Remember me
▼ Content

What is heat?



Page 5 of 5<<<345
05-10-2016 14:38
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: Yes. It is the set of all values that can be the input for a given function.

Excellent. The key word for a domain is that it is a set.

Do you know how to "combine" sets? Are you familiar with the term "union"?

Do you know how to look for "overlap" in sets? Are you familiar with the term "intersection"?

Btw, your description above of a "domain" is very good. Why do you imagine that Surface Detail is having difficulty grasping what you apparently understand with, what I gather is, something less than a British education?


jwoodward48 wrote: What is "combining domains between functions"? In all my years of college Calc, etc., I've never heard of it.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, and I hope you're sitting down.

You didn't actually learn everything in all your years of college. You are actually going to read stuff on the internet that you've never heard before.

In fact, almost all you learned from Marxists and warmizombies is just flat wrong and you are going to read all the correct stuff on the internet wondering "Why have I never hear this before?"



I'm here to help. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
05-10-2016 15:27
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
I KNOW that I don't know everything. I know that you can combine sets and domains and intervals. I don't know what "between functions" means.
05-10-2016 15:45
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Into, what is spectral radiance?

(But jwood, I thought you knew what it was!)

Oh, yes, I do. Energy per unit area per unit time per square angle per unit frequency. But... I don't know. That could just be Marxist propaganda or warmist dogma. So what's your definition of "spectral radiance"?
05-10-2016 19:41
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
jwoodward48 wrote:
I KNOW that I don't know everything. I know that you can combine sets and domains and intervals. I don't know what "between functions" means.

I reckon IBdaMann has found a dictionary of mathematics and is picking words out at random in order to, somehow, formulate a wacky alternative theory to quantum physics. Not possible, you say? Give him a chance. After all, it is said that, given sufficient time, a monkey with a typewriter will reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. So maybe a bit of patience is in order. Who knows what he might come up with?
05-10-2016 19:51
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
You just can't comprehend my GENIUS!
05-10-2016 20:27
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: I KNOW that I don't know everything. I know that you can combine sets and domains and intervals. I don't know what "between functions" means.

Perhaps it would have been more appropriate for you to simply state that you "don't know" than to imply there's a problem with someone else because you have not heard it before.

Please recall that Surface Detail and his cognitive dissonance and strange (albeit spectacularly amazingly brilliantly superhuman) British education forced us to belabor the point of what a "domain" is so we could discuss the domain of a gas' radiating wavelengths, which you astutely identified as a "set" of radiating wavelengths.

Now the question is one of combining domains. I have to apologize; I had the perfect example spectrograph showing the individual emissions of three gases and the spectrograph of the emission of the combined mixture of the three gases. I think that would have answered your question but I cannot for the life of me find it now.

Anyway, any operation that can be performed on sets can be performed on domains.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
05-10-2016 20:35
spot
★★★★☆
(1088)
Surface Detail wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
I KNOW that I don't know everything. I know that you can combine sets and domains and intervals. I don't know what "between functions" means.

I reckon IBdaMann has found a dictionary of mathematics and is picking words out at random in order to, somehow, formulate a wacky alternative theory to quantum physics. Not possible, you say? Give him a chance. After all, it is said that, given sufficient time, a monkey with a typewriter will reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. So maybe a bit of patience is in order. Who knows what he might come up with?


Might work I once convinced a girl in a bar that I was an author had a memorable one night stand out of that. Desperately trying to convince random sad bastards on the internet that your a super-genius that has overturned everything we know about atmospheric physics seems more unproductive use of time.
05-10-2016 20:57
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
IB, if two gases have the same temperature and are both radiating at 900 nm (just for instance), will they necessarily have the same spectral radiance at that wavelength? Planck says so.
05-10-2016 21:03
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Oh, wait, no! I see! Emissivity! Never mind, I'm wrong. (It would have been better if you had explained that, rather than cryptic statements and the never-ending insults, but...)
Edited on 05-10-2016 21:04
05-10-2016 21:10
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
Surface Detail wrote: I reckon IBdaMann has found a dictionary of mathematics and is picking words out at random in order to, somehow, formulate a wacky alternative theory to quantum physics.

jwoodward48, what is your opinion of Surface Detail's assertion here? What is your assessment?

It seems to me that if his incomparable comprehensive British education had taught him anything, he wouldn't have to "reckon." Why do you think my posts appear to him as just random math words? Don't you imagine that he should be able to understand what he is reading? He has shown that he cannot understand "accumulation of 2% per decade of Greenland's ice mass balance." Shouldn't he ask the meaning of terms I use that he doesn't understand rather than insult me and blame me for using terms he never learned (as you also are often want to do) to imply the problem lies with other people and not with himself?

What do you think?

Shouldn't someone of his educational preeminence be able to read and understand a post, even if it contains some "math words"?



.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
05-10-2016 21:35
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
We have another thread for the discussion of ice mass balance. You made it yourself. An increase in the amount of snow being added on top does not imply that the mass balance has increased.

Anyway, you have to admit that you haven't been that clear. I would have said "adding together" rather than "combining" functions, as what does the latter mean? f(x)+g(x)? f(g(x))? g(f(x))? f(x)*g(x)? f(x)^g(x)? g(x)^f(x)? All are ways of combining functions. "Combining" lacks a clarity of meaning that "adding together" has.
06-10-2016 15:57
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: An increase in the amount of snow being added on top does not imply that the mass balance has increased.

It does when the snow becomes ice. The ice mass balance increases by exactly that much ice.

It's called addition. It's awesome.

jwoodward48 wrote: Anyway, you have to admit that you haven't been that clear. I would have said "adding together" rather than "combining" functions,

You have to admit that those weren't my words. I responded to those words with an explanation and set operations.

I do what I can to be clear.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-10-2016 16:32
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Yes, but if more is subtracted than added, the number decreases. Arithmetic is fun.

Oops, that was Into. Regardless, the statement wasn't clear.
06-10-2016 16:39
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: Yes, but if more is subtracted than added, the number decreases. Arithmetic is fun.

Yes, but when all you have is addition, 2% per decade specifically, you get a monotone increasing function. The only appropriate word for this is "accumulation."

Arithmetic is groovy.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-10-2016 16:49
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
IBdaMann wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote: Yes, but if more is subtracted than added, the number decreases. Arithmetic is fun.

Yes, but when all you have is addition, 2% per decade specifically, you get a monotone increasing function. The only appropriate word for this is "accumulation."

Arithmetic is groovy.

Addition isn't all we have, though. We are also subtracting from the ice balance - you know: melting, icebergs, etc.
06-10-2016 17:28
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
And they aren't measuring net increase. They're measuring gross increase.

Netnetnetnetnet.
06-10-2016 18:18
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
Surface Detail wrote: Addition isn't all we have, though. We are also subtracting from the ice balance - you know: melting, icebergs, etc.

The subtraction occurs in a different function. The results of that other function create a sequence of annual values. They are all positive. The resulting series is a summation of positive values.

So all we have is addition. No negatives. The Greenland ice mass balance continues to increase in a "monotone increasing" manner.

Hence "accumulation."


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-10-2016 18:22
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
What other function? You need to back up your claims with data. How do you know that the subtraction is less than the addition.
06-10-2016 18:53
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: What other function?

The function of those natural occurrences that Surface Detail referenced, of all the parameters involved in computing the net gain/loss, e.g. precipitation, meltage, sublimation, calving, etc..

That function. All that happens and we end up with some net gain/loss, which happens to be a net gain in this case. Yup, a net gain that amounts to 2% per decade.

jwoodward48 wrote: You need to back up your claims with data.

Nope. For this discussion we are considering the conclusions of those who physically went to Greenland and performed the measurements.

Those observers are listed in the report and in the OP. If you wish to dismiss their conclusions on the grounds that they are obvious charlatans for not preaching the sacred dogma then I would thoroughly understand.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-10-2016 18:58
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
They didn't measure the net increase. They measured the gross increase.
06-10-2016 19:26
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: And they aren't measuring net increase. They're measuring gross increase.

Nope. They're measuring the net. The authors specify this in the introduction.

"The net mass balance of the Greenland ice sheet has been the subject of much recent work."

Look, the report is there for you to deny freely.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-10-2016 19:29
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Oh, you. Just because they talk about net balance doesn't mean that's the topic of the report. I thought you knew this. Time to go back to British Kindergarten.
06-10-2016 20:32
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: Just because ... doesn't mean ...

You need more than a "just because ..."

If the authors specify something up front then they don't need to mention it again thereafter. Also, a couple of the references specify net ice balance.


... the word "gross" does not even appear in the report, under any context.



jwoodward48 wrote: Time to go back to British Kindergarten.

Heard that!

If only Marx had pushed for all children to be sent to British schools then it would have been universally adopted and we'd be living in utopia already.

Opportunity lost.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-10-2016 20:47
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
What are they measuring? What are the actual observations?
06-10-2016 22:01
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4950)
jwoodward48 wrote: What are they measuring? What are the actual observations?

All we have are the conclusions. The raw data are not available in the report, only summaries and a radargram. I suppose you could request more information on the raw data from the Journal of Glaciology. Otherwise I would not hold it against you if you were to discard the report until you were to get the raw data.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-10-2016 22:35
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Sorry, that was phrased wrong. I mean operational definitions of the measured variables. Not just depth, but, say, the distance between the observed IRH and the surface. (That's not operational enough, but it's a step toward clarity.)
08-10-2016 00:02
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
IBdaMann wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote: Just because ... doesn't mean ...

You need more than a "just because ..."

If the authors specify something up front then they don't need to mention it again thereafter. Also, a couple of the references specify net ice balance.


... the word "gross" does not even appear in the report, under any context.


They're referencing the net ice balance measured by other studies, not their own.

The word gross does not appear. However, I might note that "reflective" appears quite often in the paper - does that mean that they are studying the effect of heat on reflective surfaces? It's talking about reflection, you know. See? I can pull the word "reflective" out of something they said!

The previous paragraph was not serious. It was trying to point out how they can reference something that they don't directly measure.

jwoodward48 wrote: Time to go back to British Kindergarten.

Heard that!

If only Marx had pushed for all children to be sent to British schools then it would have been universally adopted and we'd be living in utopia already.

Opportunity lost.


Unsure if the reply was serious. My sentence was facetious. Internet tone is nonexistent, as usual.


"Heads on a science
Apart" - Coldplay, The Scientist

IBdaMann wrote:
No, science doesn't insist that, ergo I don't insist that.

I am the Ninja Scientist! Beware!
Edited on 08-10-2016 00:06
08-10-2016 00:05
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
IBdaMann wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote: I KNOW that I don't know everything. I know that you can combine sets and domains and intervals. I don't know what "between functions" means.

Perhaps it would have been more appropriate for you to simply state that you "don't know" than to imply there's a problem with someone else because you have not heard it before.

It's a bit late, but what I meant was "either this is really complicated or a mis-stated simple thing".


"Heads on a science
Apart" - Coldplay, The Scientist

IBdaMann wrote:
No, science doesn't insist that, ergo I don't insist that.

I am the Ninja Scientist! Beware!
08-10-2016 00:13
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Into, again, what do you consider "spectral radiance" to be?
Page 5 of 5<<<345





Join the debate What is heat?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Max Planck and Pierre Prevost on Net Thermal Radiation and Net Heat3227-09-2019 02:43
How does radiation heat CO2615-08-2019 05:38
Holding in heat1704-06-2019 19:08
What makes IPCC thinks CO2 is better than O2 at trapping heat?028-04-2019 15:40
Heat7119-04-2019 23:53
▲ 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 © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact