The world has never seen such freezing heat
in [Design]
|
Prev: Class D audio driver with external mosfets
Next: NE162 mixer: input/output impedance in balanced mode?
From: bill.sloman on 13 Dec 2008 12:31 On 13 dec, 06:01, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:19:00 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > > On 12 dec, 22:39, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:35:42 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > >> > On 12 dec, 17:51, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> >> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:41:49 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > >> >> > On 11 dec, 21:46, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:28:40 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > >> >> >> > On 9 dec, 18:31, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> > >> >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 07:02:51 +0000, Don Klipstein wrote: > >> >> >> >> > In <pan.2008.12.04.06.47.13.380...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com>, > >> >> >> >> > Bill Ward wrote: > >> >> >> >> >>On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:35:12 +0000, Don Klipstein wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >>> In article > >> >> >> >> >>> <pan.2008.11.28.15.55.03.836...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com>, > >> >> >> >> >>> Bill Ward wrote: > >> >> >> >> >>>>On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 02:26:40 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > > >> >> >> >> >>>>> On 27 nov, 23:02, Whata Fool <wh...(a)fool.ami> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >>>>>> bill.slo...(a)ieee.org ÃÂ wrote: > > > <snip> > > >> >> But since you are such a self-evident expert in the fine details of > >> >> spectroscopy, perhaps you could give us a quantitative answer to the > >> >> original issue: > > >> >> What fraction of a -55C blackbody spectrum does CO2 absorb near the > >> >> 15u band, what fraction is absorbed near the 4.7u band, and what > >> >> fraction is not absorbed? Assume upper troposphere temperatures and > >> >> pressures. > > >> > To do that in a useful way I'd need the detailed infra-red absorbtion > >> > spectrum of CO2 at -55C and lower stratosphere pressures - a digital > >> > spectrum giving extinction coefficients and line widths for all the > >> > active lines. I'm fairly sure that this information exists and is > >> > available - climate modellers refer to it from time to time - but I've > >> > been looking for it recently and haven't been able to find a search > >> > string that gets me anything like it. > > > I spoke too soon. That data appears to be available - free - from HITRAN, > > if you register and they accept your registration > > >http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/hitran// > > >> > Once I had that, the rest would be pretty trivial. > > >> > This is not to say that I'd take on the project if I got the spectral > >> > information. > > >> > At present my only motivation do the job would be to satisy your idle > >> > curiousity, and since it is perfectly obvious that you wouldn't care > >> > what the answer was and wouldn't have clue what it meant in any larger > >> > context, it isn't exactly compelling. > > >> > And don't bother claiming that I'm bluffing. Your fuss about the > >> > "blackbody" issue is an utterly transparent bluff, and it hasn't > >> > worked. > > >> > You already look like a pretentious idiot, and trying to persist with > >> > that game isn't going to make you look any better. > > >> Oh come on. You can't even do a rough estimate? How close can you get? > > >> Enough to show you're not bluffing? Apparently not. > > >>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Atmospheric_Transm.... > > > The carbon dioxide spectrum don't resolve the rotational fine structure > > which makes it totally useless for the job you want done. > > >> I'm guessing, by simply looking at the relevant spectra, that CO2 would > >> absorb around 20-30% in the 15u band, and less than 5% in the 4.7u band, > >> leaving 65-75% unabsorbed. > > >> Your bluff is called. Is the graph wrong? > > > Not wrong - as far as it goes - but pretty much useless for your purposes. > > What you see as unresolved absorbtion bands look more like stretches of > > picket fence at higher resolution. The individual absorbtion lines in the > > "picket fence" are the rotational fine structure above and below pure > > vibrational lines, and each line has a line width that depends on the > > pressure broadening in the environment of interest. I managed to find a > > paper recently (and posted its URL in this thread) that showed some high > > resolution detail around the 4 um band. > > > The spectrum also appears to show 100% absorbtion, which means that it > > tells you essentially nothing about the extinction coefficients of the > > stronger lines. > > > Your "percentages" are - just as you say - guesswork. The data you are > > looking at isn't much better than Knut Angstrom had to work with about a > > century ago, and his data certainly mislead him. > > >http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm > > >>What are the real numbers, if you actually know? > > > To find out I'd first have to apply to register with HITRAN, which > > undertakes to respond to any such application within a fortnight. I have > > no idea how they regard interested amateurs, and I'm not motivated to find > > out. > > So you have no idea what the absorption is, yet somehow feel qualified to > criticize my estimate. From what you are saying, the actual absorption > spectrum is less dense than that shown, so the estimates I made are likely > on the high side. I merely pointed out the most obvious defect of the spectrum that you'd chosen as your basic information. To go further into its inadequacy, I need to draw your attention to the Beer-Lambert Law for light transmission through an absorbing medium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer-Lambert_law T = Iout/Iin = e^(- k.l.c) where T is transmission (the Y-axis of your spectrum) which is the intensity of the light exiting your absorber (Iout) divided by the intensity of the light incident on your absorber (Iin) at a particular wavelength e is the base of natural logarithims (the Wikipedia article uses 10, but physicists don't) k is the extinction coefficient for that wavelength l is the path length and c the concentration of the absorber along the absorbing path. Your spectrum doesn't mention either the concentration of the CO2 scanned or the length of the path scanned, so it can't be used in any kind of quantitative estimate. Your "estimate" failed to specify the distance over which the energy was being absorbed - though one might guess that you had the whole thickness of the atmosphere in mind - roughly 10km at standard atmospheric pressure - nor the concentration of CO2 you had in mind, though again one might guess the the current 388 ppm. If you want to think about what is going on in the atmosphere you should abandon your idle speculations and spend on some time on the American Institute of Physics web-site. You will find the story they tell complicated (and probably intimidating) but it does have the advantage of being based on good science, rather than your own unreliable intuitions. <snipped the usual ad hominem stuff> -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: bill.sloman on 13 Dec 2008 12:40 On 13 dec, 16:41, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote: > > > On Dec 13, 5:50 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> > > wrote:"Who is Bill? Are there any bills on the newsgroup? I guess > > Newsproxy is working. :)" > > > cool ("Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net>") you prefer > > ignorance that is your choice, but once again does anybody really care > > who you acknowledge, just like im not sure anybody care what surprises > > (Bill Ward bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com) much less what his personal > > opinions are? > > Some people just aren't worth wasting any time on. Things like > politics and fake religions. One thing is odd, though. A lot of these > quacks have the same first name, (like Bill) or dozens of sock puppets. > Others present their crappy ideas, and cling to them even after the > physics behind their errors are explained. Life is to short to waste on > bottom feeders. I prefer to do something constructive with what is left > of my life. Like posting "me too" to Jim Thompson's sillier opinions? As "constructive options" go, this leaves you pretty low in the bottom- feeder pecking order, somewhere around sycophant. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: bill.sloman on 13 Dec 2008 12:48 On 13 dec, 05:16, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:41:48 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > > On 11 dec, 21:26, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 04:56:18 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > >> > On 11 dec, 04:16, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:45:08 -0500, Whata Fool wrote: > >> >> > Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > > >> >> >>On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 06:10:34 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > > >> >> >>> On 9 dec, 01:32, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> >> >>>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 06:36:08 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > >> >> >>>> > On 8 dec, 03:02, Whata Fool <wh...(a)fool.ami> wrote: > >> >> >>>> >> Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote: > > >> >> >>>> >> >On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 05:29:26 -0800,bill.slomanwrote: > > >> >> >>>> >> >> On 7 dec, 09:25, Whata Fool <wh...(a)fool.ami> wrote: > > >> > <snip> > > >> >> > Bill, what is needed is a calculation of the thermal > >> >> > energy in a square meter column of atmosphere, to see how long it > >> >> > takes to cool the whole column by radiation. > > >> >> We already know it will cool at the same rate the sun is heating it, > >> >> about 240W/m^2, and will do so at a radiation temperature of about > >> >> 255K. > > >> >> What we don't know is how or if the surface temperature and the > >> >> vertical distribution of temperature is affected by 390 ppmv of CO2 > >> >> in the presence of an excess of water in the system. > > >> > You and Whata Fool don't know. Better informed investigators have a > >> > rather clearer idea. > > >> But you don't. At least not one you can explain. Isn't it > >> frustrating to be so sure of yourself and yet be so completely unable to > >> explain why? > > > I'm used to it. I can deal with stupidity, and I can cope with people who > > can't understand because they don't want to. I spent most of my careeer in > > industry, and coping with obstructive bosses is rahter more demanding that > > putting up with pretentious nitwits in user-groups. > > I'm sure you felt superior to your bosses. That must have been a > frustrating career. I certainly felt superior to some of them, mainly because they were the ones that it was easy to circumvent. Every career has it's frustrations, and I can't say that I can (or did) blame my bosses for more than a few of them, nor that any of them got me down. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: Millwright Ron on 13 Dec 2008 14:11 On Dec 13, 7:41 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote: > > > On Dec 13, 5:50 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> > > wrote:"Who is Bill? Are there any bills on the newsgroup? I guess > > Newsproxy is working. :)" > > > cool ("Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net>") you prefer > > ignorance that is your choice, but once again does anybody really care > > who you acknowledge, just like im not sure anybody care what surprises > > (Bill Ward bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com) much less what his personal > > opinions are? > > Some people just aren't worth wasting any time on. Things like > politics and fake religions. One thing is odd, though. A lot of these > quacks have the same first name, (like Bill) or dozens of sock puppets. > Others present their crappy ideas, and cling to them even after the > physics behind their errors are explained. Life is to short to waste on > bottom feeders. I prefer to do something constructive with what is left > of my life. > > --http://improve-usenet.org/index.html > > aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white > listed, or I will not see your messages. > > If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in > your account:http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm > > There are two kinds of people on this earth: > The crazy, and the insane. > The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy. Terrell How is the tv repairman? I haven't seen much of your drivel lately. If you are tired of that nasty taste in your mouth...Maybe you should change jobs.
From: Millwright Ron on 13 Dec 2008 14:13
On Dec 13, 5:50 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote: > > > On Dec 12, 9:01 pm, Bill Ward <bw...(a)REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> > > wrote:"snip" > > > Does anybody really care what surprises bill, much less what his > > personal opinions are? > > Who is Bill? Are there any bills on the newsgroup? I guess > Newsproxy is working. :) > > --http://improve-usenet.org/index.html > > aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white > listed, or I will not see your messages. > > If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in > your account:http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm > > There are two kinds of people on this earth: > The crazy, and the insane. > The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy. Terrell How is the tv repairman? I haven't seen much of your drivel lately. If you are tired of that nasty taste in your mouth...Maybe you should change jobs. |