heat conduction as 'vibrating atoms' is a flawed interpretation
in [Math]
|
Prev: Idiots, we all will be killed in a couple of days. Write to Geneva and plead the citizens of Geneva to block the entrances to LHC.
Next: 281 and 283: Will the twin primes always mirror the closeness between the second two primes 3 and 5?
From: Tim Golden BandTech.com on 27 Mar 2010 09:30 On Mar 24, 12:51 pm, mstem...(a)walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote: > In article <6acc186e-f5b6-4c39-8435-fe303fc88...(a)z3g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>, "Tim Golden BandTech.com" <tttppp...(a)yahoo.com> writes: > > >On Mar 5, 1:08 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> heat is infrared lightwaves. there is nothing wrong > > >This statement on heat merely worsens the conflict, for now you are > >claiming that heat propagates at the speed of light, > > There are three modes of heat transfer: > 1. Radiation > 2. Conduction > 3. Convection > > The first of these, the one that's relevant to spudnik's statement, > does propagate at the speed of light. > > > yet the > >conduction of heat through a solid is extremely slow; > > Yup, conduction is much slower than radiation. So is convection. But, > those aren't propagation by infrared E-M waves, but by other mechanisms, > so they're irrelevant. No Michael. His argument is in response to my presentation. I am discussing heat conduction. Particularly I am discussing the discrepancy between the rate of propagation of heat to the rate of propagation of sound, both of which are accepted in modernity to be 'vibrating atoms'. This discussion does not take place in advanced physics, e.g. Kittel's Solid State Physics. Would you care to deny that the mechanism of conduction of heat through say a bar of steel is via atomic translation? What about sound? Particularly, I may take a nail with a very sharp point and hammer it into one end of the bar of steel and observe that a local perturbation does conduct through the bar very rapidly. Next take an acetylene torch at full blast applied to the end of the bar and observe how remarkably slow that heat will transfer to the other end of the bar. The interpretation of heat as vibrating atoms is flawed. There must be a more loosely coupled interaction at work in the conduction of heat. - Tim > > -- > Michael F. Stemper > #include <Standard_Disclaimer> > This email is to be read by its intended recipient only. Any other party > reading is required by the EULA to send me $500.00.
From: M Purcell on 27 Mar 2010 10:47 On Mar 27, 6:30 am, "Tim Golden BandTech.com" <tttppp...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 24, 12:51 pm, mstem...(a)walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) > wrote: > > > > > > > In article <6acc186e-f5b6-4c39-8435-fe303fc88...(a)z3g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>, "Tim Golden BandTech.com" <tttppp...(a)yahoo.com> writes: > > > >On Mar 5, 1:08 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> heat is infrared lightwaves. there is nothing wrong > > > >This statement on heat merely worsens the conflict, for now you are > > >claiming that heat propagates at the speed of light, > > > There are three modes of heat transfer: > > 1. Radiation > > 2. Conduction > > 3. Convection > > > The first of these, the one that's relevant to spudnik's statement, > > does propagate at the speed of light. > > > > yet the > > >conduction of heat through a solid is extremely slow; > > > Yup, conduction is much slower than radiation. So is convection. But, > > those aren't propagation by infrared E-M waves, but by other mechanisms, > > so they're irrelevant. > > No Michael. > > His argument is in response to my presentation. > I am discussing heat conduction. > > Particularly I am discussing the discrepancy between the rate of > propagation of heat to the rate of propagation of sound, both of which > are accepted in modernity to be 'vibrating atoms'. This discussion > does not take place in advanced physics, e.g. Kittel's Solid State > Physics. > > Would you care to deny that the mechanism of conduction of heat > through say a bar of steel is via atomic translation? What about > sound? > > Particularly, I may take a nail with a very sharp point and hammer it > into one end of the bar of steel and observe that a local perturbation > does conduct through the bar very rapidly. Next take an acetylene > torch at full blast applied to the end of the bar and observe how > remarkably slow that heat will transfer to the other end of the bar. > > The interpretation of heat as vibrating atoms is flawed. There must be > a more loosely coupled interaction at work in the conduction of heat. Indeed, the conduction of heat is not as organized as a wave, it's more analogous to the diffusion of a scent.
From: spudnik on 27 Mar 2010 16:05 waht he said. ultimately, it is all mediated by radiation, but "stuff gets in the way of it." there is another mode of heat transfer, perhaps also less analyzable a la Fourier, "trasporative heat flow," when water flows over a warm object e.g. > > Would you care to deny that the mechanism of conduction of heat > > through say a bar of steel is via atomic translation? What about > > sound? > > The interpretation of heat as vibrating atoms is flawed. There must be > > a more loosely coupled interaction at work in the conduction of heat. > > Indeed, the conduction of heat is not as organized as a wave, it's > more analogous to the diffusion of a scent. --Light: A history! http://wlym.com
From: M Purcell on 27 Mar 2010 22:10 On Mar 27, 1:05 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > waht he said. ultimately, it is all mediated > by radiation, but "stuff gets in the way of it." > > there is another mode of heat transfer, perhaps > also less analyzable a la Fourier, > "trasporative heat flow," when water flows > over a warm object e.g. That would seem to allow transmission of information.
From: Jennifer The Book Extraordinare on 28 Mar 2010 21:50
message in a bottle(s) ?? > That would seem to allow transmission of information. --Light: A History! http://wlym.com |