|
Post by Andrew on Jan 28, 2014 5:44:07 GMT
Physically or chemically speaking, which is what we need to understand to understand the nature of latent heat, latent heat is not released externally. It is only released internally to maintain the temperature of the freezing mixture. If the temperatures in an orchard are falling then the act of freezing alone is totally incapable of causing the orchard to become warmer at the freezing point. If the temperatures in the arctic are falling then the act of freezing alone is totally incapable of causing the arctic to become warmer at the freezing point. All you had to say was hang on a minute I am not saying that at all. Instead you are continually defending Sigurdur who is still saying if temperatures in an orchard are falling then freezing will warm the orchard!! The way to move this conversation forwards is to make statements which we agree upon rather than find tiniest insignificant reasons to score points. It is impossible for the act of water freezing to raise temperatures in orchards when the temperature was falling before the freezing point was reached. There is no mechanism. Zilch nada zero mechanism. Thats what this conversation has always been about. Its freakophysics to claim that the temperature of the atmosphere is always falling in the presence of a zero degree ocean. So why do you continue with such nonsense? You can endlessly play the c.unt and pointlessly f**k around with my replies for the rest of time but it will not change science. It is impossible for the act of water freezing to raise temperatures in orchards when the temperature was falling before the freezing point was reached. There is no mechanism. Zilch nada zero mechanism. Thats what this conversation has always been about.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 28, 2014 5:48:18 GMT
Andrew: Did you read the link where the University of Florida published that temps in the lower sectors rose because of latent heat release to sensible heat? Once again.......observation my good man...observation trumps hypothesis. edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ch182Why Microsprinklers Provide Cold ProtectionSeveral factors contribute to the cold protection effectiveness of microsprinkler systems. Most well water in Florida is around 68 to 70°F. This warm water contributes a small amount of sensible heat to the grove at it drops from the initial temperature to 32°F. When temperatures drop below freezing, the latent heat of fusion is released when the water freezes. Depending on the amount of ice that forms, the heat released can raise temperatures in the lower part of the canopy. Water has a high heat capacity and can store a fair amount of heat. Therefore, a moist soil can hold more heat than a dry soil.
Microsprinklers can also raise the dew point or frost point temperature in the grove. When the temperature drops to the frost point, heat is released as the water vapor is converted to ice crystals. When the grove air temperature reaches the dew point temperature, the rate of cooling slows down because heat is released as the water vapor in the air condenses. It has been suggested that microsprinklers can provide some protection above the spray zone because moist air rises and condenses higher up in the canopy. The heat of condensation (8950 BTUs/gallon) may help warm the upper canopy and protect more of the tree.The article is unclear as to what the authors believe. Larry Parsons is still alive. www.crec.ifas.ufl.edu/academics/faculty/parsons/parsons_larry.shtmlIf you had any balls you would write to Parsons so we can resolve it once and for all. Obviously that article is misleading.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 28, 2014 6:47:54 GMT
The article isn't misleading Andrew. This is a well known occurrence. As I said, empirical observations have to be respected. IF this was a one time thing.............then one has to question it.
But the knowledge, which Prof Parsons expressed, is used all the dog gone time. This is how it works in the world. This is the reality.
Water is an amazing chemical.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 28, 2014 7:24:18 GMT
The article isn't misleading Andrew. This is a well known occurrence. As I said, empirical observations have to be respected. IF this was a one time thing.............then one has to question it. But the knowledge, which Prof Parsons expressed, is used all the dog gone time. This is how it works in the world. This is the reality. Water is an amazing chemical. I have written to the University of Florida institute of food and agricultural sciences via their contact page. Meanwhile it would help me if you could clarify what you actually mean by freezing causing heating. For example that article says that oranges are ok at 28F air temperature for 4 hours before becoming damaged. Obviously the large amount of energy provided by latent heat at 0C can help to warm the orchard to temperatures greater than 28F up to a maximum of 0C. However the warmer water was already a greater source of heating than the freezing mixture. The article also says that hardy parts of the plant can withstand 17C degrees so again obviously the latent heat will be involved in ensuring that heating by a 0C source is maintained. However, once again the pre freezing water was already a greater source of heating than the freezing mixture. "Oranges are usually damaged when the fruit are exposed to temperatures of 28°F or lower for 4 hours or more. As the temperature gets colder or durations below 28°F get longer, damage to fruit, leaves, twigs, and eventually large branches increases."So from reading that it appears oranges and orange plants are somewhat frost tolerant. They seem to be saying a leaf can sustain 28F for 4 hours rather than saying a leaf in air of 28F can survive for a least 4 hours. Either way the plant is relatively cold tolerant. Obviously 0C ice/water mixtures can provide substantial beneficial heating for these plants even though this heating is less than the warmer sprayed water will provide before it freezes The meaning of the article is unclear. As it reads it appears to be suggesting something impossible.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 28, 2014 14:02:36 GMT
Andrew: Water going from 40f to 32f with a phase change, has more joules than water going from 65f to 40f.
All plants have some tolerance to light frost.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 28, 2014 14:06:47 GMT
Andrew: Water going from 40f to 32f with a phase change, has more joules than water going from 65f to 40f. All plants have some tolerance to light frost. So what? 9 kilowatts for all of eternity cannot make cooling things hotter when they were already cooling with 3 hours of 10 kilowatts.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 29, 2014 22:44:43 GMT
You can endlessly play the c.unt and pointlessly f**k around with my replies for the rest of time but it will not change science. It is impossible for the act of water freezing to raise temperatures in orchards when the temperature was falling before the freezing point was reached. There is no mechanism. Zilch nada zero mechanism. Thats what this conversation has always been about. No that is not what this has been about1 Your claim and Numeruno's claim has been for 5 months that the energy from the release of latent heat cannot warm anything under any circumstance. Now knowing that you got your ass kicked on that argument you are trying to write it conditionally (when the temperature of the air in contact with the water/ice is falling in temperature.) Your endless play on word games is merely contrived to cover up you screwed the pooch on this one. Yes cold air entering an orchard can and is warmed both by the application of warm water and from ice freezing. Either you are stupid and cannot wrap your head around such a dynamic process, instead trying to cling to static models you learned from a book. Meanwhile people are using this known physical effect to protect crops. You are also being a moron about the external release of the energy of latent heat. Latent heat cannot be released from ice if the energy is not being released externally. You want to play some mindless numbnutz game where you are pretending you went inside of the ice and passed out numbers like to early Black Friday shoppers (in this case to the sensib1le energy that maintains the water above absolute zero), then when latent heat arrives on the scene they get the back of the queue! First there is no science whatsoever to establish such a moronic claim, secondly you have to be a moron to think thats the way it works.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 30, 2014 4:26:08 GMT
You can endlessly play the c.unt and pointlessly f**k around with my replies for the rest of time but it will not change science. It is impossible for the act of water freezing to raise temperatures in orchards when the temperature was falling before the freezing point was reached. There is no mechanism. Zilch nada zero mechanism. Thats what this conversation has always been about. No that is not what this has been about1 Your claim and Numeruno's claim has been for 5 months that the energy from the release of latent heat cannot warm anything under any circumstance. ? The ice can only freeze either by radiating energy to a colder air layer or space or by warming the very cold air that blows across the water ice mixture. So yes the ice is releasing energy to the atmosphere and the ice is a source of heat which can warm the atmosphere, but the unfrozen water is also a source of heat that can warm the atmosphere and is actually a greater source of heat because it has a higher temperature. If the temperatures are falling the act of freezing water cannot create a heat spike. There is no mechanism. Zilch nada Zero. For some reason you have been f**king around with me for 7 months unable to agree on that simple reality.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 31, 2014 7:29:05 GMT
If the temperatures are falling the act of freezing water cannot create a heat spike. There is no mechanism. Zilch nada Zero. For some reason you have been f**king around with me for 7 months unable to agree on that simple reality. We can't agree on it because I am not so stupid as to believe there is only one method of the temperature of the air in an orchard, or the arctic, to fall.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 31, 2014 8:09:59 GMT
If the temperatures are falling the act of freezing water cannot create a heat spike. There is no mechanism. Zilch nada Zero. For some reason you have been f**king around with me for 7 months unable to agree on that simple reality. We can't agree on it because I am not so stupid as to believe there is only one method of the temperature of the air in an orchard, or the arctic, to fall. The act of water freezing can never create an atmospheric heat spike in cooling air Some other additional act is required Eg it becomes windy Water use in Florida is used for radiation frosts in light winds, where spraying begins many degrees before the air has been cooled to freezing temperatures.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 31, 2014 15:08:57 GMT
We can't agree on it because I am not so stupid as to believe there is only one method of the temperature of the air in an orchard, or the arctic, to fall. The act of water freezing can never create an atmospheric heat spike in cooling air Some other additional act is required Eg it becomes windy Water use in Florida is used for radiation frosts in light winds, where spraying begins many degrees before the air has been cooled to freezing temperatures. So once again you admit that myself, Sigurdur, Nautonnier, and NSIDC has been correct from the start. You want to create an argument that we claimed this process could operate universally (i.e. could globally warm the entire world via the freezing of the surface) when very clearly we have said repeatedly it is merely a local or regional phenomena. All of us months ago talked about cool air entering the orchard as opposed to air cooling in place in the orchard. Now that you fully comprehend that you are entirely on the wrong side of physics in this argument you want to pretend we made claims we never made. Heat rises out of freezing water. It was Numnos claim that was not true and you took on Numnos position. Today your position is looking far more reasonable. It has to! You couldn't handle it otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 31, 2014 17:21:04 GMT
So once again you admit that myself, Sigurdur, Nautonnier, and NSIDC has been correct from the start. You want to create an argument that we claimed this process could operate universally (i.e. could globally warm the entire world via the freezing of the surface) when very clearly we have said repeatedly it is merely a local or regional phenomena. All of us months ago talked about cool air entering the orchard as opposed to air cooling in place in the orchard. Now that you fully comprehend that you are entirely on the wrong side of physics in this argument you want to pretend we made claims we never made. Heat rises out of freezing water. It was Numnos claim that was not true and you took on Numnos position. Today your position is looking far more reasonable. It has to! You couldn't handle it otherwise. [/quote Idiot, nauttonier was obviously talking about heat bombs. Sig thinks the uni report is not misleading. You were the prat talking about higher temps in Florida orchards . NSIDC created a confused article that you have attacked or defended as it suited you. Not one single time have you helped me. I have been forced to attempt to reason with the PhD botanists to stop the endless stupidity from sig. The uni report is obviously talking about falling temperatures as the freezing progresses, where heat spikes are totally impossible My argument is the same as it was seven months ago. My argument has been clearly expressed since day 2 of this stupid conversation where you have fought me no matter what I said. As is your style you have continually made stupid statements about my position even though I have had to repeat myself continually to stress I never for a single second ever said such things. Why do you f**k around like that" ?? Wrong side of physics? ?? You used the same insane statements to pretend you were making progress in the stupid ghe debacle where insanely even after 18 months of school boy physics you still claim I made it all up. Yesterday I had to get my text from day two of this stupid conversation in an attempt to get you to shut the f**k up. Today you just repeat your endlessly stupid statements about what you think I was talking about that drove me to repeat yet again my position from day f**king two of this insanely stupid conversation. And on it will go endlessly. Heaven knows how you ever ended up as you are.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 31, 2014 18:23:02 GMT
Andrew: Your interpretation and thoughts of what happens when Orchards/fields are irrigated is wrong. They don't start irrigating early to get the present warmth of the water. They start irrigating/watering early to make SURE when the temp gets sub zero F, that everything is running properly.
The applying of water BEFORE if freezes, actually hastens the removal of heat from the orchard. Remember what happens when water evaporates?
The Ag part of this is something that you don't understand at all. But as a farmer, I understand it totally.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 31, 2014 18:56:42 GMT
Andrew: Your interpretation and thoughts of what happens when Orchards/fields are irrigated is wrong. They don't start irrigating early to get the present warmth of the water. They start irrigating/watering early to make SURE when the temp gets sub zero F, that everything is running properly. The applying of water BEFORE if freezes, actually hastens the removal of heat from the orchard. Remember what happens when water evaporates? The Ag part of this is something that you don't understand at all. But as a farmer, I understand it totally. Your theories about your superiority are irrelevant. The relevant factor is that you agree the operation of sprinklers begins before the freezing point is reached. " On frost nights, it is recommended that microsprinklers be turned on when the air temperature reaches 36°F"
Therefore if the temperatures are falling when freezing begins heat spikes are totally impossible due to the act of water freezing when water at 60F or more is leaving the sprayers. "Most well water in Florida is around 68 to 70°F.">>The applying of water BEFORE if freezes, actually hastens the removal of heat from the orchard. Remember what happens when water evaporates? This is an utterly stupid statement. The freezing cold water is far nearer the damaging frozen solid sub zero temperatures than water which is around 30F hotter! If the plants are going to get damaged in 36F conditions with water spraying, then as sure as hell they are going to be damaged when it is 28F! >>The Ag part of this is something that you don't understand at all. But as a farmer, I understand it totally. Evidently you understand squat about this process.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 31, 2014 22:12:32 GMT
Andrew: Your interpretation and thoughts of what happens when Orchards/fields are irrigated is wrong. They don't start irrigating early to get the present warmth of the water. They start irrigating/watering early to make SURE when the temp gets sub zero F, that everything is running properly. The applying of water BEFORE if freezes, actually hastens the removal of heat from the orchard. Remember what happens when water evaporates? The Ag part of this is something that you don't understand at all. But as a farmer, I understand it totally. Your theories about your superiority are irrelevant. The relevant factor is that you agree the operation of sprinklers begins before the freezing point is reached. " On frost nights, it is recommended that microsprinklers be turned on when the air temperature reaches 36°F"
Therefore if the temperatures are falling when freezing begins heat spikes are totally impossible due to the act of water freezing when water at 60F or more is leaving the sprayers. "Most well water in Florida is around 68 to 70°F.">>The applying of water BEFORE if freezes, actually hastens the removal of heat from the orchard. Remember what happens when water evaporates? This is an utterly stupid statement. The freezing cold water is far nearer the damaging frozen solid sub zero temperatures than water which is around 30F hotter! If the plants are going to get damaged in 36F conditions with water spraying, then as sure as hell they are going to be damaged when it is 28F! >>The Ag part of this is something that you don't understand at all. But as a farmer, I understand it totally. Evidently you understand squat about this process. LOL! Your the idiot who argued at the start that the energy of latent heat does not rise externally from the ice. Now that you have learned different you are running around like a madman creating strawmen arguments that it rises out of the ice but its impossible it will warm anything, assuming no super cooling as yet another concession of yours. I personally don't know if heat spikes are created in orchards. The argument was originally whether if the energy of latent heat can protect crops which you originally called an insane idea claiming it can heat nothing externally. The heat spikes were in regard to observed and measured effects observed in peer reviewed science papers on latent heat polynyas which you claimed to be muddled and that such an effect was impossible. You have provided no evidence those studies are incorrect and continue to parade your ignorance and build strawmen arguments regarding other processes all of which now conceded that indeed the energy of latent heat does in fact rise out of the ice/water to heat the atmosphere.
|
|