The following is a news release from the University of Copenhagen
this past March. I've decided not to put it in my own words
because I agree with Professor Andresen, and want the
article to reflect his views rather than mine because he is the
professor not me.
Discussions on global warming often refer to 'global temperature.'
Yet the concept is thermodynamically as well as mathematically an
impossibility, says Bjarne Andresen, a professor at The Niels Bohr
Institute, University of Copenhagen, who has analyzed this topic
in collaboration with professors Christopher Essex from University
of Western Ontario and Ross McKitrick from University of Guelph,
Canada.
It is generally assumed that the atmosphere and the oceans have
grown warmer during the recent 50 years. The reason for this point
of view is an upward trend in the curve of measurements of the
so-called 'global temperature'. This is the temperature obtained
by collecting measurements of air temperatures at a large number
of measuring stations around the Globe, weighing them according to
the area they represent, and then calculating the yearly average
according to the usual method of adding all values and dividing by
the number of points.
Average without meaning
"It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something
as complicated as the climate of Earth", Bjarne Andresen says, an
an expert of thermodynamics. "A temperature can be defined only
for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed
by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive
the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc.
which make up the climate".
He explains that while it is possible to treat temperature
statistically locally, it is meaningless to talk about a a global
temperature for Earth. The Globe consists of a huge number of
components which one cannot just add up and average. That would
correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone
book. That is meaningless. Or talking about economics, it does
make sense to compare the currency exchange rate of two countries,
whereas there is no point in talking about an average 'global
exchange rate'.
If temperature decreases at one point and it increases at another,
the average will remain the same as before, but it will give rise
to an entirely different thermodynamics and thus a different
climate. If, for example, it is 10 degrees at one point and
40 degrees at another, the average is 25 degrees. But if instead
there is 25 degrees both places, the average is still 25 degrees.
These two cases would give rise to two entirely different types of
climate, because in the former case one would have pressure
differences and strong winds, while in the latter there would be
no wind.
Many averages
A further problem with the extensive use of 'the global
temperature' is that there are many ways of calculating average
temperatures.
Example 1: Take two equally large glasses of water. The water in
one glass is 0 degrees, in the other it is 100 degrees. Adding
these two numbers and dividing by two yields an average
temperature of 50 degrees. That is called the arithmetic average.
Example 2: Take the same two glasses of water at 0 degrees and 100
degrees, respectively. Now multiply those two numbers and take the
square root, and you will arrive at an average temperature of 46
degrees. This is called the geometric average. (The calculation is
done in degrees Kelvin which are then converted back to degrees
Celsius.)
The difference of 4 degrees is the energy which drives all the
thermodynamic processes which create storms, thunder, sea
currents, etc.
Claims of disaster?
These are but two examples of ways to calculate averages. They are
all equally correct, but one needs a solid physical reason to
choose one above another. Depending on the averaging method used,
the same set of measured data can simultaneously show an upward
trend and a downward trend in average temperature. Thus claims of
disaster may be a consequence of which averaging method has been
used, the researchers point out.
What Bjarne Andresen and his coworkers emphasize is that physical
arguments are needed to decide whether one averaging method or
another is needed to calculate an average which is relevant to
describe the state of Earth.
Reference: C. Essex, R. McKitrick, B. Andresen: Does a Global
Temperature Exist?; J. Non-Equil. Thermod. vol. 32, p. 1-27
(2007).
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070315101129.htm
Sunday, October 16, 2016
Global Warming Greenhouse Theory Disproved a Century Ago
The claim that carbon dioxide (CO2) can increase air temperatures by
"trapping" infrared radiation (IR) ignores the fact that in 1909
physicist R.W. Wood disproved the popular 19th Century
thesis that greenhouses stayed warm by trapping
IR. Unfortunately, many people who
claim to be scientists are unaware of Wood's experiment which
was originally published in the Philosophical magazine , 1909, vol 17, p319-320.
Philosophical Magazine might not sound like the name of a science publication, but a century ago leading scientists published their discoveries in it.
During the early 19th Century many physicists supported the theory postulated by Benjamin Franklin that heat involved some type of fluid. The theory became known as "caloric theory". Joseph Jean Baptiste Fourier's theory that the atmosphere was heated from infrared radiation from the ground was a variation of caloric theory with IR functioning as the "fluid". Fourier believed greenhouses were heated by trapping this radiation.
Physicists in the early 19th Century were attempting to develop theories to explain the nature of atoms and their properties such as heat. Physicists theorized that atoms were the smallest particles of matter.
By the end of the century a new theory of heat, called "kinetic theory", was being developed that suggested heat was the motion, or kinetic energy, of atoms. However, Fourier's theory that IR heated the atmosphere particularly by interacting with carbon dioxide and water vapor continued to have support.
In 1897 J.J. Thompson overturned the popular theory of the atoms being the smallest particles of matter by reporting his discovery of the electron and predicting two other types of charged particles he called protons and neutrons.
Wood was an expert on IR. His accomplishments included inventing both IR and UV (ultraviolet) photography. In 1909 he decided to test Fourier's theory about how greenhouses retained heat.
Wood constructed two identical small greenhouses. The description implies the type of structure a gardener would refer to as a "cold frame" rather than a building a person could walk into.
He lined the interior with black cardboard which would absorb radiation and convert it to heat which would heat the air through conduction. The cardboard would also produce radiation. He covered one greenhouse with a sheet of transparent rock salt and the other with a sheet of glass. The glass would block IR and the rock salt would allow it to pass.
During the first run of the experiment the rock salt greenhouse heated faster due to IR from the sun entering it but not the glass greenhouse. He then set up another pane of glass to filter the IR from the sun before the light reached the greenhouses.
The result from this run was that the greenhouses both heated to about 50 C with less than a degree difference between the two. Wood didn't indicate which was warmer or whether there was any difference in the thermal conductivity between the glass sheet and the rock salt. A slight difference in the amount of heat transfered through the sheets by conduction could explain such a minor difference in temperature. The two sheets probably didn't conduct heat at the same rate.
The experiment conclusively demonstrates that greenhouses heat up and stay warm by confining heated air rather than by trapping IR. If trapping IR in an enclosed space doesn't cause higher air temperature than CO2 in the atmosphere cannot cause higher air temperatures.
The heated air in the greenhouses couldn't rise higher than the sheets that covered the tops of the greenhouses. Heated air outside is free to rise allowing colder air to fall to the ground.
Atmospheric CO2 is even less likely to function as a barrier to IR or reflect it back to reheat the ground or water than the sheet of glass in Wood's greenhouse.
The blackened cardboard in Wood's greenhouses was a very good radiator of IR as is typical of black substances. The water that covers 70% of earth's surface is a very poor radiator and produces only limited amounts of IR as is typical of transparent substances. Water releases heat through evaporation rather than radiation.
The glass sheet provided a solid barrier to IR. Atmospheric CO2 is widely dispersed comprising less than 400 parts per million in the atmosphere. Trapping IR with CO2 would be like trying to confine mice with a chain link fence.
Glass reflects a wider spectrum of IR than interacts with CO2. The glass sheets reflected IR back toward the floor of the greenhouse. CO2 doesn't reflect IR.
At the time of Wood's experiment, it was believed that CO2 and other gas molecules became hotter after absorbing IR.
Four years later Niels Bohr reported his discovery that the absorption of specific wavelengths of light didn't cause gas atoms/molecules to become hotter. Instead, the absorption of specific wavelengths of light caused the electrons in an atom/molecule to move to a higher energy state. After absorption of light of a specific wavelength an atom couldn't absorb additional radiation of that wavelength without first emitting light of that wavelength. He called the amount of energy absorbed and emitted as a "quantum". (Philosophical Magazine Series 6, Volume 26 July 1913, p. 1-25)
Unlike the glass which reflects IR back where it comes from, CO2 molecules emit IR up and sideways as well as down. In the time interval between absorbing and reemitting radiation, CO2 molecules allow IR to pass them by. Glass continuously reflects IR.
Those who claim that CO2 molecules in the atmosphere can cause heating by trapping IR have yet to provide any empirical scientific evidence to prove such a physical process exists. The experiment by R.W. Wood demonstrates that even a highly reflective covering that reflects a broad spectrum of IR cannot cause heating by trapping IR in a confined space. There is no way CO2, which at best only affects a small portion of the IR produced by earth's surface, can heat the atmosphere by trapping IR.
Contrary to the lie repeated in news stories about climate, science doesn't say that CO2 is causing higher temperatures by trapping IR. Empirical science indicates that no such process exists in this physical universe.
Philosophical Magazine might not sound like the name of a science publication, but a century ago leading scientists published their discoveries in it.
During the early 19th Century many physicists supported the theory postulated by Benjamin Franklin that heat involved some type of fluid. The theory became known as "caloric theory". Joseph Jean Baptiste Fourier's theory that the atmosphere was heated from infrared radiation from the ground was a variation of caloric theory with IR functioning as the "fluid". Fourier believed greenhouses were heated by trapping this radiation.
Physicists in the early 19th Century were attempting to develop theories to explain the nature of atoms and their properties such as heat. Physicists theorized that atoms were the smallest particles of matter.
By the end of the century a new theory of heat, called "kinetic theory", was being developed that suggested heat was the motion, or kinetic energy, of atoms. However, Fourier's theory that IR heated the atmosphere particularly by interacting with carbon dioxide and water vapor continued to have support.
In 1897 J.J. Thompson overturned the popular theory of the atoms being the smallest particles of matter by reporting his discovery of the electron and predicting two other types of charged particles he called protons and neutrons.
Wood was an expert on IR. His accomplishments included inventing both IR and UV (ultraviolet) photography. In 1909 he decided to test Fourier's theory about how greenhouses retained heat.
Wood constructed two identical small greenhouses. The description implies the type of structure a gardener would refer to as a "cold frame" rather than a building a person could walk into.
He lined the interior with black cardboard which would absorb radiation and convert it to heat which would heat the air through conduction. The cardboard would also produce radiation. He covered one greenhouse with a sheet of transparent rock salt and the other with a sheet of glass. The glass would block IR and the rock salt would allow it to pass.
During the first run of the experiment the rock salt greenhouse heated faster due to IR from the sun entering it but not the glass greenhouse. He then set up another pane of glass to filter the IR from the sun before the light reached the greenhouses.
The result from this run was that the greenhouses both heated to about 50 C with less than a degree difference between the two. Wood didn't indicate which was warmer or whether there was any difference in the thermal conductivity between the glass sheet and the rock salt. A slight difference in the amount of heat transfered through the sheets by conduction could explain such a minor difference in temperature. The two sheets probably didn't conduct heat at the same rate.
The experiment conclusively demonstrates that greenhouses heat up and stay warm by confining heated air rather than by trapping IR. If trapping IR in an enclosed space doesn't cause higher air temperature than CO2 in the atmosphere cannot cause higher air temperatures.
The heated air in the greenhouses couldn't rise higher than the sheets that covered the tops of the greenhouses. Heated air outside is free to rise allowing colder air to fall to the ground.
Atmospheric CO2 is even less likely to function as a barrier to IR or reflect it back to reheat the ground or water than the sheet of glass in Wood's greenhouse.
The blackened cardboard in Wood's greenhouses was a very good radiator of IR as is typical of black substances. The water that covers 70% of earth's surface is a very poor radiator and produces only limited amounts of IR as is typical of transparent substances. Water releases heat through evaporation rather than radiation.
The glass sheet provided a solid barrier to IR. Atmospheric CO2 is widely dispersed comprising less than 400 parts per million in the atmosphere. Trapping IR with CO2 would be like trying to confine mice with a chain link fence.
Glass reflects a wider spectrum of IR than interacts with CO2. The glass sheets reflected IR back toward the floor of the greenhouse. CO2 doesn't reflect IR.
At the time of Wood's experiment, it was believed that CO2 and other gas molecules became hotter after absorbing IR.
Four years later Niels Bohr reported his discovery that the absorption of specific wavelengths of light didn't cause gas atoms/molecules to become hotter. Instead, the absorption of specific wavelengths of light caused the electrons in an atom/molecule to move to a higher energy state. After absorption of light of a specific wavelength an atom couldn't absorb additional radiation of that wavelength without first emitting light of that wavelength. He called the amount of energy absorbed and emitted as a "quantum". (Philosophical Magazine Series 6, Volume 26 July 1913, p. 1-25)
Unlike the glass which reflects IR back where it comes from, CO2 molecules emit IR up and sideways as well as down. In the time interval between absorbing and reemitting radiation, CO2 molecules allow IR to pass them by. Glass continuously reflects IR.
Those who claim that CO2 molecules in the atmosphere can cause heating by trapping IR have yet to provide any empirical scientific evidence to prove such a physical process exists. The experiment by R.W. Wood demonstrates that even a highly reflective covering that reflects a broad spectrum of IR cannot cause heating by trapping IR in a confined space. There is no way CO2, which at best only affects a small portion of the IR produced by earth's surface, can heat the atmosphere by trapping IR.
Contrary to the lie repeated in news stories about climate, science doesn't say that CO2 is causing higher temperatures by trapping IR. Empirical science indicates that no such process exists in this physical universe.
Gravity Cools the Atmosphere
This statement may sound strange to those who don't understand that
heat is the kinetic energy, or motion, of atoms/molecules.
Actions which increase kinetic energy of atoms cause an increase in
heat. Actions which decrease kinetic energy of atoms
reduce heat energy thus cooling atoms/molecules. I will use
molecules instead of atoms because gas atoms exist as parts of
molecules and at atmospheric temperatures atoms in molecules behave
as a unit. The following is a simplified view of atmospheric
heating and cooling involving the rising and falling of air
molecules. Air currents can cause warm air and cold air to mix
with heat transferring from warm air to cool air.
Inertia is the property of matter in which an object in motion will tend to stay in motion unless acted upon by some force. Gravity is a force which can increase or decrease motion. If you push a rock off a cliff, gravity will cause a downward motion with the velocity increasing as the object falls. If you throw a baseball up into the air, gravity will gradually decrease its upward motion until the baseball stops going up and gravity starts to pull it back down to the ground.
Physicists determined in the 19th Century that heat was the motion, or kinetic energy, of atoms. Individual molecules have their own kinetic energy which physicists call "heat". There is a common misconception that heating causes molecules to vibrate. Heat causes motion in molecules but molecules seldom have freedom of movement. Molecules in solids are held in place in a matrix. Attempts to move result in vibration unless molecules become hot enough to break the bonds of the matrix, such as when ice melts. Gas molecules bounce off each other like ping pong balls in a bingo machine which in effect is vibration.
As the sun heats the earth's surface, air molecules in thermal contact with the surface begin absorbing heat energy from the ground. Two substances in what physicists call "thermal contact" will attempt to become the same temperature. Although the process is far more complicated than what happens with billiard balls on a pool table, the behavior of billiard balls is one way of visualizing how energy is transferred from molecule to molecule.
As air molecules heat up they begin to rise from the earth's surface because warm air is less dense, and thus lighter, than cool air. As air molecules bounce off each other the area they cover spreads out and there are fewer molecules per cubic meter. The upward movement allows cooler air to flow in under the warm air and begin heating. The process continues as long as some air is cooler than the ground.
The atmosphere also receives heat energy from the evaporation of water. The water vapor comes from bodies of water and the ground as well as the evaporation of water from plants and animals. For example, the human body cools itself by perspiring water to the outside of the skin where it evaporates and takes the heat energy into the atmosphere.
The heat energy held by water vapor involves more than just its temperature. Water vapor also holds what physicists call latent heat which includes the heat energy that must be absorbed for water to go from a solid to a liquid [heat of fusion] and from a liquid to a gas [heat of vaporization]. Other gases also possess latent heat , but they are gases at atmospheric temperature so they don't go through a change of state that would involve this heat. Water is normally a liquid or solid at atmospheric temperature.
When matter rises from the earth's surface it must turn part of its kinetic energy into potential energy to overcome the force of gravity. This process affects all matter regardless of whether it is as big as a rocket or as small as a water molecule. The conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy doesn't cause a loss of energy, just a change in status from what might be called "active" energy to "inactive" energy. The is analogous to charging a battery.
Objects, including gas molecules, above ground have potential energy because that energy will become kinetic energy if they fall, If some of the kinetic energy (i.e., heat) of gas molecules didn't change to potential energy gas molecules would gain energy from the movement upward which is impossible.
When gas molecules rise the conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy causes them to slow down and thus become "cooler", The cooling process is slow because of the low mass of gas molecules, particularly water vapor which consists of an oxygen atom and two atoms of hydrogen which is the element with the lowest mass. High air pressure blocks this cooling by preventing warm air from rising.
When matter begins falling back to the ground, gravity converts its potential energy back into kinetic energy. As gravity increases the kinetic energy of solid objects when they fall, the velocity of the object increases. Gravity generally doesn't increase the kinetic energy of individual gas molecules[cause heating] as they fall back to the ground. Instead, gravity increases the kinetic energy of the air mass, or wind. An exception is the Chinook winds that sometimes occur along the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains.
In its gaseous state water molecules are lighter than the other molecules of the other atmospheric gases. Although water molecules can fall back to earth as gas molecules, they usually condense into liquid droplets or freeze into ice particles. If the ice particles are large enough, they can acquire enough kinetic energy as they fall to cause damage to solid objects on the ground. If water drops freeze on tree limbs or power lines when they near the ground their kinetic energy will temporarily become potential energy which can become kinetic energy if whatever they attach to falls.
The amount of potential energy held by water is determined by the distance it rises above sea level rather than just its distance from the ground. Generally water droplets will transfer their kinetic energy to whatever they hit such as human skin. If sufficient water hits on a slope, the kinetic energy of the flood water can be sufficient to move dirt or in rare cases buildings.
Inertia is the property of matter in which an object in motion will tend to stay in motion unless acted upon by some force. Gravity is a force which can increase or decrease motion. If you push a rock off a cliff, gravity will cause a downward motion with the velocity increasing as the object falls. If you throw a baseball up into the air, gravity will gradually decrease its upward motion until the baseball stops going up and gravity starts to pull it back down to the ground.
Physicists determined in the 19th Century that heat was the motion, or kinetic energy, of atoms. Individual molecules have their own kinetic energy which physicists call "heat". There is a common misconception that heating causes molecules to vibrate. Heat causes motion in molecules but molecules seldom have freedom of movement. Molecules in solids are held in place in a matrix. Attempts to move result in vibration unless molecules become hot enough to break the bonds of the matrix, such as when ice melts. Gas molecules bounce off each other like ping pong balls in a bingo machine which in effect is vibration.
As the sun heats the earth's surface, air molecules in thermal contact with the surface begin absorbing heat energy from the ground. Two substances in what physicists call "thermal contact" will attempt to become the same temperature. Although the process is far more complicated than what happens with billiard balls on a pool table, the behavior of billiard balls is one way of visualizing how energy is transferred from molecule to molecule.
As air molecules heat up they begin to rise from the earth's surface because warm air is less dense, and thus lighter, than cool air. As air molecules bounce off each other the area they cover spreads out and there are fewer molecules per cubic meter. The upward movement allows cooler air to flow in under the warm air and begin heating. The process continues as long as some air is cooler than the ground.
The atmosphere also receives heat energy from the evaporation of water. The water vapor comes from bodies of water and the ground as well as the evaporation of water from plants and animals. For example, the human body cools itself by perspiring water to the outside of the skin where it evaporates and takes the heat energy into the atmosphere.
The heat energy held by water vapor involves more than just its temperature. Water vapor also holds what physicists call latent heat which includes the heat energy that must be absorbed for water to go from a solid to a liquid [heat of fusion] and from a liquid to a gas [heat of vaporization]. Other gases also possess latent heat , but they are gases at atmospheric temperature so they don't go through a change of state that would involve this heat. Water is normally a liquid or solid at atmospheric temperature.
When matter rises from the earth's surface it must turn part of its kinetic energy into potential energy to overcome the force of gravity. This process affects all matter regardless of whether it is as big as a rocket or as small as a water molecule. The conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy doesn't cause a loss of energy, just a change in status from what might be called "active" energy to "inactive" energy. The is analogous to charging a battery.
Objects, including gas molecules, above ground have potential energy because that energy will become kinetic energy if they fall, If some of the kinetic energy (i.e., heat) of gas molecules didn't change to potential energy gas molecules would gain energy from the movement upward which is impossible.
When gas molecules rise the conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy causes them to slow down and thus become "cooler", The cooling process is slow because of the low mass of gas molecules, particularly water vapor which consists of an oxygen atom and two atoms of hydrogen which is the element with the lowest mass. High air pressure blocks this cooling by preventing warm air from rising.
When matter begins falling back to the ground, gravity converts its potential energy back into kinetic energy. As gravity increases the kinetic energy of solid objects when they fall, the velocity of the object increases. Gravity generally doesn't increase the kinetic energy of individual gas molecules[cause heating] as they fall back to the ground. Instead, gravity increases the kinetic energy of the air mass, or wind. An exception is the Chinook winds that sometimes occur along the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains.
In its gaseous state water molecules are lighter than the other molecules of the other atmospheric gases. Although water molecules can fall back to earth as gas molecules, they usually condense into liquid droplets or freeze into ice particles. If the ice particles are large enough, they can acquire enough kinetic energy as they fall to cause damage to solid objects on the ground. If water drops freeze on tree limbs or power lines when they near the ground their kinetic energy will temporarily become potential energy which can become kinetic energy if whatever they attach to falls.
The amount of potential energy held by water is determined by the distance it rises above sea level rather than just its distance from the ground. Generally water droplets will transfer their kinetic energy to whatever they hit such as human skin. If sufficient water hits on a slope, the kinetic energy of the flood water can be sufficient to move dirt or in rare cases buildings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)