Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric who wrote (70177)	5/23/2016 8:16:37 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	2 Recommendations Recommended By lightshipsailor teevee Respond to of 86352

dear anonymous fountain of bovine excrement, all matter in solid liquid or gas form can emit black body radiation, but each form has a property called emissivity. Emissivity is defined as the ratio of the energy radiated from a material's surface to that radiated from a blackbody (a perfect emitter) at the same temperature and wavelength and under the same viewing conditions. A gas has no surface. It is also known that the nature of a surface greatly impacts emissivity. Polished silver is .02 and ice is .97 ice is close to 1 a perfect black body emitter. All the physics equations deal with units of surface area. And a gas has no surface. Using the supposed equations that verify black body emission are hand waving with no observed data confirmation. As to understanding atmospheric physics, there is nothing quantitatively defined and verified. CO2 is a trace gas and has a trace emissivity compared to H20 where it is in the fraction of a tenth of a percent and when compared to ice crystals is in the millionth category. How stupid does one have to be to speak of atmospheric physics that are supposedly defined in models to show how CO2 does emissivity and creates a hot spot. But no one can find the hot spot. eRICO you claim you ignore as you are simply to stupid and dishonest to discuss science.