tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post2006460930072113288..comments2024-03-19T03:14:04.172-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: Instructions for the hard of learningEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-38199962307517374762012-10-24T15:47:04.023-04:002012-10-24T15:47:04.023-04:00How does the photon know the temperature of the so...How does the photon know the temperature of the source from which it was emitted? How does it know the temperature of the body it is hitting? How does the photon know it is hitting the surface or being absorbed by a greenhouse gas or headed out to space? JAE has some really smart photons there.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-15652956383242476052012-10-24T14:22:34.927-04:002012-10-24T14:22:34.927-04:00jae to Mars, or wherever you are: "jae believ...jae to Mars, or wherever you are: "jae believes in really smart photons." Oh, bunny, that added a lot to the discussion. Can you elaborate, please? You and Dano sound like brothers.RandyvVifhttp://steveniaguilaro.tumblr.com/post/32440721090/if-you-are-looking-to-get-a-better-handle-on-yournoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-73251450959348538622008-09-10T22:55:00.000-04:002008-09-10T22:55:00.000-04:00from pough to jae:open air is one of the absolutel...from pough to jae:<BR/><BR/><I>open air is one of the absolutely worst insulators on the planet</I><BR/><BR/>You just admitted it's an insulator. Pick up the wrong script?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-9789989302443780142008-09-10T17:16:00.000-04:002008-09-10T17:16:00.000-04:00jae to Herr Hare and harettes:LOL. The bunny must ...jae to Herr Hare and harettes:<BR/><BR/>LOL. The bunny must be desperately looking for something to chew on, lately. I don't know WHO besides you mentioned survival blankets, which are a very special type of "blanket." Another Hare-brained tangent. As the bunny probably knows, open air is one of the absolutely worst insulators on the planet, due to convection (which is another reason the CO2/AGW idea is so silly). But air is, alas, a poor conductor, also. So, if you take a material with low mass (to minimize conduction)and use it to surround billions of very tiny air bubbles(to minimize conduction), you get the best type of insulation known, other than a vacuum, where there is no convection. It's called foam insulation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-71287501709987651162008-09-10T13:55:00.000-04:002008-09-10T13:55:00.000-04:00jaeAt least the Roman does not have to un-learn th...jae<BR/><BR/>At least the Roman does not have to un-learn that "a photon emitted by a colder body knows to avoid a hotter one"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-7163691257737381742008-09-09T22:14:00.000-04:002008-09-09T22:14:00.000-04:00Eli is an obliging bunny, so he googled survival b...Eli is an obliging bunny, so he googled survival blanket, and <A HREF="http://www.campmor.com/outdoor/gear/Product___89035" REL="nofollow"> what do you think he found?</A><BR/><BR/>"Our Heatsheet® Survival blanket is 20% larger than competing brands-allowing you to shelter two people inside. Survival and first aid instructions are printed directly on the blanket! Reflects up to 80% of radiant body heat."<BR/><BR/>Hmm, guess returned radiation keeps the little lost Rabetts warm and cozy.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-59956916398434812212008-09-09T18:17:00.000-04:002008-09-09T18:17:00.000-04:00jae to the Roman:Boy, do you have a lot to learn a...jae to the Roman:<BR/><BR/>Boy, do you have a lot to learn about insulation. Why don't you Google it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-37236469974675004142008-09-09T17:38:00.000-04:002008-09-09T17:38:00.000-04:00Maybe those chemistry PhD:s sleep without a blanke...Maybe those chemistry PhD:s sleep without a blanket too. As it is, the colder blanket can not warm the body, it would contradict the second law of thermodynamics! It doesn't matter if it's radiation, conduction or convection, "a cooler body can't warm a warmer one".<BR/><BR/>Blankets are only a marketing scam by textile companies.<BR/><BR/>Also their computers have no heat sinks or coolers either, since after the processor gets one degree hotter than the surroundings, the as heat will always flow perfectly in one direction.<BR/><BR/>Actually, they don't even need a house, since insulation is not a phenomenon but a hoax (by the nefarious insulation industry no less). A shed will do (to keep dry), and some hot radiators, or a fireplace.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-39397836667221447122008-09-08T22:41:00.000-04:002008-09-08T22:41:00.000-04:00Another arm-waving dead thread. LOL.Another arm-waving dead thread. LOL.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-23133089168625433762008-09-08T07:13:00.000-04:002008-09-08T07:13:00.000-04:00To claim that the green house effect violates the ...To claim that the green house effect violates the second law of thermodynamics is to claim that there is no greenhouse effect.<BR/><BR/>... and to claim that there is no greenhouse effect is to deny reality, for without it, the earth would be a much colder place.<BR/><BR/>But by all means, jae and other PhD quacks, keep denying reality.<BR/><BR/>It just makes you look foolish.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-69988008385841352232008-09-08T04:50:00.000-04:002008-09-08T04:50:00.000-04:00To those claiming there are no top-of-atmosphere I...To those claiming there are no top-of-atmosphere IR emission spectral measurements. Try Googling...<BR/><BR/>ir atmospheric emission spectrum toa<BR/><BR/><BR/>To those who claiming that the green house effect violates the 2nd law of thermo...pick up a text book or something. The original post spells it out. If you can't see that, then there is no hope for you<BR/><BR/>DaveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-2664231802552682252008-09-07T22:56:00.000-04:002008-09-07T22:56:00.000-04:00"Rabett: "Guys, I don't think you want to mess wit..."Rabett: "Guys, I don't think you want to mess with Robert about Pchem or thermo. You really will get undressed."<BR/><BR/><BR/>LOL. Now, we are being threatened by being "insulted" by a big guy? Somehow, I'm not very afraid. <BR/><BR/>Why the heck can't he (or the funnybunny) at least present some page numbers. At best, he could present some equations showing how the AGW CO2-warming theory does not violate the second law. <BR/><BR/>At the very best, he could provide what Steve McIntyre has been asking for for over 2 years: a sensible first-principles exposition of how CO2 can heat the atmosphere, and especially how the "positive feedback" idea works. Like Steve, I've been waiting for over two years for such a document. Since it has not been forthcoming, I don't believe it exists, which suggests strongly that the "warmers" are engaging in absolute fraud. The warmers ALWAYS point to all kinds of books and articles, so they can duck this question and avoid answering it. Bring it on, Robert!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-21445162982412623842008-09-07T20:06:00.000-04:002008-09-07T20:06:00.000-04:00Das Prinzip von Clausius: Die Wärme kann nicht von...Das Prinzip von Clausius: Die Wärme kann nicht von selbst aus einem kälteren in einen wärmeren Körper übergehen.<BR/><BR/>Clausius sagte nicht dass das unmöglich war.<BR/><BR/><BR/>This review by <A HREF="http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~rlorenz/MEPRG.pdf" REL="nofollow">Ozawa et al.</A> from Rev Geophys 2003, 41(4): 1018 is quite good too.<BR/><BR/><I>Cymraeg llygoden</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-76062350992110312382008-09-07T17:56:00.000-04:002008-09-07T17:56:00.000-04:00Rabett: "Guys, I don't think you want to mess with...Rabett: "Guys, I don't think you want to mess with Robert about Pchem or thermo. You really will get undressed."<BR/><BR/>If they do, at least I may learn something. They certainly won't.TheChemistryOfBeerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04228308036995626376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-77971126048229765132008-09-07T13:56:00.000-04:002008-09-07T13:56:00.000-04:00If Marky wants full spectrum emission from the top...If Marky wants full spectrum emission from the top of the atmosphere, there is always Nimbus 3 and Nimbus 4 from the 1960s and 70s, AIRS, AURA, a bunch of balloons and more. Google is your friend. Ignorance and attitude don't make for a good mixture Marky.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-33327408562679234162008-09-07T13:11:00.000-04:002008-09-07T13:11:00.000-04:00Understanding and being able to apply the basic id...Understanding and being able to apply the basic ideas behind the second law of thermodynamics does not require much in the way of mathematical knowledge. <BR/><BR/>But it does require having an understanding of the basic underlying assumptions of the law (eg, isolated macroscopic system ) and also the non-applicability of the law to certain (eg, microscopic) cases: <BR/><BR/>a lower energy molecule <I>can</I> transfer some of its energy to a higher energy molecule, eg through exchange of a photon (emission of the photon from the lower energy molecule and absorption of the same photon by the higher energy molecule). The second law simply does not apply to such a case.<BR/><BR/><BR/>But, in and of itself, the unsubstantiated claim that "AGW violates the second law of thermodynamics" is not even a scientific argument. (Any PhD or even BS chemist should certainly recognize such a statement for what it is: an empty hand-waving argument)<BR/><BR/>To demonstrate violation of the second law of thermodynamics (or violation of any other physical law) one must show precisely <I>how</I> something violates the law, which, of course, requires that one first know what the law actually says -- and means.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-56883133250963251792008-09-07T11:15:00.000-04:002008-09-07T11:15:00.000-04:00Hey, I've got a chemistry degree, but my maths is ...Hey, I've got a chemistry degree, but my maths is rather poor, I'm not much use at calculus. Morevoer, I harbour a deep and abiding grudge for my school and university for not giving me a proper grounding in philosophy of science; instead I have had to learn it all after uni.<BR/><BR/>But anyway, jae needs to consider which system is under inspection here, which is increasing in entropy? <BR/>go on Jae, tell us. How does the atmosphere really work in terms of increasing entropy? You see, at the moment, you appear to be in rebellion against every textbook out there on the topic, without actually having ponied up any rational argument as to why they (and by implication the many PhD'd and professored writers) are wrong. Don't tell us its the entropy, show us. And don't forget the Gibbs free energy.guthriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17992984293423290387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-66084242819057482752008-09-07T10:55:00.000-04:002008-09-07T10:55:00.000-04:00I think if people are actually being given an unde...I think if people are actually being given an undergrad degree in chemistry (to say nothing of a PhD) without understanding the meaning of the second law of thermodynamics, then that does not say much for the department/university that is granting the degree.<BR/><BR/>Anyone who actually believes that the second law of thermodynamics somehow prohibits photons emitted by a colder body from being absorbed by a nearby warmer body (ie, that the photons emitted by the colder body will somehow "avoid" being absorbed by the warmer body) has no business being awarded a PhD in any branch of chemistry (organic or otherwise)<BR/><BR/>That they can go through 9+ years of higher education in science and actually entertain such thoughts is unbelievable (to me at least).<BR/><BR/>That's as embarrassing (if not more embarrassing) for the department who awards the degree as for the one who got it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-61985370131213555332008-09-07T00:02:00.000-04:002008-09-07T00:02:00.000-04:00Robert, I think the place where gradate students h...Robert, I think the place where gradate students have to wrestle with the meaning of thermo is when they hit their first stat mech course, or at least that was my case.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-47421218261305290592008-09-06T23:59:00.000-04:002008-09-06T23:59:00.000-04:00Guys, I don't think you want to mess with Robert a...Guys, I don't think you want to mess with Robert about Pchem or thermo. You really will get undressed.<BR/><BR/>When someone points you at basic material, you would do well to actually RTFR before you mouth off and make a fool of yourself.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-18963227429308425312008-09-06T23:42:00.000-04:002008-09-06T23:42:00.000-04:00MarkeyMouse says: jae is quite correct. It is stan...MarkeyMouse says: jae is quite correct. It is standard practice for Warmers to get evasive when ask questions they have no answer. The eli method is to say it's all on the web "somewhere", and RobertP employs a version "it's all in standard text books".<BR/><BR/>Conversley the Warmers always ask for "peer reviewed" evidence of non Alarmist assertions.<BR/><BR/>Example. Anyone got any full spectrum radiation satellite measurements from the top of the atmosphere?<BR/><BR/>Crickets chirp.<BR/><BR/>The radiation balance cartoons shown are unsupported by hard evidence apparently.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-28695729388881863402008-09-06T23:01:00.000-04:002008-09-06T23:01:00.000-04:00From jae to Robert P. The reference trick again an...From jae to Robert P. <BR/><BR/>The reference trick again and again and again. I have looked briefly at some of those texts, and they ALL use the same concept of the "backradiation" cartoon nonsense. Do ANY of them consider entropy, which is really what the second law is all about? No, AFIK, they conveniently skip this issue and keep beating on "backradiation." I need to know HOW on this world a cold substance heats a hot substance. EVER. This phenomenon is not known, except in "climate science." Radiation cartoons do NOT explain it, because they ignore entropy (as well as other things). They are a scientific joke, IMHO. If one of them really gets into the issue of how I can warm myself with an ice cube, without violating the second law, point me to THAT one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-13735945089643973372008-09-06T22:56:00.000-04:002008-09-06T22:56:00.000-04:00jae says: "You have yet to say anything substantiv...jae says: <I>"You have yet to say anything substantive here.'</I><BR/><BR/>This from the guy who obviously believes that photons emitted from the colder of two objects somehow "know" (in their infinite photonic wisdom) to avoid the hotter object.<BR/><BR/>You are one funny guy, jae.<BR/><BR/>One funny guy.<BR/><BR/>BTW, you can "debate" what the second law means or does not mean until the cows come home, but it is clear to everyone who reads what you have written that you are denying a simple fact (repeatedly, [over and over {again and again}]): <BR/><BR/>the global average temp of the earth is ~288K, considerably higher than it would be if the earth did not have an atmosphere that absorbed/emitted in the IR (part of that emitted radiation being directed back toward the earth) <BR/><BR/>But then as you have already made clear in the previous thread, you either are not familiar with the Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law or you do not know how to take the 4th root of a number (perhaps understandable, math not being your strong suit, being a PhD chemist and all).<BR/><BR/>So how can we really expect you to actually calculate the temp of the earth sans an IR absorbing/emitting atmosphere (even if you were given the relevant equation, as you were in the previous thread)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-30810115953520213552008-09-06T22:16:00.000-04:002008-09-06T22:16:00.000-04:00jae: the equations that you ask for can be found (...jae: the equations that you ask for can be found (implicitly) in any of the many pulcished monographs on atmospheric radiative transfer. Try Goody and Jung, if you want to see a lot of messy detail. At a more basic level, try chapter 6 of Wallace and Hobbs, _Atmospheric Science: An Introductory Survey_, Academic Press 1977. Pay particular attention to the discussion of Kirchoff's Law on pp. 291-293. Kirchoff's Law is, in essence, the application of the 2nd law of thermodynamics to radiative transfer. Since the fundamental equations of radiative transfer have the 2nd law of thermodynamics built into them, the notion that AGW violates the 2nd law is prima facie absurd.<BR/><BR/>Robert P.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-7091717071973111242008-09-06T22:00:00.000-04:002008-09-06T22:00:00.000-04:00jae to Robert P: Do you believe that "backradiati...jae to Robert P: Do you believe that "backradiation" from the colder atmosphere HEATS the planet? If so, can you provide the entropy equations for this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com