Remember me
▼ Content

gravity and temperature



Page 1 of 6123>>>
gravity and temperature10-11-2021 03:26
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
Is there such a thing as gravitational energy and is it an influence on temperature?
10-11-2021 05:07
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
keepit wrote:Is there such a thing as gravitational energy and is it an influence on temperature?

Of course there is. If you had been paying attention, Pete Rogers taught us that lesson with amazing alacrity.

So many people, such as myself, mistakenly thought of gravity as a force but Pete Rogers cleared that up. I also used to think that only matter had thermal energy and that only matter had temperature, but after the Pete Rogers series of lectures, I now know that empty volume can contain thermal energy, which happens to be its measure! I also learned that the aforementioned physics do not apply to solids, especially metals.

I also learned that the word you used in your question, i.e. "influence" is really the only word that is sufficiently unambiguous regarding this topic and I just wanted to give you credit for being spot-on with the semantics.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-11-2021 05:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
keepit wrote:
Is there such a thing as gravitational energy and is it an influence on temperature?

No. No.
RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-11-2021 05:49
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
Into the Night wrote:No. No. RQAA.

OK, you were a tad more succinct. You know keepit was trying to stir the pot.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-11-2021 16:52
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
keepit wrote:
Is there such a thing as gravitational energy and is it an influence on temperature?



Accepted theory is that the sun shines. With gravity, since compression (gravity, atmospheric pressure) is a constant, atmospheric gasses would remain at the same temperature.
If a gas is pressurized in a container, it's temperature will rise warming the container where an equilibrium is reached with the field (environment) the container is in.
This understanding of thermodynamics is what led Joseph Fourier to say the Sun was to far away to warm the Earth. This was back in 1822 when he published his work. This in turn led to Svante Arrhenius saying CO2 in 1896.
I have my own opinion and at the moment that doesn't matter. In some ways if what I know is right, hydrocarbons would still be an issue.
With Fourier, he made an observation but did not give a specific reason as to why. That would be Arrhenius over 7 decades later. I think it has yet to be realized how our atmosphere actually works. While your friends in here accept that atmospheric air pressure is 1013.2 millibars (14.7 psi, 1.033 kgf/cm^2). I don't believe this. My onion is actually based on the history of science and what math supports.
10-11-2021 17:43
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
Thanks James.
Does anyone here think the sun is hotter at the center than near the surface?
Does anyone here think the earth is hotter at the center than at the surface? Please ex[lain your thinking.
10-11-2021 18:11
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
James___ wrote:Accepted theory is that the sun shines.

Science says that the sun radiates its radiance and that the earth absorbs its own emissivity's worth after accounting for the inverse square law.

"the sun shines" also works.

James___ wrote:With gravity, since compression (gravity, atmospheric pressure) is a constant,

Correct. Since the atmosphere is not changing volume in the present progressive and hence, is not compressing, that constant is zero.

James___ wrote:atmospheric gasses would remain at the same temperature.

Atmospheric gases are always changing temperature. What you meant to write is that gravity will not be the cause of any change to those temperatures.

James___ wrote: This in turn led to Svante Arrhenius saying CO2 in 1896.

Svante Arrhenius was wrong and his work was discarded from the body of science. This is why nobody ever learns any "Arrhenius Equation" in school.

James___ wrote: In some ways if what I know is right, hydrocarbons would still be an issue.

It's not something that you know; it's something that you believe. You cannot "know" something that is not true. You can only believe something that unfortunately happens to not be the case.

James___ wrote: With Fourier, he made an observation but did not give a specific reason as to why.

Science does not give the reason why. Science gives the formally-specified unambiguous relationship between entities in nature that enable nature to be predicted. There is no "why" in science. We have religion to address that.

James___ wrote:That would be Arrhenius over 7 decades later. I think it has yet to be realized how our atmosphere actually works.

No. Since your context is "thermodynamics" then the atmosphere performs no work. The atmosphere is not energy. The atmosphere does not "work." Within the context of science, the atmosphere is a lazy bum.

James___ wrote: While your friends in here accept that atmospheric air pressure is 1013.2 millibars (14.7 psi, 1.033 kgf/cm^2). I don't believe this.

There is no single atmospheric air pressure. Yes, there is a single global average but it's not like anyone can ever find out what that is.

James___ wrote:My onion is actually based on the history of science and what math supports.

I believe math supports all values.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-11-2021 20:50
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
See google and wikipedia to learn about gravitational energy.
11-11-2021 21:14
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2621)
keepit wrote:
See google

Should I be seeing the company, the web browser, or the search engine?? BTW, Google is capitalized as it is as proper noun.

keepit wrote:
and wikipedia

Wikipedia is capitalized, as it is a proper noun.

keepit wrote:
to learn about gravitational energy.

Why can't YOU tell me anything about gravitational energy?
Edited on 11-11-2021 21:16
11-11-2021 21:24
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
gfm7175 wrote:Why can't YOU tell me anything about gravitational energy?

keepit is a moron who doesn't see any difference between energy and forces and who cannot understand how creating new dollars somehow increases the number of dollars.

keepit needs others to do his thinking for him since he obviously cannot think for himself. His problem is that he cannot therefore think through who he should have do his thinking for him, so he ended up choosing who he was told to choose.

It sucks to be keepit.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-11-2021 22:00
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
keepit wrote:
See google and wikipedia to learn about gravitational energy.



You shouldn't ask "real" Americans to do such complicated things. They can't even do basic math. The top formula is orbital velocity (think of a satellite) and the other one is gravity like between the Earth and the Moon or something on the Earth's surface such as 9.81 m/s.
I think technically that if orbital velocity is multiplied by the gravitational force then multiply that by the mass of the object and then you'd have its kinetic energy based on the effect that the Earth's gravity has on it.
Basically we'd have 7908. x 9.81 = 77577.5 m/s. Then if that is for a 1 kg weight then it would have KE = 3,009,134,253.25 J. That's over 3 Billion joules of kinetic energy.
0.77 cubic meters of air weighs 1 kg. I think 1 mol is about 22.4 cubic meters by volume. Then if we multiply Avagrado's Number by 0.03437 we get 2.0698098e+22. Then we get 335.56 joules of kinetic energy per molecule.
The commercial's over so I'm going to get back to my TV show.


I think it'd actually be 312.07 joules per molecule. Needed to correct it in case someone decided to check my work.
Edited on 11-11-2021 22:16
11-11-2021 22:15
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2621)
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:Why can't YOU tell me anything about gravitational energy?

keepit is a moron who doesn't see any difference between energy and forces and who cannot understand how creating new dollars somehow increases the number of dollars.

keepit needs others to do his thinking for him since he obviously cannot think for himself. His problem is that he cannot therefore think through who he should have do his thinking for him, so he ended up choosing who he was told to choose.

It sucks to be keepit.

.

Well said.

11-11-2021 22:37
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
James___ wrote:
keepit wrote:See google and wikipedia to learn about gravitational energy.
You shouldn't ask "real" Americans to do such complicated things.

Just for laughs, I looked up keepit's Wikipedia reference and as most warmizombies do, he simply latched onto the title/heading and didn't feel any need to read beyond that.

The Wikipedia reference is titled "gravitational energy" but refers to potential energy per gravity, not that gravity is any sort of energy. I would be inclined to say that keepit totally misread the article except that I know that keepit simply didn't read the article in the first place.

James__, were you trying to credit keepit for being a physics genius?

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-11-2021 23:02
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
ibd,
You're working too hard. Really.
11-11-2021 23:51
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
keepit wrote:ibd, You're working too hard. Really.

In what way? I've got my beverage in hand and vintage Armored Saint on the phones. Aaaahhh, I know, you believe that thinking for oneself is working too hard. I get it.

Judging by the lack of any thought put into your post that you don't believe that you are working too hard, yes? I have bad news for you.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-11-2021 23:55
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
keepit wrote:ibd, You're working too hard. Really.

I'm sorry. I actually read your reference whereas you merely read the title/heading.

I realize that actually reading the reference and understanding what you were referencing would have been far too much work for you but in my case, it was no effort at all. Really.

Really.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-11-2021 23:58
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
gfm7175 wrote:Well said.


Nice coin! Did you see the others?

That reminds me, I have one more on the way. It will be my favorite.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
12-11-2021 00:03
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:
keepit wrote:See google and wikipedia to learn about gravitational energy.
You shouldn't ask "real" Americans to do such complicated things.

Just for laughs, I looked up keepit's Wikipedia reference and as most warmizombies do, he simply latched onto the title/heading and didn't feel any need to read beyond that.

The Wikipedia reference is titled "gravitational energy" but refers to potential energy per gravity, not that gravity is any sort of energy. I would be inclined to say that keepit totally misread the article except that I know that keepit simply didn't read the article in the first place.

James__, were you trying to credit keepit for being a physics genius?

.



I got into a discussion with a guy on quora.com about gravity. He said that it had yet to be quantified. And some of the people who upvoted his question/comment
had positions in the scientific community that required PhDs.
A lot of depends on what aspect of gravity is being considered. With what I posted, I used Google but I also knew what specific information I was looking for. Kind of why I could roll through the math during a commercial break. I like to use my leisure time for leisure.
With some of what keepit is asking about would actually allow for a discussion on how gravity can influence our atmosphere. This is actually what I'm pursuing and for people who haven't spent time working at it, it might actually be a steep learning curve. This goes back to my saying that the elements in atmospheric gasses probably become more excited when they bond with another element.
Then from there the PKE a molecule has can conserve heat content. And that would increase the amount of heat it can release with each collision it has.
I've spent so much time on this that it's pretty easy for me. There are 2 things that I think help to heat the Earth's atmosphere but at the moment I haven't proved that why a science experiment was performed is what led to atmospheric air pressure being 14.7 psi.
With this, why was a tube 10m tall replaced by 30 inches of mercury? This suggests that it was at the end of the 17th century. And if my understanding is correct about why they went from a 10m tall pipe to 30 hgs of Mercury, it will change atmospheric chemistry and physics. I think I actually read about it in a book which is why I notice things that point to atmospheric pressure being wrong.
BAROMETER. The mercury barometer had its origins in the investigations being made in Italy during the early seventeenth century to discover why it was impossible to build a suction pump to raise water higher than about thirty feet (10 m). Once it was found that the height attainable was related to the density of the liquid, the experimenters exchanged their cumbersome metal tubes filled with water for shorter glass tubes with the heaviest fluid available—mercury—which was mined in Tuscany.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/earth-and-environment/atmosphere-and-weather/meteorological-instruments/barometers
12-11-2021 01:08
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
I guess one could complain that my post about gravitational energy was a semantics copout but i didn't say there was no such thing as gravitational energy. There's a big difference.
12-11-2021 01:54
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
James___ wrote:I got into a discussion with a guy on quora.com about gravity.

Those discussions can get pretty heavy.

James___ wrote:He said that it had yet to be quantified.

Did you immediately correct him by mentioning that gravity is quantified via meter/second^2 acceleration?

James___ wrote:And some of the people who upvoted his question/comment had positions in the scientific community that required PhDs.

Which serves to illustrate the worthlessness of any sort of credentials when discussing science.

Do you know what my credentials are? Does it matter in any way?

James___ wrote: A lot of depends on what aspect of gravity is being considered.

Aside from the acceleration of mass, what other "aspects" of gravity are there?

James___ wrote: With some of what keepit is asking about would actually allow for a discussion on how gravity can influence our atmosphere.

Nope. keepit's question was based entirely on a complete misunderstanding that stemmed from his inability to read an article beyond its title/heading. Fortunately for you I clarified his misunderstanding and answered the question.

Nothing remains to be done on the matter. I closed it out. There is no more discussion to be had beyond wondering how keepit manages to find the bathroom when he needs it.

James___ wrote:This is actually what I'm pursuing and for people who haven't spent time working at it, it might actually be a steep learning curve.

How is what you're pursuing confusing force for energy? Might that be why you aren't able to get your Bessler Wheel working?

James___ wrote:This goes back to my saying that the elements in atmospheric gasses probably become more excited when they bond with another element.

What do you mean by "more excited"? Do you mean the manner in which my dog becomes more excited when he smells beef being put into his meals?

James___ wrote: Then from there the PKE a molecule has can conserve heat content.

There is no such thing as "heat content" and is thus not a component in public-key encryption.

James___ wrote:And that would increase the amount of heat it can release with each collision it has.

Heat is never "released" because heat cannot be contained/trapped/held.

James___ wrote:I've spent so much time on this that it's pretty easy for me to confuse Force for Energy

Maybe you just need to step back, listen to THIS SONG and get your bearings straight.

James___ wrote:There are 2 things that I think help to heat the Earth's atmosphere but at the moment I haven't proved that why a science experiment was performed is what led to atmospheric air pressure being 14.7 psi.

There is only one thing that even "helps" heat the earth's atmosphere which is the same one thing that heat's the earth, because the atmosphere is part of the earth.

I'll give you a clue: It's a three letter word beginning with an "s" and ending in an "n," i.e. the "s*n"

There is no second thing.

James___ wrote: And if my understanding is correct about why they went from a 10m tall pipe to 30 hgs of Mercury, it will change atmospheric chemistry and physics.

Let's go with the option of your understanding not being correct. Would that mean chemistry and physics remain the same?

BAROMETER. The mercury barometer had its origins in the investigations being made in Italy during the early seventeenth century to discover why it was impossible to build a suction pump to raise water higher than about thirty feet (10 m).

Since we routinely pump water to heights greater than 30ft, we can safely conclude that it was not impossible during the seventeenth century, only that they simply did not know how to do it.

They might have been under the mistaken impression from the Bible seeing as how God only caused the ocean to prevail 15 cubits (27.5 feet) and they might have thought that was because of some unidentified physical limit.

James___ wrote:Once it was found that the height attainable was related to the density of the liquid,

It's not ... so they could not have "found" this to be the case.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
12-11-2021 01:57
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
keepit wrote:
I guess one could complain that my post about gravitational energy was a semantics copout but i didn't say there was no such thing as gravitational energy. There's a big difference.



I think with them, they might not have wanted to consider how much energy gravity has and that it actually contributes energy to the atmosphere. With the core of the Earth, it'd be hot like with a banked fire.
That's where you get your coals going and then place what food you want to cook wrapped in aluminum foil on top of them. Then you bury them until the next day. I've eaten venison cooked that way before but am not sure about how they did everything. I had neighbors who hunted and I guess once a year that was something they liked to do.
Inside the ground it will be really hot if you're close to the heat. Kind of like an element on a stove. Conduction works better.
What shows gravity's effect in the ground is that the ground temperature rises at
Up to 10–15 m deep approximately, ground heat is supplied by the sun
and rain. From there the underground temperature increases about 3º C per 100 m depth, due to the internal thermal energy of the Earth.


They might not be familiar with this. Someone once posted observations they made at home in here. They monitored at maybe 1 ft above the ground and higher. It was cooler closer to the ground almost like the heat was being absorbed. Then again because dirt is denser it could absorb heat from the air.
12-11-2021 02:29
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
There is no gravity. The earth sucks. ha ha
12-11-2021 02:31
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
James___ wrote:... they might not have wanted to consider how much energy gravity has

Gravity is a force. It has no energy.

James___ wrote: ... and that it actually contributes energy to the atmosphere.

Gravity has no energy to contribute to the atmosphere.

James___ wrote:With the core of the Earth, it'd be hot like with a banked fire.

The earth's core is a tad bit hotter than any banked fire. Did you know that the earth's core is hotter than any volcanic eruption?

James___ wrote: I've eaten Ivermectin-glazed venison cooked that way before but am not sure about whether they performed proper indigenous sourcing.

Next time make sure they stick to lavender and helichrysum so that it is safe for the dog. GasGuzzler can clarify.

James___ wrote: Inside the ground it will be really hot if you're close to the heat.

If you feel that it is really hot then you are zero distance from the heat.

I'm going to have a lot of fun at your expense as long as you refuse to learn what heat is. Cheers!

James___ wrote:Kind of like an element on a stove. Conduction works better.

... except when it doesn't.

Did you know that conduction is totally ineffective for the sun to heat a planet?

James___ wrote: What shows gravity's effect in the ground is that the ground temperature rises at

You're confusing gravity with the crust's reduction of heat. You should be embarrassed.

James___ wrote: They might not be confused about this as I am.

I think any one of us will be happy to clear up any misunderstandings you might have. Be careful about letting keepit try to clear up misunderstandings. You won't get any of that wasted time back.

James___ wrote: Someone once posted observations they made ...

Someone is singular. "They" is plural. Did you play hooky throughout highschool?
Attached image:

12-11-2021 03:09
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:... they might not have wanted to consider how much energy gravity has

Gravity is a force. It has no energy.

James___ wrote: ... and that it actually contributes energy to the atmosphere.

Gravity has no energy to contribute to the atmosphere.




With gravity, it can't have force without energy. Otherwise its energy couldn't be conserved. The Moon is one example.
12-11-2021 03:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
James___ wrote:With gravity, it can't have force without energy.

Incorrect. No force has any energy.

James___ wrote:Otherwise its energy couldn't be conserved.

No force has any energy to be conserved.

James___ wrote: The Moon is one example.

The moon is not an example of a force. The moon is an example of a body of matter.

How do you not know this?

.
12-11-2021 18:20
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:With gravity, it can't have force without energy.

Incorrect. No force has any energy.

James___ wrote:Otherwise its energy couldn't be conserved.

No force has any energy to be conserved.

James___ wrote: The Moon is one example.

The moon is not an example of a force. The moon is an example of a body of matter.

How do you not know this?

.



You don't like being wrong, do you?
12-11-2021 19:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
keepit wrote:
See google and wikipedia to learn about gravitational energy.


See Google and Wikipedia to learn about all the wacky ways to deny science.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
12-11-2021 19:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
keepit wrote:
I guess one could complain that my post about gravitational energy was a semantics copout but i didn't say there was no such thing as gravitational energy. There's a big difference.


Semantics fallacy. Denial of self argument.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
12-11-2021 19:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
James___ wrote:
keepit wrote:
I guess one could complain that my post about gravitational energy was a semantics copout but i didn't say there was no such thing as gravitational energy. There's a big difference.



I think with them, they might not have wanted to consider how much energy gravity has and that it actually contributes energy to the atmosphere. With the core of the Earth, it'd be hot like with a banked fire.
That's where you get your coals going and then place what food you want to cook wrapped in aluminum foil on top of them. Then you bury them until the next day. I've eaten venison cooked that way before but am not sure about how they did everything. I had neighbors who hunted and I guess once a year that was something they liked to do.
Inside the ground it will be really hot if you're close to the heat. Kind of like an element on a stove. Conduction works better.
What shows gravity's effect in the ground is that the ground temperature rises at
Up to 10–15 m deep approximately, ground heat is supplied by the sun
and rain. From there the underground temperature increases about 3º C per 100 m depth, due to the internal thermal energy of the Earth.


They might not be familiar with this. Someone once posted observations they made at home in here. They monitored at maybe 1 ft above the ground and higher. It was cooler closer to the ground almost like the heat was being absorbed. Then again because dirt is denser it could absorb heat from the air.

Gravity is not energy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
12-11-2021 19:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:... they might not have wanted to consider how much energy gravity has

Gravity is a force. It has no energy.

James___ wrote: ... and that it actually contributes energy to the atmosphere.

Gravity has no energy to contribute to the atmosphere.




With gravity, it can't have force without energy. Otherwise its energy couldn't be conserved. The Moon is one example.


Force does not require energy. Gravity is not conserved. If you get far away enough from any other mass, there is no gravity.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
12-11-2021 20:18
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3804)
If gravity has no energy, what makes the gravity wheel spin perpetually? Work requires energy. No energy, no wheel spin.
12-11-2021 22:18
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
Gravitational energy is a potential energy. Think of an apple in a tree as having potential energy and when the apple falls it gradually loses its potential energy until it hits the ground. The potential energy during this process is converted to kinetic energy which can be thermal energy and thereby raise the temperature of its surroundings.

It's kind of like a govt bond. A govt bond is potentially spendable and when it is cashed it then can be spent (kinetic). Regardless of which state a govt bond is in it has an effect on the dollar economy.
Edited on 12-11-2021 22:34
12-11-2021 23:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
keepit wrote:
Gravitational energy is a potential energy.

Gravity is not energy.
keepit wrote:
Think of an apple in a tree as having potential energy and when the apple falls it gradually loses its potential energy until it hits the ground. The potential energy during this process is converted to kinetic energy which can be thermal energy and thereby raise the temperature of its surroundings.

The potential energy of an apple in a tree is by position, not by gravity. It is the potential of what gravity can do to an apple, not the energy itself.
keepit wrote:
It's kind of like a govt bond. A govt bond is potentially spendable and when it is cashed it then can be spent (kinetic). Regardless of which state a govt bond is in it has an effect on the dollar economy.

False equivalence fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
13-11-2021 00:00
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
HarveyH55 wrote:
If gravity has no energy, what makes the gravity wheel spin perpetually? Work requires energy. No energy, no wheel spin.



Because you're thou (singular) Harvey, when I demonstrate what I like to call the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, I'll become known. As you can now know, while heat is a flow of energy that is because it is "energy".
And with the Sun, the Earth, etc., gravity generates heat. Otherwise the Earth would not become hotter as gravity increases. And with what keepit mentioned,
you (plural) should know that if gravity has the potential to accelerate a given body or mass, then that body/mass has what is referred to as PKE (potential kinetic energy). If it accelerates because of energy then it will have KE (kinetic energy) which is 1/2mv^2 while force is ma. 2 different things. I think some of you guys need to learn the basics.
An example is a 1kg weight moving at 4 m/s. Then it's .5 x 1 x 4^2 = 8. That's its KE. It's force would be 1 kg x 4 = 4 newtons of force. The only way gravity can create energy is if it is energy just as the 1st Law of Thermodynamics states.
Yep, just think, I might become known because I am aware of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics and what it allows for.

The First Law of Thermodynamics states that heat is a form of energy, and thermodynamic processes are therefore subject to the principle of conservation of energy. This means that heat energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can, however, be transferred from one location to another and converted to and from other forms of energy.
https://www.livescience.com/50881-first-law-thermodynamics.html
13-11-2021 01:59
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3804)
keepit wrote:
Gravitational energy is a potential energy. Think of an apple in a tree as having potential energy and when the apple falls it gradually loses its potential energy until it hits the ground. The potential energy during this process is converted to kinetic energy which can be thermal energy and thereby raise the temperature of its surroundings.

It's kind of like a govt bond. A govt bond is potentially spendable and when it is cashed it then can be spent (kinetic). Regardless of which state a govt bond is in it has an effect on the dollar economy.


How much energy did it take, to place the apple in the tree? Gravity acted on an object. The energy, is independent of the force acting on the object. The apple's energy came from the tree that produced it. Not the force of gravity, that acted on it.

Gravity doesn't act on specific parts of the 'wheel'. It acts on the entire 'wheel', all the time, independent of the energy used to preform the work of spinning it. You still have to provide equal energy to overcome the force of gravity, as any benefit of using gravity to spin a wheel. It's not free energy, or creation of energy.
13-11-2021 02:25
James___
★★★★★
(5343)
HarveyH55 wrote:
keepit wrote:
Gravitational energy is a potential energy. Think of an apple in a tree as having potential energy and when the apple falls it gradually loses its potential energy until it hits the ground. The potential energy during this process is converted to kinetic energy which can be thermal energy and thereby raise the temperature of its surroundings.

It's kind of like a govt bond. A govt bond is potentially spendable and when it is cashed it then can be spent (kinetic). Regardless of which state a govt bond is in it has an effect on the dollar economy.


How much energy did it take, to place the apple in the tree? Gravity acted on an object. The energy, is independent of the force acting on the object. The apple's energy came from the tree that produced it. Not the force of gravity, that acted on it.

Gravity doesn't act on specific parts of the 'wheel'. It acts on the entire 'wheel', all the time, independent of the energy used to preform the work of spinning it. You still have to provide equal energy to overcome the force of gravity, as any benefit of using gravity to spin a wheel. It's not free energy, or creation of energy.



This is where I've done the building and the testing while you haven't. In the next week or 2 I'll be doing the final test. If it doesn't rotate more than 90º then it can't work IMO. If it does rotate more than 90º then I've most likely realized Bessler's work. So if all goes well, it won't take much for me to finish the build. And it is a lot of work. Besides, as I mentioned, if successful I'll most likely become known because 99% of people would agree with you if not more.
13-11-2021 02:30
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1441)
keepit wrote:
Is there such a thing as gravitational energy and is it an influence on temperature?


I will have a shot at this.The Earth has a mass which creates gravitational Attraction which keeps the atmosphere from drifting of into space.The Atmosphere is part of the Earth and is denser closer to the surface.As a mass the Atmosphere takes time to heat and cool so keeps the planet habitable for us humans and other flora and fauna.The alarmists are claiming a tiny bit more CO2 is slowing the process and creating warming from nothing which is somehow changing the weather.The alarmists are losing traction as over the last 30 years nothing has happened.The gigatons of ice melting is 0.000something of the ice mass on the planet and is hard to calculate.To deal with sea levels I simply ask.Can you go to the Maldives for a holiday.The answer is yes.On the day you can no longer go to the Maldives I will agree we have a problem.If the sea is not rising out of control I do not care about the other disaster claims.In the Pilbara in summer it is regularly over 50.C and people still live and work there.Its hot as hell but no one dies.The hottest place is around the Ashburton area and I have been there and our thermometer in the sun went to 61.C.As Americans it all has to happen in the states or it did not happen.Death valley is pretty hot as well


duncan61
13-11-2021 03:32
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
James___ wrote: If it doesn't rotate more than 90º then it can't work IMO.

This is a great time for a mathematician's counsel. The correct answer is that if iit doesn't rotate more than 360º then it can't work. If it does rotate more than 360º then you've met one of the KPPs (key performance parameters) and only have a few more to go.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-11-2021 08:07
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
If gravity has no energy, what makes the gravity wheel spin perpetually? Work requires energy. No energy, no wheel spin.



Because you're thou (singular) Harvey, when I demonstrate what I like to call the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, I'll become known. As you can now know, while heat is a flow of energy that is because it is "energy".

Heat is not energy.
James___ wrote:
And with the Sun, the Earth, etc., gravity generates heat.

Gravity is not heat.
James___ wrote:
Otherwise the Earth would not become hotter as gravity increases.

It doesn't, and gravity is not increasing.
James___ wrote:
And with what keepit mentioned,
you (plural) should know that if gravity has the potential to accelerate a given body or mass, then that body/mass has what is referred to as PKE (potential kinetic energy). If it accelerates because of energy then it will have KE (kinetic energy) which is 1/2mv^2 while force is ma. 2 different things. I think some of you guys need to learn the basics.
An example is a 1kg weight moving at 4 m/s. Then it's .5 x 1 x 4^2 = 8. That's its KE. It's force would be 1 kg x 4 = 4 newtons of force. The only way gravity can create energy is if it is energy just as the 1st Law of Thermodynamics states.
Yep, just think, I might become known because I am aware of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics and what it allows for.

Not the 1st law of thermodynamics. Random math and numbers.
James___ wrote:
The First Law of Thermodynamics states that heat is a form of energy,

No, it doesn't. Heat is not energy.
James___ wrote:
and thermodynamic processes are therefore subject to the principle of conservation of energy.

Heat is not conserved.
James___ wrote:
This means that heat energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Heat is not energy. Heat is not conserved.
James___ wrote:
It can, however, be transferred from one location to another and converted to and from other forms of energy.

Heat is not transferred.
James___ wrote:
https://www.livescience.com/50881-first-law-thermodynamics.html


False authority fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
13-11-2021 08:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
keepit wrote:
Gravitational energy is a potential energy. Think of an apple in a tree as having potential energy and when the apple falls it gradually loses its potential energy until it hits the ground. The potential energy during this process is converted to kinetic energy which can be thermal energy and thereby raise the temperature of its surroundings.

It's kind of like a govt bond. A govt bond is potentially spendable and when it is cashed it then can be spent (kinetic). Regardless of which state a govt bond is in it has an effect on the dollar economy.


How much energy did it take, to place the apple in the tree? Gravity acted on an object. The energy, is independent of the force acting on the object. The apple's energy came from the tree that produced it. Not the force of gravity, that acted on it.

Gravity doesn't act on specific parts of the 'wheel'. It acts on the entire 'wheel', all the time, independent of the energy used to preform the work of spinning it. You still have to provide equal energy to overcome the force of gravity, as any benefit of using gravity to spin a wheel. It's not free energy, or creation of energy.



This is where I've done the building and the testing while you haven't. In the next week or 2 I'll be doing the final test. If it doesn't rotate more than 90º then it can't work IMO. If it does rotate more than 90º then I've most likely realized Bessler's work. So if all goes well, it won't take much for me to finish the build. And it is a lot of work. Besides, as I mentioned, if successful I'll most likely become known because 99% of people would agree with you if not more.

Perpetual motion is not possible.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Page 1 of 6123>>>





Join the debate gravity and temperature:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
From ice core analysis to temperature curves26609-09-2021 01:41
global temperature415-11-2020 04:08
Darwin Airport homogenizing of temperature data3620-10-2020 20:28
New High Temperature Records Again Outpace Lows3102-09-2020 23:24
New Temperature High Recorded in Death Valley1919-08-2020 02:27
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact