|
Post by Andrew on Sept 5, 2013 3:16:19 GMT
If water had no hidden heat, it would instantly freeze solid at 0C and then fall in temperature and the plants would die Yep! Thanks for finally admitting that. Both myself and Numerouno have been talking about that for about 2 weeks The latent heat delays the cooling where the farmers got more heating before the ice formed, and without the latent heat the water would freeze almost immediately and then quickly fall to a damaging temperature. the phase change energies. They are bound into the molecular forces of the matter and are forces that will ONLY DELAY changes in the temperature of the matter AS LONG AS THE PHASE CHANGE GOES ON! Your orchard water will DELAY the freezing while the freezing is ongoing, but WILL RELEASE NO ENERGY WHATSOEVER WHILE DOING SO! Feeel free to consider this at your leisure. The latent heat of fusion enables a delay in cooling below 0C, meanwhile a new layer of ice builds so that it becomes impossible for the plants to cool to very cold space or to the cold air due to a layer of relatively warm ice that surrounds the delicate plant. Even if warm ice protects the plants for the rest of time, and the entire heat of the universe flows out of the ice, the warmer water was protecting them by a greater amount
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 5, 2013 4:46:36 GMT
Yep! Thanks for finally admitting that. Both myself and Numerouno have been talking about that for about 2 weeks the phase change energies. They are bound into the molecular forces of the matter and are forces that will ONLY DELAY changes in the temperature of the matter AS LONG AS THE PHASE CHANGE GOES ON! Your orchard water will DELAY the freezing while the freezing is ongoing, but WILL RELEASE NO ENERGY WHATSOEVER WHILE DOING SO! Releases no energy? LOL! A warm object that stops releasing energy so it avoids cooling? You are off your rocker!
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 5, 2013 4:49:20 GMT
Both myself and Numerouno have been talking about that for about 2 weeks Releases no energy? LOL! A warm object that stops releasing energy so it avoids cooling? You are off your rocker! If the entire heat of the universe flows from the icey water, and cooling is delayed for all of eternity, the icey water continues to release less energy than was released by the warmer water No heat spikes in the atmosphere No warming caused by cooling Delayed cooling only No mysterious warming energy releases
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 5, 2013 15:57:23 GMT
Releases no energy? LOL! A warm object that stops releasing energy so it avoids cooling? You are off your rocker! If the entire heat of the universe flows from the icey water, and cooling is delayed for all of eternity, the icey water continues to release less energy than was released by the warmer water Perpetual energy machines and waters hooked up to wires to supply energy would be the only thing that could sustain the effect you are talking about. Which of course means you could get the same crop effect by simply applying enough water so the the latent heat of freezing was not needed. However, that has a number of costs to the farmer. More water will require more water supplies thats more costs. Also the Univ of Florida article detailed other problems with too much water. So your imaginations about perpetual energy machines is simply a distraction. When water freezes latent heat in water is converted to sensible heat and it rises out of the water to keep warming the atmosphere after the water cooled and froze. So lets dispense with the Numno notion that latent heat remains hidden and is employed to expand the ice and chip away at mountains shall we? Can you bring yourself to say YES to that? Or are you going to choose to continue to look like a moron for the sake of refusing to answer the question?
OK on to the 2nd issue. Can latent heat create a heat spike? Well it can if temperatures are below 0C is what I say. What evidence do I have of this? Well the first condition necessary is for the water to be less than 0C! But you have spend endless argument in claiming water freezes at exactly 0C! But this is not true. All water supercools to freeze. The only question is how much supercooling it creates and if that can create a measurable heat spike or not. Frazil ice is formed only in supercooled water. Its a common form of ice in the polar areas and its seen in streams and rivers with a lot of turbulence. But its not likely that streams and rivers have enough surface area to measurably effect the climate. The question is whether the oceans do. And as it turns out the answer is Yes. No heat spikes in the atmosphere No warming caused by cooling Delayed cooling only No mysterious warming energy releases You need to catch up on your out of date education Iceskater. Latent heat Polynyas may be so powerful as to control climate. Antarctica polynyas are highly correlated to ENSO and produce huge air to water/ice heat fluxes, sometimes exceeding 500w/m2. This is 10 to 100 times more heat flux than through the ice surrounding the polynyas and far higher than the sensible heat polynyas formed by upwelling warm water. Further these latent heat polynyas are considered to be "ice factories", freezing ice and blowing it way from the shore so the factory can stay in production. (it has a large pipe so freezing doesn't clog it unlike your heatpump system). These latent heat polynyas produce up to 10 times as much ice as produced by other polar waters. I have to thank you for inducing me to look this up. Its intensely interesting and greatly reinforces the suspicions I have had and been talking about how low ice in the arctic may be responsible for the ocean oscillations. Here in the first reference below the heat fluxes are quantified. A lot of interesting reading here. Give it a try you just might learn something. www.igsoc.org/annals.old/27/igs_annals_vol27_year1998_pg420-426.pdfLatent-heat polynyas can have a large impact on regional air-sea-ice interaction processes. Air-water temperature differences of -20°C can occur in polynyas, causing ocean atmosphere heat fluxes in excess of 500 W m - 2 in winter (Fahrbach and others, 1994). This is 1 -2 orders of magnitude greater than estimated through the thicker ice cover sur rounding the polynya (Worby and Allison, 1991). Potter (1995) estimated from a high-temporal-resolution study of the Cape Darnley polynya that the average heat flux from 420 the polynya is about 430 W m - 2 . For this reason, polynyas may dominate the regional heat flux, particularly in winter (Adolphs and Wendler, 1995), in spite of comprising only a small area of the pack. The resultant heat and water-vapour transport from the open water surface can also lead to signif icant local climatic modifications (Takizawa and others, 1994). Due to the importance of polynyas in regional heat budgets, interannual changes in polynya characteristics may be sensitive indicators of climate change (Mysak and Huang, 1992). For this reason, it is vital to understand the natural in terannual variability in the occurrence of polynyas. There you have it! Heat spikes in the atmosphere!
Huge heat fluxes coming off offshore wind events. Super cold winds coming off the continent drives supercooling in nearshore waters and pushes ice away from the shore essentially opening the factory door. This causes supercooling of the waters and ice forms that floats above the surface and turn gets blown offshore to keep the process overturning. This extracts huge amounts of heat, mostly latent heat, thus the name of the polynyas, latent heat polynyas! At any rate, you have a lot more letters to write Andrew! Here are some links you can start with, if you run out I will send you somemore. Besides the NSIDC link I provided you before you have Australia and Canada to go after below. www.acecrc.sipex.aq/access/page/?page=1www.acecrc.sipex.aq/access/page/?page=01480fac-bc82-102a-8ea7-0019b9ea7c60polar.ocean.washington.edu/PAPERS/Polynya_encyclo.pdfjournals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2010JPO4304.1www.ccpo.odu.edu/~lizsmith/SEES/polar/polar_lecture/Part_1/1_3.htm
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 5, 2013 16:22:15 GMT
If the entire heat of the universe flows from the icey water, and cooling is delayed for all of eternity, the icey water continues to release less energy than was released by the warmer water Perpetual energy machines and waters hooked up to wires to supply energy would be the only thing that could sustain the effect you are talking about. Which of course means you could get the same crop effect by simply applying enough water so the the latent heat of freezing was not needed. However, that has a number of costs to the farmer. More water will require more water supplies thats more costs. Also the Univ of Florida article detailed other problems with too much water. So your imaginations about perpetual energy machines is simply a distraction. When water freezes latent heat in water is converted to sensible heat and it rises out of the water to keep warming the atmosphere after the water cooled and froze. So lets dispense with the Numno notion that latent heat remains hidden and is employed to expand the ice and chip away at mountains shall we? Can you bring yourself to say YES to that? Or are you going to choose to continue to look like a moron for the sake of refusing to answer the question?
OK on to the 2nd issue. Can latent heat create a heat spike? Well it can if temperatures are below 0C is what I say. What evidence do I have of this? Well the first condition necessary is for the water to be less than 0C! But you have spend endless argument in claiming water freezes at exactly 0C! But this is not true. All water supercools to freeze. The only question is how much supercooling it creates and if that can create a measurable heat spike or not. Frazil ice is formed only in supercooled water. Its a common form of ice in the polar areas and its seen in streams and rivers with a lot of turbulence. But its not likely that streams and rivers have enough surface area to measurably effect the climate. The question is whether the oceans do. And as it turns out the answer is Yes. No heat spikes in the atmosphere No warming caused by cooling Delayed cooling only No mysterious warming energy releases You need to catch up on your out of date education Iceskater. Latent heat Polynyas may be so powerful as to control climate. Antarctica polynyas are highly correlated to ENSO and produce huge air to water/ice heat fluxes, sometimes exceeding 500w/m2. This is 10 to 100 times more heat flux than through the ice surrounding the polynyas and far higher than the sensible heat polynyas formed by upwelling warm water. Further these latent heat polynyas are considered to be "ice factories", freezing ice and blowing it way from the shore so the factory can stay in production. (it has a large pipe so freezing doesn't clog it unlike your heatpump system). These latent heat polynyas produce up to 10 times as much ice as produced by other polar waters. I have to thank you for inducing me to look this up. Its intensely interesting and greatly reinforces the suspicions I have had and been talking about how low ice in the arctic may be responsible for the ocean oscillations. Here in the first reference below the heat fluxes are quantified. A lot of interesting reading here. Give it a try you just might learn something. www.igsoc.org/annals.old/27/igs_annals_vol27_year1998_pg420-426.pdfLatent-heat polynyas can have a large impact on regional air-sea-ice interaction processes. Air-water temperature differences of -20°C can occur in polynyas, causing ocean atmosphere heat fluxes in excess of 500 W m - 2 in winter (Fahrbach and others, 1994). This is 1 -2 orders of magnitude greater than estimated through the thicker ice cover sur rounding the polynya (Worby and Allison, 1991). Potter (1995) estimated from a high-temporal-resolution study of the Cape Darnley polynya that the average heat flux from 420 the polynya is about 430 W m - 2 . For this reason, polynyas may dominate the regional heat flux, particularly in winter (Adolphs and Wendler, 1995), in spite of comprising only a small area of the pack. The resultant heat and water-vapour transport from the open water surface can also lead to signif icant local climatic modifications (Takizawa and others, 1994). Due to the importance of polynyas in regional heat budgets, interannual changes in polynya characteristics may be sensitive indicators of climate change (Mysak and Huang, 1992). For this reason, it is vital to understand the natural in terannual variability in the occurrence of polynyas. There you have it! Heat spikes in the atmosphere!
Huge heat fluxes coming off offshore wind events. Super cold winds coming off the continent drives supercooling in nearshore waters and pushes ice away from the shore essentially opening the factory door. This causes supercooling of the waters and ice forms that floats above the surface and turn gets blown offshore to keep the process overturning. This extracts huge amounts of heat, mostly latent heat, thus the name of the polynyas, latent heat polynyas! At any rate, you have a lot more letters to write Andrew! Here are some links you can start with, if you run out I will send you somemore. Besides the NSIDC link I provided you before you have Australia and Canada to go after below. www.acecrc.sipex.aq/access/page/?page=1www.acecrc.sipex.aq/access/page/?page=01480fac-bc82-102a-8ea7-0019b9ea7c60polar.ocean.washington.edu/PAPERS/Polynya_encyclo.pdfjournals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2010JPO4304.1www.ccpo.odu.edu/~lizsmith/SEES/polar/polar_lecture/Part_1/1_3.htmOK. Lets see what we can agree on. About 10 days ago i said that because of latent heat there was more heat available over time than without latent heat and this seems to be your big point that you want to make. However what you will not allow to exist is that warm water will heat icey water and therefore the sea heats the atmosphere more strongly than when the sea is colder and icey. We could agree for example that you dont agree with that idea. Why do you bring up super cooling again and again? Supercooled plants will die. There is no such thing as a Latent heat polynya and you recognise I am saying that. A warm ocean is heating a very cold atmosphere. obviously we are talking about sensible heat and not latent heat. Supercooled water cannot exist with ice. After the obfuscating responses from NSIDC i dont really have much interest in writing to anybody else and pointing out how stupid they are.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 5, 2013 16:47:20 GMT
OK. Lets see what we can agree on. About 10 days ago i said that because of latent heat there was more heat available over time than without latent heat and this seems to be your big point that you want to make. I acknowledge that you have been inconsistent between supporting Numno and saying different things inconsistent with Numno. I have been just trying to figure out what you support and what you don't support. Its hard when you say two different things. However what you will not allow to exist is that warm water will heat icey water and therefore the sea heats the atmosphere more strongly than when the sea is colder and icey. Thats only partly true. Its only true on the basis of a snapshot of an energy rate. Its not true that a given quantity of 2C cool water that does not freeze and cools to -2C gives off more total energy than the same quantity of water at -2C that then freezes and then cools to -3C. In fact the reverse is true. We could agree for example that you dont agree with that idea. Read what I agree with right above! Why do you bring up super cooling again and again? Supercooled plants will die. That of course is ignorance on steriods! Plants have different tolerances to supercooling. Some plants cannot be saved by latent heat of fusion, others can. There is no such thing as a Latent heat polynya and you recognise I am saying that. A warm ocean is heating a very cold atmosphere. obviously we are talking about sensible heat and not latent heat. Supercooled water cannot exist with ice. Well don't take that up with me, take it up with the scientists that are observing and measuring this phenomena. You have a lot more letters to write! Seems to me that the rest of the world is getting on board and you Finlanders are turning into a bunch of flatearthers. And indeed supercooled water does coexist with ice and it doesn't even have to be saltwater! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frazil_iceAnd check out the cool video in the right sidebar of Yosemite Frazil ice.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 5, 2013 17:19:13 GMT
OK. Lets see what we can agree on. About 10 days ago i said that because of latent heat there was more heat available over time than without latent heat and this seems to be your big point that you want to make. I acknowledge that you have been inconsistent between supporting Numno and saying different things inconsistent with Numno. I have been just trying to figure out what you support and what you don't support. Its hard when you say two different things. However what you will not allow to exist is that warm water will heat icey water and therefore the sea heats the atmosphere more strongly than when the sea is colder and icey. Thats only partly true. Its only true on the basis of a snapshot of an energy rate. Its not true that a given quantity of 2C cool water that does not freeze and cools to -2C gives off more total energy than the same quantity of water at -2C that then freezes and then cools to -3C. In fact the reverse is true. We could agree for example that you dont agree with that idea. Read what I agree with right above! Why do you bring up super cooling again and again? Supercooled plants will die. That of course is ignorance on steriods! Plants have different tolerances to supercooling. Some plants cannot be saved by latent heat of fusion, others can. There is no such thing as a Latent heat polynya and you recognise I am saying that. A warm ocean is heating a very cold atmosphere. obviously we are talking about sensible heat and not latent heat. Supercooled water cannot exist with ice. Well don't take that up with me, take it up with the scientists that are observing and measuring this phenomena. You have a lot more letters to write! Seems to me that the rest of the world is getting on board and you Finlanders are turning into a bunch of flatearthers. And indeed supercooled water does coexist with ice and it doesn't even have to be saltwater! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frazil_iceAnd check out the cool video in the right sidebar of Yosemite Frazil ice. If its so important to you to believe you can heat things more strongly when the heat source is colder then so be it.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 5, 2013 18:29:38 GMT
If its so important to you to believe you can heat things more strongly when the heat source is colder then so be it. So are you really so stupid that you don't realize that the strength of heating is a sum of energy over a period of time? Or is it just a matter of you trying to look stupid so as to avoid admitting making a mistake?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 5, 2013 19:04:36 GMT
are you really so stupid that you don't realize that the strength of heating is a sum of energy over a period of time? Error!
Hot heats cold
A trillion trillion trillion BTU's in billions of tonnes of Icey water cannot heat .000000001g of warmer water
Icefisher i am going to be 59 next week. I really have no idea what point you wish to make with that comment. My point is that colder iceywater cannot possibly cause a heat spike when the atmosphere was more strongly heated by warmer water before freezing began I have no idea what your point is. Totally beyond me. I just get the impression you are dancing and obfuscating and have no point to make at all If you do have a point then you will need to explain it in clearer terms than this far. If you cannot explain what on earth you are talking about in clear terms i am going to keep on thinking you either have brain damage or you are just playing silly buggers
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 5, 2013 21:38:28 GMT
Error!
Hot heats cold
A trillion trillion trillion BTU's in billions of tonnes of Icey water cannot heat .000000001g of warmer water
Icefisher i am going to be 59 next week. I really have no idea what point you wish to make with that comment. My point is that colder iceywater cannot possibly cause a heat spike when the atmosphere was more strongly heated by warmer water before freezing began I have no idea what your point is. Totally beyond me. If you want to read about the latent heat polynyas Andrew it will explain it to you. What you are not understanding is the heat spike is generated by the heat of fusion. You are in denial of this effect! The scientists in the antarctic are measuring it. Look at the heat fluxes they are measuring! They are far higher than the temperature differences can explain if there were no spontaneous emission of heat from the heat of fusion! If you disagree make the numbers the scientists have come up with agree with your claim!! The heat fluxes are so great, one to two factors of magnitude greater than over thick ice, that the heat of fusion cannot explain it either, so the scientists explain that its due to the latent heat of fusion in combination with the latent heat of condensation.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 6, 2013 3:51:14 GMT
Error!
Hot heats cold
A trillion trillion trillion BTU's in billions of tonnes of Icey water cannot heat .000000001g of warmer water
Icefisher i am going to be 59 next week. I really have no idea what point you wish to make with that comment. My point is that colder iceywater cannot possibly cause a heat spike when the atmosphere was more strongly heated by warmer water before freezing began I have no idea what your point is. Totally beyond me. If you want to read about the latent heat polynyas Andrew it will explain it to you. What you are not understanding is the heat spike is generated by the heat of fusion. You are in denial of this effect! The scientists in the antarctic are measuring it. Look at the heat fluxes they are measuring! They are far higher than the temperature differences can explain if there were no spontaneous emission of heat from the heat of fusion! If you disagree make the numbers the scientists have come up with agree with your claim!! The heat fluxes are so great, one to two factors of magnitude greater than over thick ice, that the heat of fusion cannot explain it either, so the scientists explain that its due to the latent heat of fusion in combination with the latent heat of condensation. There are no circumstances ever when a latent heat flux is possible. By definition they can never exist. NOBODY at NSIDC is talking about the arctic atmospheric warming due to supercooling of water that subsequently warms up when freezing. Instead Mark Serreze is saying the article is confusing and is technically incorrect. I also wrote to NSDIC to point out there use of 'latent heat polynya' was obviously wrong. A warm ocean is heating a colder air flow only by a sensible heat flux, and obviously when a strong very cold wind blows across a warm sea the water is going to be open until all of the water is colder, where the sensible heat flux upon ice formation is lower than it was before, and the idea there is an extra heat flux called a latent heat flux is totally daft. Fairly obviously there is not a good peer review process between all of science and so called climate science.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 6, 2013 5:56:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 6, 2013 6:12:56 GMT
By definition a latent heat is a hidden heat Supercooled water does not have the same amount of latent heat of fusion in joules as ordinary water does, where the latent heat of fusion is specified for ordinary water freezing at the normal freezing point. Supercooled water has an amount of heat of fusion in joules proportional to its temperature below zero. At a certain very low temperature supercooled water has no latent heat of fusion and only has a heat of fusion
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 6, 2013 7:17:57 GMT
By definition a latent heat is a hidden heat Supercooled water does not have the same amount of latent heat of fusion in joules as ordinary water does, where the latent heat of fusion is specified for ordinary water freezing at the normal freezing point. Supercooled water has an amount of heat of fusion in joules proportional to its temperature below zero. At a certain very low temperature supercooled water has no latent heat of fusion and only has a heat of fusion Source please!
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 6, 2013 7:22:52 GMT
By definition a latent heat is a hidden heat Supercooled water does not have the same amount of latent heat of fusion in joules as ordinary water does, where the latent heat of fusion is specified for ordinary water freezing at the normal freezing point. Supercooled water has an amount of heat of fusion in joules proportional to its temperature below zero. At a certain very low temperature supercooled water has no latent heat of fusion and only has a heat of fusion Source please! A source for what? Do you think that liquid water at absolute zero can have a latent heat of fusion?? Other things being equal supercooled water at -80C has no latent heat of fusion, and instead only has a heat of fusion.
|
|