat sink is 10 to 15 times larger than the light itself in order to keep the operating temperature below 110 or so.

So, you're saying the operating temperature is below 110F.

Yet it's shining into a 400F oven.

Hence, your theory fails.

 

[SSDD]

No, the metal is not hotter than the Sun.

Then it is receiving no energy from the ice itself but is receiving light reflected from the light source.

Would light from a source cooler than the metal also be allowed to reflect toward the hotter metal?

Energy doesn't move from cool to warm.

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.

Second Law of Thermodynamics

 

[SSDD]

It takes a heat sink is 10 to 15 times larger than the light itself in order to keep the operating temperature below 110 or so.

So, you're saying the operating temperature is below 110F.

No, that's not what I am saying at all. The temperature of the LED, at the point the light is being produced is far above 400...the heat sink bleeds off the heat that exists to keep from burning up the light. You really are a stupid woman, aren't you?

, your theory fails.

Ask flacalten to explain heat sinks to you. the fact that the light source is so hot is why a heat sink is necessary...it doesn't make the source any cooler...it only bleeds off the heat that the source is creating to keep it at an effective temperature.

I have no theory..I just have the second law of thermodynamics and it hasn't been proven wrong yet. The fact that you have no clue as to what a heat sink does certainly doesn't revoke the second law.

 

[Kosh]

Earth's temperature has not risen significantly since 1998 and has cooled by 0.5oC since early 2007. Even the United Nations has quietly admitted this. This is completely contrary to the CO2 caused global warming theory, which states that the earth's temperature should be quickly rising because atmospheric CO2 is rising quickly. The UN and those who support the CO2 warming theory claim that the cooling is just a temporary glitch and earth's temperature will began to rise again in a year or two. However, as explained, a majority of scientists now believe that we are in for a 15 to 35 year cooling cycle that has nothing to do with CO2 and everything to do with solar activity and temperature oscillations of the oceans

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then it is receiving no energy from the ice itself but is receiving light reflected from the light source.

Would light from a source cooler than the metal also be allowed to reflect toward the hotter metal?

Energy doesn't move from cool to warm.

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.

Second Law of Thermodynamics

Energy doesn't move from cool to warm.

I thought we were talking about reflection?

 

[SSDD]

Would light from a source cooler than the metal also be allowed to reflect toward the hotter metal?

Energy doesn't move from cool to warm.

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.

Second Law of Thermodynamics

Energy doesn't move from cool to warm.

I thought we were talking about reflection?

Of course sunlight would reflect from the ice to the metal...the sun being warmer than the metal...No energy from the ice is being absorbed by the metal. If twisting your opponents argument, and misrepresenting what he is saying is the only way you see to continue...then you have lost already.

 

[mamooth]

The temperature of the LED, at the point the light is being produced is far above 400...

You just told us the LED doesn't work at high temps. Now you say it's running at above 400F. You can't keep your conspiracy theory consistent from sentence to sentence.

Let's go with your latest flipflop. You've said the LED operates at above 400F, but you've neglected to provide any evidence for that startling claim. I'm sure the semiconductor industry would love to have semiconductors that work at 400F. Can you tell them how it's done, and thus collect your Nobel Prize?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Energy doesn't move from cool to warm.

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.

Second Law of Thermodynamics

Energy doesn't move from cool to warm.

I thought we were talking about reflection?

Of course sunlight would reflect from the ice to the metal...the sun being warmer than the metal...No energy from the ice is being absorbed by the metal. If twisting your opponents argument, and misrepresenting what he is saying is the only way you see to continue...then you have lost already.

Now we have a perfect blackbody, in the sunlight, let's say -50°C and a perfect blackbody, in the shade, at 400°C.

How much energy will the cooler object send to the warmer?

 

[Crick]

No, that's not what I am saying at all. The temperature of the LED, at the point the light is being produced is far above 400...the heat sink bleeds off the heat that exists to keep from burning up the light. You really are a stupid woman, aren't you?

The heat sink? The heat sink?!?!? What heat sink?

 

[mamooth]

I'm having fun watching SSDD walk further and further into crazyland. I know I shouldn't encourage him, but it's hard to resist.

 

[SSDD]

No, that's not what I am saying at all. The temperature of the LED, at the point the light is being produced is far above 400...the heat sink bleeds off the heat that exists to keep from burning up the light. You really are a stupid woman, aren't you?

The heat sink? The heat sink?!?!? What heat sink?

You don't know what a heat sink is?

 

[SSDD]

The temperature of the LED, at the point the light is being produced is far above 400...

You just told us the LED doesn't work at high temps. Now you say it's running at above 400F. You can't keep your conspiracy theory consistent from sentence to sentence.

Let's go with your latest flipflop. You've said the LED operates at above 400F, but you've neglected to provide any evidence for that startling claim. I'm sure the semiconductor industry would love to have semiconductors that work at 400F. Can you tell them how it's done, and thus collect your Nobel Prize?

I provided you with an article from a source that you trust stating explicitly that 70% of the energy used by a LED is converted to heat.

Your car's operating temperature is about 210 degrees F. Do you think that the fuel igniting in the combustion chamber is 210 or less? You really are a stupid woman. No man could be so ignorant (except crick who may be a whiny little girl also). So as I was saying, your car's operating temperature is 210 degrees or so but the temperature within the combustion chamber can approach, or exceed 3000 degrees.....just as the operating temperature of your led is in the 100 degree range. Operating temperature, however does not say what the maximum temperature within the device is, it only says what the temperature must be held to in order to continue to operate properly...I guess a stupid woman such as yourself shouldn't be expected to know such things, but you did claim to be a nuclear watch officer so when you make such foundational errors, it only highlights your previous lies.

 

[SSDD]

I'm having fun watching SSDD walk further and further into crazyland. I know I shouldn't encourage him, but it's hard to resist.

All you are doing is bringing attention to your own abject ignorance. Clearly, since you have no idea what a heat sink is, or what it does, it follows that you lied when you claimed to have any knowledge concerning nuclear reactors. Do you think the operating temperature of a nuclear reactor is the same temperature that the rods would reach were they not immersed in water?

Good of you to be willing to publicly display the depth of your ignorance though....thanks.

 

[mamooth]

I provided you with an article from a source that you trust stating explicitly that 70% of the energy used by a LED is converted to heat.

But you haven't told us the temperature of the LED, or shown any evidence to back up your insane claims. You've just pouted a lot.

Again, tell us what temperature an LED flashlight is operating at. The part that emits the light. I keep asking that, and you keep running from the question.

Needless to say, you'll need to provide the references or calculations as to where you got that number.

Oh, nice to see you join the vet-spitters. That matches well with your treason-based lifestyle.

 

[SSDD]

I provided you with an article from a source that you trust stating explicitly that 70% of the energy used by a LED is converted to heat.

But you haven't told us the temperature of the LED, or shown any evidence to back up your insane claims. You've just pouted a lot.

Again, tell us what temperature an LED flashlight is operating at. The part that emits the light. I keep asking that, and you keep running from the question.

Needless to say, you'll need to provide the references or calculations as to where you got that number.

Oh, nice to see you join the vet-spitters. That matches well with your treason-based lifestyle.

If 70% of the energy used to produce light is converted to heat, then knowing the amount of energy coming in from the source, and the area of the LED, and the output of the LED one should be able to calculate the temperature of the light producing surface of the LED.

Admit publicly that you, a claimed nuclear watch officer, can't handle that small bit of relatively simple math and I will provide you with an answer and have a new quote to add to my tag line....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I provided you with an article from a source that you trust stating explicitly that 70% of the energy used by a LED is converted to heat.

But you haven't told us the temperature of the LED, or shown any evidence to back up your insane claims. You've just pouted a lot.

Again, tell us what temperature an LED flashlight is operating at. The part that emits the light. I keep asking that, and you keep running from the question.

Needless to say, you'll need to provide the references or calculations as to where you got that number.

Oh, nice to see you join the vet-spitters. That matches well with your treason-based lifestyle.

If 70% of the energy used to produce light is converted to heat, then knowing the amount of energy coming in from the source, and the area of the LED, and the output of the LED one should be able to calculate the temperature of the light producing surface of the LED.

Admit publicly that you, a claimed nuclear watch officer, can't handle that small bit of relatively simple math and I will provide you with an answer and have a new quote to add to my tag line....

Now we have a perfect blackbody, in the sunlight, let's say -50°C and a perfect blackbody, in the shade, at 400°C.

How much energy will the cooler object send to the warmer?

 

[SSDD]

But you haven't told us the temperature of the LED, or shown any evidence to back up your insane claims. You've just pouted a lot.

Again, tell us what temperature an LED flashlight is operating at. The part that emits the light. I keep asking that, and you keep running from the question.

Needless to say, you'll need to provide the references or calculations as to where you got that number.

Oh, nice to see you join the vet-spitters. That matches well with your treason-based lifestyle.

If 70% of the energy used to produce light is converted to heat, then knowing the amount of energy coming in from the source, and the area of the LED, and the output of the LED one should be able to calculate the temperature of the light producing surface of the LED.

Admit publicly that you, a claimed nuclear watch officer, can't handle that small bit of relatively simple math and I will provide you with an answer and have a new quote to add to my tag line....

Now we have a perfect blackbody, in the sunlight, let's say -50°C and a perfect blackbody, in the shade, at 400°C.

How much energy will the cooler object send to the warmer?

Where did you get this perfect blackbody? Do you actually have a perfect blackbody or are we pretending....which, by the way is the primary problem with post modern science and all of climate science. All pretending all the time and no actual science.

 

[mamooth]

If 70% of the energy used to produce light is converted to heat, then knowing the amount of energy coming in from the source, and the area of the LED, and the output of the LED one should be able to calculate the temperature of the light producing surface of the LED.

If it's so simple, then you should be able to calculate it. So calculate it. I keep asking, and you keep finding new creative reasons to not give an answer.

Of course, it's not simple. One would also have to know heat capacity and heat conductance of all the materials, the exact physical layout, then set it up the heat flow model and run the program. The result would be a curve over time rising up to an equilibrium temp, as a opposed to a single temperature. Specific temperature would also vary depending on how close any point was to the heat sink.

Seriously, you don't have a clue about heat flow.

Admit publicly that you, a claimed nuclear watch officer, can't handle that small bit of relatively simple math and I will provide you with an answer and have a new quote to add to my tag line....

So you're saying it's my responsibility to prove your insane theories. That would not be how it works. I'm not the one claiming it's totally simple. You are, so show us.

Of course, we all know you're actually not capable of doing the calculation, which is why you're going to give us a new reason to avoid doing so. If you'd like to prove me wrong, just do the calculation for us.

I'll get you started. A 5mm white LED draws 20 mA at 3v. That's 60 mW total, so 42 mW of heat. Assume the light-emitting surface is a 1mm square. You take it from there, being you say it's so easy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If 70% of the energy used to produce light is converted to heat, then knowing the amount of energy coming in from the source, and the area of the LED, and the output of the LED one should be able to calculate the temperature of the light producing surface of the LED.

Admit publicly that you, a claimed nuclear watch officer, can't handle that small bit of relatively simple math and I will provide you with an answer and have a new quote to add to my tag line....

Now we have a perfect blackbody, in the sunlight, let's say -50°C and a perfect blackbody, in the shade, at 400°C.

How much energy will the cooler object send to the warmer?

Where did you get this perfect blackbody? Do you actually have a perfect blackbody or are we pretending....which, by the way is the primary problem with post modern science and all of climate science. All pretending all the time and no actual science.

Do you actually have a perfect blackbody or are we pretending

Your smart photons don't work if we pretend?

 

[flacaltenn]

Real simple guys.. Put your IR Remote control in the freezer for 10 minutes.
Aim it at your TV quickly.. If the TV turns on --- Physics is vindicated..

Don't forget it's in there !!

Tomorrow -- the ultimate test of CO2 physics using 20 cans of beer...