Atmospheric Mechanics

[jlindgaard]

@All,

I have contacted a Dr. Nee at Western Kentucky University (he is the Dept. Head for Atmospheric Sciences) and have asked him if he would like to become involved in an experiment to try and demonstrate how solar radiation breaks down molecules. And while the upper troposphere, the tropopause and lower stratosphere are quite cold and have a vacuum that is above 29 hg's, it might be possible.

I let Dr. Nee know that I believe that water molecules in our atmosphere become positively charged due to solar radiation. And when the lack of pressure and heat type energy place gaseous molecules in a negative state, that positively charged water molecules and negatively ionized gases become attracted to each other.

And when this happens, collisions occur. The attachment is to a basic diagram that shows how a hydraulic cylinder can be modified to replicate the basic mechanics of our upper atmosphere. The unique aspect of it is that if water molecules becoming positively charged is what initiates our atmospheric processes, then under controlled conditions, we can control the ppm of H2O and also control the amount of heat type energy (current) it is exposed to as well as what vacuum allows for what rate of occurrence of gases in our atmosphere.

And since I live in Kentucky as Dr. Nee does, I am hopeful that he will find that understanding the specific mechanics of how our atmosphere works is something that can benefit the state that we live in.

 

edited to add: the seals for the rod would need to be a nonconductive/non metallic material. Otherwise the seals would allow for a circuit/current to flow through them and then this could not work. The seals for the rod is to keep hydraulic fluid which creates the seal with the piston and lubricates the wall of the cylinder from leaking.

The interesting aspect of this is that mainstream science has yet to show how solar radiation breaks down molecules or how new molecules are formed once this happens.

Of course, if I am right, there is a reason there is something called a Nobel Prize. It acknowledges people who have contributed to something.

Edited June 24, 2015 by jlindgaard

[jlindgaard]

@All,

I have another project that I am working on. If it works, I will mention this.because whether it is photosynthesis

or how molecules interact in our upper atmosphere, there is one odd thing about it.

If a hydraulic cylinder with only atmospheric gases in it, when expanded would become quite cold. This is because the gaseous molecules would be conserving energy.

And yet the hydraulic unit itself could stay at room temperature. You see, if the cylinder has an electrical current running through it, then the expanded gases could draw energy from the cylinder without it having an appreciable drop in temperature.

And if the hydraulic cylinder is not electrically charged, then a sufficient expansion of gases in it's housing would cause frost to develop on the exterior of the hydraulic unit. Rather basic but still would probably be something that atmospheric scientists would find fascinating.

[swansont]

 

I have contacted a Dr. Nee at Western Kentucky University (he is the Dept. Head for Atmospheric Sciences)

 

The only Dr. Nee listed there is an assistant professor in the chemistry department.

[Endy0816]

Found this, he is involved with atmospheric research at least.

 

http://people.wku.edu/matthew.nee/index.htm

[jlindgaard]

Endy,

Swansont is knowledgeable in all facets of science. He can't be questioned. And if you want a good laugh, search my name on youtube

along with black body radiation. It seems that history has been rewritten because Planck's work was disregarded until the 1970's when it was revived/

Some idiot thought that black light could emanate from a dense body. Can't find it on the internet. Still, go through reader's digest of the 70's and am sure you'll find the story.

It's funny though, to read about black body radiation today, it is made to sound like it's always been known but no research, etc. is shown. All info is recent.

I guess though most people are not familiar with the history of physics. A lot can be missed because of that

 

@Swansont, you're not 007 and haven't climbed the Eiger, sorry.

@All,

Am sorry to disagree with mainstream science but Global Warming coincides nicely with ozone depletion and recovery.

Edited June 27, 2015 by jlindgaard

[Mordred]

jlindgaard. Swansort is a Ph.D you can fling as many insults as you want. This does not change the FACT, he has the ability to recognize BS.

( this I count as one of the most lame and infantile arguments. With 30 + years of forum physics discussions. Not all on this site)

 

 

Insults will get you no where. I've read several of your posts. None and I mean zip zero show any true science.

 

Try studying real science instead of insulting those that have done so.

 

Do you honestly believe or are so foolish to believe your better that close to a million or so professional scientists, with funding and research support?

 

Photosynthesis is a major arena of research.

 

Give us a break and get off your high horse. Were not idiots to blindly follow someone that cannot properly and professionally support their ideas.

Edited June 27, 2015 by Mordred

[jlindgaard]

@Mordred,

Both NASA and NOAA say that Global Warming is happening at a much slower pace than what their computer models say.

And as you say, that is not real science. Any more, I think anyone that anyone who has the time to post 29,000 times doesn't have much else to do.

Of course, I am pursuing a woman who doesn't want to be caught. I think that is better than not pursuing a relationship with a woman.

@everybody else,

scientists have missed a lot. basic clue, water vapor does not exist. Yet it is accepted as mainstream science.

[Mordred]

@Mordred,

Both NASA and NOAA say that Global Warming is happening at a much slower pace than what their computer models say.

And as you say, that is not real science. Any more, I think anyone that anyone who has the time to post 29,000 times doesn't have much else to do.

Of course, I am pursuing a woman who doesn't want to be caught. I think that is better than not pursuing a relationship with a woman.

 

@everybody else,

scientists have missed a lot. basic clue, water vapor does not exist. Yet it is accepted as mainstream science.

Why would you think any line of research and data collection isn't science?

 

The problem with global warming is limitted datasets. Is it man made caused? Or a natural cycle?

 

I've studied global warming. Honestly there are strong arguments in either case. Take heart. I posted in one of your other locked threads a viable and inexpensive solution to CO2 levels.

 

The problem with that solution is lack of side effect research. Not the methodology.

Using oceanic bottom floor nutrients to encourage algea growth can work. It's been tested on a small scale.

 

The problem is the potential side effects. ( imbalance of ecosystems)

Seems to me your falling into science media traps. Trust me they are more common than you realize.

In this thread you are proposing manmade interference on our atmosphere. What are the repercussions? Our atmosphere dictates our weather... Should we interfere or should we merely adapt ?

Change on a global scale requires the cooperation of every country.

 

Change is never easy it takes years to decades.

One cannot fully comprehend the amount of research into global warming that is being done via the internet.

 

Every major country has its own studies, and conclusions.

Change takes time.

Edited June 27, 2015 by Mordred

[jlindgaard]

Swansont,

I wish you the best in pursuing 30,000 posts.

 

http://www.wku.edu/chemistry/faculty/matthew_nee

 

Research

Laser spectroscopy of photochemical processes in atmospheric and environmental chemistry

What is atmospheric and environmental chemistry research ? And photo chemical ? This has to be

some media hype. Of course, if people have never shown any interest in our atmosphere, then they might not know

that, hmm, why is it again that NASA and NOAA along with an unnamed committee at the U.N. making everything known ?

Maybe if you wish to disagree with me, you'll post some facts ? I haven't seen any. But I guess there is a discussion going

on about why most computer models are wrong. And Swansont, my favorite one is the EPA saying that NO2 has an impact

24 times greater than CO2 but CO2 is the problem. Care to explain ? I mean NO2 has a GWP of 310 to CO2's 1. And when

the amount of each released into the atmosphere actually demonstrates that NO2 is the real cause of Global Warming

according to the EPA. Check their web site, I did.

Here's the link; http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions

Edited June 27, 2015 by jlindgaard

[Strange]

It seems that history has been rewritten because Planck's work was disregarded until the 1970's when it was revived/

...

It's funny though, to read about black body radiation today, it is made to sound like it's always been known but no research, etc. is shown. All info is recent.

 

This is simply not true. A good summary of the early research into black-body radiation, and its role in the formulation of QM (hardly "disregarded"), can be found here: http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/Q/quantum_theory_origins.html

 

Am sorry to disagree with mainstream science but Global Warming coincides nicely with ozone depletion and recovery.

 

Perhaps you could provide some data to support that?

Both NASA and NOAA say that Global Warming is happening at a much slower pace than what their computer models say.

 

Citation needed.

 

 

scientists have missed a lot. basic clue, water vapor does not exist. Yet it is accepted as mainstream science.

 

So water has no gaseous phase? Where does it go when heated to its boiling point? How do distillation and steam engines work? Why is there condensation on the inside of my windows?

[John Cuthber]

 

scientists have missed a lot. basic clue, water vapor does not exist. Yet it is accepted as mainstream science.

[Endy0816]

@op

 

Swansont is presumably human like the rest of us. Anyone's knowledge can be incomplete on a subject.

 

Personally I think your ideas are bunk. I feel enough has been said already as to the specifics in regards.

[StringJunky]

...

Using oceanic bottom floor nutrients to encourage algea growth can work. It's been tested on a small scale.

Can you point me to any info on this research? i've known about the idea a long time from Lovelock, but never heard of any implementation or test models. It's a great idea because:

 

1. It increases albedo by facilitating algae producing DMS for cloud-seeding.

2. Reduces ocean acidity by consuming carbon dioxide.

3. Puts oxygen in the atmosphere

4. Carbon dixide absorption thus reducing greenhouse effect

[swansont]

Endy,

Swansont is knowledgeable in all facets of science. He can't be questioned.

 

Sure I can. Happens all the time. The fact remains, though, that you misrepresented something,. There is no Department of Atmospheric Sciences at WKU, so there can be no head of it.

 

It seems that history has been rewritten because Planck's work was disregarded until the 1970's when it was revived/

 

No, I don't think that's correct.

 

Some idiot thought that black light could emanate from a dense body. Can't find it on the internet. Still, go through reader's digest of the 70's and am sure you'll find the story.

It's funny though, to read about black body radiation today, it is made to sound like it's always been known but no research, etc. is shown. All info is recent.

 

Black light - you mean UV? Or something else?

 

A Google scholar search for blackbody radiation yields ~3200 results between 1900 and 1950

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=blackbody+radiation&hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C47&as_ylo=1900&as_yhi=1950

 

http://www.wku.edu/chemistry/faculty/matthew_nee

 

Research

Laser spectroscopy of photochemical processes in atmospheric and environmental chemistry

 

 

Thank you for admitting you were wrong, and confirming I was right.

[jlindgaard]

Swansont,

If Asst. Prof. Dr. Nee has no interest in my experiment, I'm not going to worry about it. It does cost money and does take time to set something

like that up. Besides, it was supposed to break 100 degrees in Portland. I am sure they enjoy having warm summers.

And since Sen. McConnell is from Ky., he doesn't support lowering CO2 emissions or the EPA. And Dr. Nee is in Ky. and works at a state university.

Who knows, I might be better off doing what ever Sen. McConnell would like. After all, politics can be a messy thing such as if universities want

money for something in their budget.

And as Sen. Majority Leader, Sen. McConeel probably weilds a lot of influence.

[John Cuthber]

Swansont,

If Asst. Prof. Dr. Nee has no interest in my experiment, I'm not going to worry about it. It does cost money and does take time to set something

like that up. Besides, it was supposed to break 100 degrees in Portland. I am sure they enjoy having warm summers.

And since Sen. McConnell is from Ky., he doesn't support lowering CO2 emissions or the EPA. And Dr. Nee is in Ky. and works at a state university.

Who knows, I might be better off doing what ever Sen. McConnell would like. After all, politics can be a messy thing such as if universities want

money for something in their budget.

And as Sen. Majority Leader, Sen. McConeel probably weilds a lot of influence.

Do you understand that you are expected to reply to the points and questions that people have raised?

For example, how come I have books that refer to black body radiation that are from before 1970?

Why do you say "Global Warming coincides nicely with ozone depletion and recovery." when global warming is carrying on, but ozone depletion has (nearly) stopped?

How can you believe that "water vapor does not exist." when it's perfectly obvious that it does?

[jlindgaard]

I'm not going to worry about it John. As I mentioned in my first post, if my current project works, I'll mention this.

By this I mean that expanding gases could cause them to collide and who knows, if water absorbs more solar radiation than a gas, it might cause more interactions.

At present, I don't know anyone who cares.

Edited June 27, 2015 by jlindgaard

[Strange]

At present, I don't know anyone who cares.

 

I assume the only reason you refuse to answer questions is because you don't care.

[jlindgaard]

strange,

I think it's unrealistic to expect me to remember what specific book I read 40 years ago. For all I know it was Planck's autobiography.

But as has been mentioned, if it can't be googled...

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

jlindgaard, I think you've made a mistake in choosing SFN to post your ideas. We require more scientific rigor than you're apparently willing or able to give. There are plenty of other sites on the web where non-mainstream wishful thinking and guessing are embraced, but we will always require evidence to back up any assertions made.

 

Please reconsider your membership, or adopt a more reasoning approach to your scientific inquiries. What you're doing now isn't acceptable for our discussion forum. You're soapboxing if you aren't backing up what you say.

 

Whatever this was is now closed.