|
|
Post by Ratty on Apr 22, 2018 5:04:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 22, 2018 10:21:38 GMT
The professor confuses heat radiation with kinetic energy of molecules which we measure as temperature and call hot. In the atmosphere humid air has a higher enthalpy than dry air. This means that the water in the atmosphere can absorb a lot of heat energy as latent heat before the energy causes the kinetic energy to rise shown as temperature (which is the average kinetic energy of the gas volume) rise. Almost by definition the infrared that the satellite sees is radiation that is being released not stored, in the atmosphere so again the idea that the radiation there is from a hot atmosphere is incorrect, it is radiation being released by the atmosphere as infrared which has no temperature it is energy being radiated. We are back in the logic hole that this board spent some quite noisy times on - if water freezes at height it gives up the same amount of latent heat of freezing as it does if it freezes at ground level. By adding water to the atmosphere as humidity the enthalpy of the atmosphere in that area is raised and it takes much more heat to raise the temperature of a volume of atmosphere. So irrigation reduces the temperature of the air by increasing its enthalpy. |
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Apr 22, 2018 13:01:44 GMT
but that does change the outcome not sure which way but I think the regional climate will have different characteristics.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Apr 22, 2018 17:32:29 GMT
The professor confuses heat radiation with kinetic energy of molecules which we measure as temperature and call hot. In the atmosphere humid air has a higher enthalpy than dry air. This means that the water in the atmosphere can absorb a lot of heat energy as latent heat before the energy causes the kinetic energy to rise shown as temperature (which is the average kinetic energy of the gas volume) rise. Almost by definition the infrared that the satellite sees is radiation that is being released not stored, in the atmosphere so again the idea that the radiation there is from a hot atmosphere is incorrect, it is radiation being released by the atmosphere as infrared which has no temperature it is energy being radiated. We are back in the logic hole that this board spent some quite noisy times on - if water freezes at height it gives up the same amount of latent heat of freezing as it does if it freezes at ground level. By adding water to the atmosphere as humidity the enthalpy of the atmosphere in that area is raised and it takes much more heat to raise the temperature of a volume of atmosphere. So irrigation reduces the temperature of the air by increasing its enthalpy. You raise some excellent points. The release of latent heat as we have discussed ad-nauseam here remains a mysterious process. Until I joined this forum and started thinking about this with many of your comments Naut, the issue of the phase change of water is something science seems to little understand. Supercooling, Mpemba effect, the Yosemite effect (a tourist attraction) all seem to lead to a property of water that might be critical to climate that we have practically no understanding of. I did a crude experiment in my home. I had been putting bottles of Kirkland water in my refrigerator freezer compartment for the purpose of using as drinking water I carry in my backpack on warm days to cool a snack and provide for some refreshing cold water. I was surprised how difficult it was to freeze this water. I regularly make ice cubes that freeze in about a 1/2 day but I had bottles of Kirkland water that had not frozen even after a couple of weeks in the freezer. Using a cheap IR detector I measured the freezer temperature as about 14F. I could pull an unfrozen water bottle out and its surface would measure the same. Tap the bottle on the door of the freezer and it would freeze in about one second, not solid but about 90% or better leaving a small amount of unfrozen water in the bottle. I tried measuring the heat output as it froze and noted that some bottles would cause the IR detector to register as high as 50F instantaneously going from 14F to 50F in a flash and then instantaneously dropping back to about 32F. I don't know if this is an electronic issue or an actual temperature effect, but it was obvious that a lot of heat had been released upon freezing and not all the water froze. I recall discussing this issue at length regarding the fact that science classifies water freezing as an exothermic process. Blowing up dynamite is also an exothermic process. I don't think one can say with any certainty that the laws of radiation with carefully constructed quantities totally controls this process as was argued by at least a couple of forum participants. What hasn't changed is political science. The Svensmark theory to gain any traction is subjected to constant demands of demonstrated proof and when the proof is provided then it becomes a quantifiable argument that going to scale up to the planetary level starting with a chamber the size of a small room. No extrapolation is allowed, not an inch. Yet the politically correct theory sits there with no demonstration. . . .at all. I think your comment: "Almost by definition the infrared that the satellite sees is radiation that is being released not stored, in the atmosphere so again the idea that the radiation there is from a hot atmosphere is incorrect, it is radiation being released by the atmosphere as infrared which has no temperature it is energy being radiated." is extremely provocative. In the presence of phase changes, primarily water, something critical may well be lost. Political science does not like these kinds of problems but then again political science is probably what will kill us all in the end. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 22, 2018 20:04:36 GMT
I was hoping my heart would just get tired and stop, rather than having political science do me in.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Apr 22, 2018 21:17:30 GMT
I was hoping my heart would just get tired and stop, rather than having political science do me in. You and I are probably among the lucky ones. We will probably be long gone before the hacks kill everybody. |
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Apr 22, 2018 21:33:32 GMT
I was hoping my heart would just get tired and stop, rather than having political science do me in. You and I are probably among the lucky ones. We will probably be long gone before the hacks kill everybody. Me too but my theory is that oxygen is slowly killing us; it just takes 75-100 years to do its job. PS: Very interesting freezer observations, Icefisher. Try for a grant to do some more research? |
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Apr 22, 2018 22:39:17 GMT
You and I are probably among the lucky ones. We will probably be long gone before the hacks kill everybody. Me too but my theory is that oxygen is slowly killing us; it just takes 75-100 years to do its job. PS: Very interesting freezer observations, Icefisher. Try for a grant to do some more research? Now if only there were some grants being issued without first having your foot in some political door. Grant writing standards are so high there is no way to funded without a politically well-place advocate. |
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Apr 22, 2018 22:59:53 GMT
Me too but my theory is that oxygen is slowly killing us; it just takes 75-100 years to do its job. PS: Very interesting freezer observations, Icefisher. Try for a grant to do some more research? Now if only there were some grants being issued without first having your foot in some political door. Grant writing standards are so high there is no way to funded without a politically well-place advocate. It's easy to obtain a grant here. If you have a worthwhile project, the government is happy to assist: Kill The Deniers. Yep This Is A Title Of An Actual Play, Funded By Taxpayer Grant |
|
