|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 3, 2013 19:38:46 GMT
Trbixler As I said before you interfered in a discussion while being clueless what was being discussed by me, and supported Magellan who was also clueless what was being discussed by me. By supporting Magellans stupidity, where he openly admitted he was not reading what i had written, and he said he knew I was wrong, you prolonged this stupid conversation that has now gone on for 18 stupid months What i was talking about is school boy science You made me out to be talking about some kind of magic energy production, as did Magellan. I am asking you again to do the decent thing, review what happened and help me demonstrate that the others were muddled up and are still lacking knowledge of simple scientific principles Why the hell do i need to produce more experiments to prove that Tyndall, Maxwell, Kelvin and Boltzmann were correct? The fact of the matter is you had no idea what you were talking about when you began supporting Magellan against me. Come on please. Please do the right thing here Andrew Please refer to this and take it from there You are paying him for his efforts? A physics lab experiment typically starts with a specification for the experiment and an expectation of results. Did you provide such a specification? I was surprised that magellan spent as much effort as he has on this experiment. No specification then a non paying client complaining is beyond belief. Did you read the link www.engineeringtoolbox.com/radiation-heat-transfer-d_431.htmlFill in the equations and write up your expectations. Run the experiment (log the results enough times to see the consistency) the analyze the results. Be a professional. My physics lab professor Dr. Geer would be shocked. siris-archives.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?uri=full=3100001~!140167!0 You began by refusing to learn what you were supposed to be building
Apparently the description was too long for you. All these things are demonstrating exactly the same principle. In each case there is a warm body, colder body and colder environment. Ie they illustrate the warm surface, the colder atmosphere and the deeper cold of outer space    |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 21:30:14 GMT
Andrew. Give it a rest.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 3, 2013 21:34:05 GMT
Numerouno who is about the only person apart from Steve Entropic and Miescatter who has supported me thru this said you were a proven liar. Why dont you explain in clear terms that you believe Icefisher is totally muddled up? Why is it acceptable to you that Trbixler can tell me to provide better experiments and get my act together? Why is is acceptable to you that Magellan who demonstrated monsterous stupidity is able to constantly tell me i am a liar when it is absolutely clear he did not have the slightest clue what i was talking about to begin with? Do you tell Magellan to give it up? No. Of course you dont, because obviously an open and honest approach to dealing with problems is not your style. Or do you have a better explanation? |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 22:01:45 GMT
Andrew: I will say again. Give it a rest. Ice fisher and Magellan did give it a rest for awhile.
This has nothing to do with climate. Back radiation is an assumption in regards to weather/climate but has never been demonstrated to be important because of the other variables that you did not include in your experiment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 3, 2013 22:10:35 GMT
Andrew: I will say again. Give it a rest. Ice fisher and Magellan did give it a rest for awhile. This has nothing to do with climate. Back radiation is an assumption in regards to weather/climate but has never been demonstrated to be important because of the other variables that you did not include in your experiment. It is ridiculous to say that Backardiation is an assumption in its ability to impact our climate. Only a scientifically ignorant person can say such a thing. The near earth atmosphere in clear conditions is full of water vapour even in the driest conditions People who make negative comments about backradation in the contexts of climate are clearly scientifically illiterate. You, Icefisher and Magellan all belong to the same club of anti-scientific people. You all think your opinion is what matters to decide the results of the scientific method. At a guess i can probably find screeds of text where Cambourne is saying backradiation breaks the laws of thermodynamics, where nobody is able to reason with you, |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 22:23:08 GMT
Andrew.
Back radiation, when talking about a circle is totally different than a flat surface. Think about circumference and the increase of such for every foot increase above the earth's surface. Then remind yourself that the photons do not have heat value themselves nor care about direction. They are emitted at random.
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 22:27:00 GMT
I am not picking on you or maggelan or icefisher. But for any argument to be relevant to a climate discussion circumference, pressure etc must be part of that discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 3, 2013 22:32:30 GMT
Andrew. Back radiation, when talking about a circle is totally different than a flat surface. Think about circumference and the increase of such for every foot increase above the earth's surface. Then remind yourself that the photons do not have heat value themselves nor care about direction. They are emitted at random. Your comment makes no sense to me at all. The only way for the surface to cool is via the atmosphere regardless of the geometry If you explain what you are getting at I can reply to you. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 22:34:16 GMT
Ever wonder why hitch pins are round rather than square? Or an axle in a tractor, why it is round rather than square? The shape changes the stress properties. Can have the same amount of metal, but the shear equation changes totally because of the shape. A flat surface verses a round surface also changes the equation in ref to radiation properties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 3, 2013 22:36:38 GMT
Ever wonder why hitch pins are round rather than square? Or an axle in a tractor, why it is round rather than square? The shape changes the stress properties. Can have the same amount of metal, but the shear equation changes totally because of the shape. A flat surface verses a round surface also changes the equation in ref to radiation properties. ?? So now you want to tell me that i need to consider why a square axel in a square bearing does not work? A six year old will be able to tell you the thing will be locked solid You are obfuscating. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 22:37:13 GMT
Andrew. The geometry changes how the cooling or heating reacts to the source of the heat.
Think about this for a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 3, 2013 22:39:11 GMT
Andrew. The geometry changes how the cooling or heating reacts to the source of the heat. Think about this for a bit. Cut the crap and explain whatever is going thru your mind when you say geometry is relevant when the only way of cooling the surface is via whatever geometry you decide is present in the atmosphere You are obfuscating |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 22:39:13 GMT
Ever wonder why hitch pins are round rather than square? Or an axle in a tractor, why it is round rather than square? The shape changes the stress properties. Can have the same amount of metal, but the shear equation changes totally because of the shape. A flat surface verses a round surface also changes the equation in ref to radiation properties. ?? So now you want to tell me that i need to consider why a square axel in a square bearing does not work? You are obfuscating. Andrew. I was attempting to show you, via a common item, why the geometric shape is critical. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 3, 2013 22:41:01 GMT
?? So now you want to tell me that i need to consider why a square axel in a square bearing does not work? You are obfuscating. Andrew. I was attempting to show you, via a common item, why the geometric shape is critical. Bullshit. You are avoiding an intelligent description of why you think it matters at all. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 3, 2013 22:41:03 GMT
The present geometry of the earth is round. The Catholics even acknowledge this now. At least most of them.
|
|
You are paying him for his efforts? A physics lab experiment typically starts with a specification for the experiment and an expectation of results. Did you provide such a specification? I was surprised that magellan spent as much effort as he has on this experiment. No specification then a non paying client complaining is beyond belief. Did you read the link www.engineeringtoolbox.com/radiation-heat-transfer-d_431.html
You began by refusing to learn what you were supposed to be building
