|
Post by numerouno on Aug 30, 2013 14:37:21 GMT
It should be obvious that neither myself or Numerouno are revising what we said. As a side comment, Numerouno mentioned that expanding ice fractures rock. However, Numerouno has got a bit mixed up. Energy has to go into ice to form water and energy has to come out of water to form ice. I'm not mixed up a bit, or any amount. By definition something that is cooling and freezing up will lose energy. Only it's the fact of the natural world that the temperature of the freezing body will stay constant during the phase change. Also, I can't recall having said that "expanding ice fractures rock". The ice will expand only once in its lifetime, and that is when it is being formed. Under real-life conditions, the ice will be forming in multiple locations, each able to be freely floated across the surface so there is no need for the ice to rock.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 30, 2013 17:23:36 GMT
From the paper by Serreze that is used as a reference for the NSIDC article comes this gem: courses.eas.ualberta.ca/eas570/arctic_amplification.pdfFrom autumn through spring, sea ice is an effective insulator, limiting sensible and latent heat transfers from the relatively warm ocean (near it salinity-adjusted freezing point) to the cold overlying atmosphere (often lower than -30C)In Winter the ice will thicken, but a higher sensible heat content of the ocean results in a thinner ice cover in spring, which will be easier to melt and leads to even less ice the following autumn. Latent heat fluxes will also increase, with more efficient trapping of longwave radiation by water vapor and slower ice growth in neighboring ice-covered areas. In crystal clear terms, Mark Serreze, the director and one of the principle scientists of one of the most prestigious ice research centres in the world believes that when water freezes it releases a heating energy into the atmosphere that was not present before freezing began, that will inhibit ice growth in neigbouring ice formation areas!
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Aug 30, 2013 22:07:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Aug 30, 2013 22:26:09 GMT
It should be obvious that neither myself or Numerouno are revising what we said. As a side comment, Numerouno mentioned that expanding ice fractures rock. However, Numerouno has got a bit mixed up. Energy has to go into ice to form water and energy has to come out of water to form ice. I'm not mixed up a bit, or any amount. By definition something that is cooling and freezing up will lose energy. Only it's the fact of the natural world that the temperature of the freezing body will stay constant during the phase change. Also, I can't recall having said that "expanding ice fractures rock". The ice will expand only once in its lifetime, and that is when it is being formed. Under real-life conditions, the ice will be forming in multiple locations, each able to be freely floated across the surface so there is no need for the ice to rock. Thanks, I was in fact intending to stop by encouraging mr Icefisher to make a fortune in heating business. There is also the general educational point. Mr Icefisher is saying that if I take a bucket water at 0.01C inside the house and cool it down just a little bit, then a bang, and there will emanate a puff of warm air from the bucket, that I can heat up my house with. Of course no such thing will happen, the phase change energy will go into changing the water into the crystal structure of ice, which will also expand a bit. (And by which way nature chops down northern rocks and mountains chip by chip.) Gin on the rocks said it maybe? You said nobody has ever measured this heat here are a couple of places it has been meaured: The energy bursts from a freezing drop of water has been measured. rogerjcheng.com/STAGE%20ONE-FREEZING%20of%20A%20WATER%20DROP.htm www.igsoc.org/journal.old/8/53/igs_journal_vol08_issue053_pg301-309.pdf
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Aug 30, 2013 22:56:42 GMT
So, do raindrops freeze from the inside out or the outside in? What is/was the prevailing "first principles"? Below is the answer based on lab experiments, and it only demonstrates how very little is understood about how the climate system works and to say this or that is based on "well known physics" or "that's been known for 150 years" isn't always the case. The funny part is the accepted theory is said to have violated 2LOT. It makes me wonder if after ten years climate scientists took the theory to heart and applied it to their models and calculations, or did they blow it off as was done when it was proven ulcers were caused by bacteria (H Pylori) in the early 1980's but ignored by mainstream medicine until ~1996. Or, maybe Azadeh Tabazadeh is wrong. Who knows? How could they get something so simple so wrong, yet we're supposed to believe the future can be predicted decades in advance based on sloppy science and questionable theories (where's the hot spot?). newsok.com/scientists-study-droplets-in-cloudsbrrecent-research-reverses-view-of-freezing-pattern/article/1912563www.thefreelibrary.com/Clearing+up+how+cloud+droplets+freeze.+%28Outside-In%29.-a095599258earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=22820Some pretty smart people say the greenhouse effect violates LOT. I don't know the answer, but do know what climate scientists predicted would happen. Where's the hot spot?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 31, 2013 2:52:16 GMT
Supercooling is a red herring. Supercooling is not thought to be an important process in the Arctic and in the case of the rapid freezing of the Arctic during many days of September and October of 2008 the refreezing was occuring over an enormously large geographical area, and super cooling is zero sum.
No matter how the Icefisher/Magellan alters splutter they were wrong. At least it appears that the Sigurdur alter realises it was wrong
Even Mark Serreze realises he was wrong but so far he is butt covering and it appears that article is not going to be pulled or modified.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Aug 31, 2013 3:07:01 GMT
Supercooling is a red herring. Supercooling is not thought to be an important process in the Arctic and in the case of the rapid freezing of the Arctic during many days of September and October of 2008 the refreezing was occuring over an enormously large geographical area, and super cooling is zero sum. No matter how the Icefisher/Magellan alters splutter they were wrong. At least it appears that the Sigurdur alter realises it was wrong Even Mark Serreze realises he was wrong but so far he is butt covering and it appears that article is not going to be pulled or modified. Actually, I didn't write the article How can freezing make something warmer?Pure DMSO (aka horse liniment) freezes at 58-66 degF depending on purity level. I've been using it for over 25 years, and have seen the phenomenon you say can't exist. We could always go back and read your quotes, such as there is no such thing as the heat of fusion of water. Ice is water in case you'd read the latest text books. Did you read the grade school level experiment How can freezing make something warmer?? And now you know how a rain drop freezes as well. There, you've learned two new things today. Also, all I've said on this matter is that freezing is a release of heat, not much more than that. Using water to spray crops is nothing new, but you guys make it sound like farmers are using perpetual motion devices.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 31, 2013 3:21:41 GMT
Supercooling is a red herring. Supercooling is not thought to be an important process in the Arctic and in the case of the rapid freezing of the Arctic during many days of September and October of 2008 the refreezing was occuring over an enormously large geographical area, and super cooling is zero sum. No matter how the Icefisher/Magellan alters splutter they were wrong. At least it appears that the Sigurdur alter realises it was wrong Even Mark Serreze realises he was wrong but so far he is butt covering and it appears that article is not going to be pulled or modified. Actually, I didn't write the article How can freezing make something warmer?Pure DMSO (aka horse liniment) freezes at 58-66 degF depending on purity level. I've been using it for over 25 years, and have seen the phenomenon you say can't exist. We could always go back and read your quotes, such as there is no such thing as the heat of fusion of water. Ice is water in case you'd read the latest text books. Did you read the grade school level experiment How can freezing make something warmer?? And now that you know how a rain drop freezes as well. There, you've learned two new things today. There is no such thing as the heat of fusion of water apart from the unusual case of super cooling where it is only a zero sum result that produces no net heat. No doubt horse liniment contains alcohol and so forth.Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is an organosulfur compound with the formula (CH3)2SO. Do you have a point to all of this nonesense?
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Aug 31, 2013 4:03:37 GMT
Actually, I didn't write the article How can freezing make something warmer?Pure DMSO (aka horse liniment) freezes at 58-66 degF depending on purity level. I've been using it for over 25 years, and have seen the phenomenon you say can't exist. We could always go back and read your quotes, such as there is no such thing as the heat of fusion of water. Ice is water in case you'd read the latest text books. Did you read the grade school level experiment How can freezing make something warmer?? And now that you know how a rain drop freezes as well. There, you've learned two new things today. There is no such thing as the heat of fusion of water apart from the unusual case of super cooling where it is only a zero sum result that produces no net heat. No doubt horse liniment contains alcohol and so forth.Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is an organosulfur compound with the formula (CH3)2SO. Do you have a point to all of this nonesense? Don't think you can educate me on DMSO. You didn't even know what it is, so had to look it up. Uninformed people think it is dangerous (and probably believe the warning label), and the FDA banned it for a period to protect their pharmaceutical paymasters. It is quite an amazing substance. Must I really start at the beginning and collate your posts to show how much you've morphed? Again, here's the link: littleshop.physics.colostate.edu/activities/atmos1/FreezingWarmer.pdfAccording to Numo, it is impossible.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 31, 2013 4:05:40 GMT
There is no such thing as the heat of fusion of water apart from the unusual case of super cooling where it is only a zero sum result that produces no net heat. No doubt horse liniment contains alcohol and so forth.Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is an organosulfur compound with the formula (CH3)2SO. Do you have a point to all of this nonesense? Don't think you can educate me on DMSO. You didn't even know what it is, so had to look it up. Uninformed people think it is dangerous (and probably believe the warning label), and the FDA banned it for a period to protect their pharmaceutical paymasters. It is quite an amazing substance. Must I really start at the beginning and collate your posts to show how much you've morphed? Again, here's the link: littleshop.physics.colostate.edu/activities/atmos1/FreezingWarmer.pdfAccording to Numo, it is impossible. What the hell is your point this time? ? Super cooling is a red herring of almost zero relevance to this discussion where for example frost protection researchers are saying the ice is frozen at 0C. Super cooling has no ability to create heat from freezing water that is not already present in 0C liquid water and capable of warming objects. How much more stupidity are you clowns going to provide on this topic before you concede you were mistaken?
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Aug 31, 2013 6:07:21 GMT
time for this to stop its rubbish!
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Aug 31, 2013 6:22:26 GMT
There is no such thing as the heat of fusion of water apart from the unusual case of super cooling where it is only a zero sum result that produces no net heat. No doubt horse liniment contains alcohol and so forth.Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is an organosulfur compound with the formula (CH3)2SO. Do you have a point to all of this nonesense? Don't think you can educate me on DMSO. You didn't even know what it is, so had to look it up. Uninformed people think it is dangerous (and probably believe the warning label), and the FDA banned it for a period to protect their pharmaceutical paymasters. It is quite an amazing substance. Must I really start at the beginning and collate your posts to show how much you've morphed? Again, here's the link: littleshop.physics.colostate.edu/activities/atmos1/FreezingWarmer.pdfAccording to Numo, it is impossible. I have said nothing about supercooling of exotic substances, which you are presenting above. I have talked about the normal freezing of water.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Aug 31, 2013 19:52:02 GMT
Don't think you can educate me on DMSO. You didn't even know what it is, so had to look it up. Uninformed people think it is dangerous (and probably believe the warning label), and the FDA banned it for a period to protect their pharmaceutical paymasters. It is quite an amazing substance. Must I really start at the beginning and collate your posts to show how much you've morphed? Again, here's the link: littleshop.physics.colostate.edu/activities/atmos1/FreezingWarmer.pdfAccording to Numo, it is impossible. I have said nothing about supercooling of exotic substances, which you are presenting above. I have talked about the normal freezing of water. solarcycle24com.proboards.com/post/93613/threadSo "never" and "under no circumstance" doesn't mean never and under no circumstance. Got it. First it was impossible, then it had to be tap water (which will work), now sodium acetate is an "exotic substance". Time to cry uncle Numo.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 1, 2013 3:57:15 GMT
I have said nothing about supercooling of exotic substances, which you are presenting above. I have talked about the normal freezing of water. solarcycle24com.proboards.com/post/93613/threadSo "never" and "under no circumstance" doesn't mean never and under no circumstance. Got it. First it was impossible, then it had to be tap water (which will work), now sodium acetate is an "exotic substance". Time to cry uncle Numo. Magellan Come on man. Supercooling offers zero protection for a plant that needs to be kept warm to avoid being super cooled. Numerouno was right and is still right, and cannot be made wrong by absolutely totally irrelevant examples of processes that have no connection to 0C ice stuck on the side of fruit trees.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Sept 1, 2013 5:03:50 GMT
solarcycle24com.proboards.com/post/93613/threadSo "never" and "under no circumstance" doesn't mean never and under no circumstance. Got it. First it was impossible, then it had to be tap water (which will work), now sodium acetate is an "exotic substance". Time to cry uncle Numo. Magellan Come on man. Supercooling offers zero protection for a plant that needs to be kept warm to avoid being super cooled. Numerouno was right and is still right, and cannot be made wrong by absolutely totally irrelevant examples of processes that have no connection to 0C ice stuck on the side of fruit trees. There you go again, arguing with farmers who use water spraying every year to protect their plants from freezing. Weather conditions such as wind and excessive cold can cause failure, but you simply ignored three videos explaining the process including Icefisher's video and now post pictures of what, ice damaged plants? The topic was Phase change/latent heat solarcycle24com.proboards.com/thread/2128/phase-change-latent-heatYou said there was no such thing as heat of fusion of water or ice. Then of course started back pedaling with special case pleading when you realized your argument was 100% wrong. Numo again said: No! Latent heat can never be used for any real-life heating or cooling purpose under no circumstances.
So, explain how a hand warmer made from salt, water, vinegar and sodium acetate (a food additive Numo says is "exotic") can warm the hands by freezing other than through the release of latent heat. Both of you guys said it isn't possible to heat anything with latent heat. In fact you said there is no such thing as heat of fusion of water or ice, when anyone can locate the formula quite easily. Again, a 7-12 grade school science class experiment: www.geosociety.org/educate/LessonPlans/LatentHeat.pdf No matter who says what, you must always make it appear they are wrong and you are riding the high horse. Your very first post said nautonnier was "all muddled up". You guys will continue arguing just on principle, e.g. never admit being wrong.
|
|