Re: [Phys-l] Greenhouse

[brian whatcott <betwys1@sbcglobal.net>]

 Hmmmm... I have no reason to dismiss this paper on sight. It seems to 
have all
 the requisites of a science paper - it makes predictions, it is 
testable, it is falsifiable.

Moreover, it seems to have that greatest virtue for a science paper, it 
is in principle
repeatable on a domestic scale.

Here is what I have in mind: take a cardboard roll of six or more inches 
diameter,
 perhaps 8 feet long.    Arrange three plugs: two transparent plugs to 
partition
 the upper half, with a gas port and a low pressure gage and a pinhole 
exit between
 them, and wired for a thermocouple.

Arrange a plate warmer at the base, closed in to avoid air leakage, 
wired through
a heavy duty dimmer to line power. Place a thermocouple on this plate 
warmer.
Wrap insulation around the entire cylinder.

Flush the upper partition with low pressure nitrogen to ensure the 
ambient is dry.

Setting the heater to a steady temperature , one looks for the trapped 
upper gas to warm,
and measures the temperature rate.

Then repeat with a CO2 fill replacing the Nitrogen.    I am supposing 
that this might
provide some indication of CO2's well known absorption/transmission curve.
But perhaps I am oversimplifying here.
 There is an issue about diffuse retransmission downwards from the 
warmed gas
 to the (now) cool heater plate. There is an issue as to whether some 
positive
 feedback loop can operate, or is the feedback negative, and so on...

Brian W

On 10/14/2010 10:05 AM, chuck britton wrote:
> As my daddy (an accounting-type person) used to say -
> 		 "Figures don't lie - but liars can figure."
>
>
> At 9:49 AM -0500 10/14/10, marx@phy.ilstu.edu wrote:
> > Thanks for the article referenced.  Here is what the authors claim
> > in their abstract...
> >
> > FALSIFICATION OF THE ATMOSPHERIC CO2 GREENHOUSE EFFECTS WITHIN THE FRAME OF
> > PHYSICS
> >
> > GERHARD GERLICH and RALF D. TSCHEUSCHNER
> > International Journal of Modern Physics B
> > Volume: 23, Issue: 3 (30 January 2009)
> > Pages: 275-364
> >
> > The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace
> > back to the traditional works of
> > Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), and Arrhenius (1896), and which is
> > still supported in global climatology,
> > essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary
> > atmosphere acts as a heat pump
> > driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but
> > radiatively equilibrated to the
> > atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics,
> > such a planetary machine can
> > never exist. Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology
> > and in a widespread secondary
> > literature, it is taken for granted that such a mechanism is real
> > and stands on a firm scientific
> > foundation.  In this paper, the popular conjecture is analyzed and
> > the underlying physical principles are
> > clarified. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws
> > between the warming phenomenon in
> > glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b)
> > there are no calculations to
> > determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the
> > frequently mentioned difference of 33
> > degrees  is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the
> > formulas of cavity radiation are used
> > inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is
> > unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and
> > friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse
> > conjecture is falsified.
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l