1. PF has switched to Xenforo. Please see this post for more details. Search and other functions are still being worked on.
    Dismiss Notice

Fossil Fuel industry trying to shut down electric vehicles

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by Kode, Mar 12, 2017.

  1. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You don't understand what an isolated system is (click on the term in the quote in my post and educate yourself). The earth is not an isolated system. And again you don't understand the difference between the second law and examples of it. That is clearly indicative of a lack of understanding of thermodynamics.

    Kelvin is not the originator of thermodynamic theory. The originators are Carnot, Joule, Clausius (who derived entropy), Thomson, Maxwell, Gibbs (Gibbs Free Energy), ...
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2017 at 9:17 PM
  2. iamanonman

    iamanonman Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    That is a completely loaded statement. The term "spontaneous" is synonymous with "isolated system" here. So is your statement correct? Yes! But, you are totally misapplying it to real world scenarios. I can move heat from cold to hot. I do this everyday in the summer with my A/C. It moves heat from the inside (where it is already colder) to the outside (where it is already warmer). This whole process in its entirety is not "spontaneous" and my inside-outside system is not isolated because I'm applying work to it from a feed of energy originating beyond my inside-outside system. Oh, and my water heater definitely stores and accumulates heat on a daily basis. Again, I had to apply work using energy originating from outside the water heater system so the 2nd law of thermodynamics is still safe despite my meddling. The Earth's biosphere is not an isolated system.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2017 at 9:38 PM
    AFM likes this.
  3. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Thanks - you are much more patient than I am. :mrgreen:
     
  4. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,597
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Click on your own link http://faculty.poly.edu/~rlevicky/Handout6.pdf and educate yourself in Thermodynamic systems. Levicky made it in capitol letters for you. In the very BEGINNING of the chapter.
    Now you are not only in argument with all Internet and all books on Thermodynamics including one you linked to, but you are dismissing Kelvin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin

    http://zapatopi.net/kelvin/

    Congratulation on arrival to the state of total denial of reality.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2017 at 10:07 PM
  5. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,597
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It is not a statement. It is the law.

    "spontaneous" is not synonymous with "isolated system", absolutely not.

    It is antonymous with your AC system, which is an example of a non spontaneous, but is the one to which a mechanical work (result of an input of electricity) is applied.
    The synonym of "Heat always flows from a hotter body to a colder body in a spontaneous process" is "Heat cannot flow from a colder body to a hotter body without an input of a mechanical work". The same second law.

    It is very entertaining to see scientists fighting it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2017 at 10:08 PM
  6. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I'd suggest following the old axiom - when in a hole stop digging.
     
  7. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I'd suggest following the old axiom - when in a hole stop digging.
     
  8. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,597
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There is no way you or iamanonman or any other denier of the second law and physical reality will stop digging. I never had an intention to stop you or iamanonman or any other denier from digging. I just hope that there is one, just one person with an open and inquiring mind in the public, who is capable of making his own mind. And if such a person goes for Thermodynamics I will get more then hoped for.

    Though I cannot deny that I have some pleasure of seeing you and iamanonman (since he delegated you to answer for him) reduced to pure trolling. I know it is not exactly a pure pleasure, but I hope God will forgive me.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2017 at 10:48 PM
  9. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That's funny. Maybe God can help you with thermo ??
     
  10. iamanonman

    iamanonman Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Whether you use the word spontaneous or isolated ultimately we're still referring to the same mechanism or process. Spontaneous in that statement is used to mean "on it's own". And by the way, I absolutely agree with the alternate form "heat cannot flow from a colder body to a hotter body without an input of a mechanical work". As long as I use an input of energy and mechanical work I can move heat from cold to hot and I can store heat. I am not violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You know this because there are countless examples in our everyday life. So why is it so hard to believe that the Earth system, which is not isolated because it is interacting with its surroundings, is receiving an input of energy and mechanical work from an external source...the Sun?
     
  11. iamanonman

    iamanonman Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    First, I'm not speaking for anyone else or delegating my responses to anyone else. They're all mine and mine alone. Second, I do have an open mind. I don't buy the AGW doom and gloom hype. This is because I don't allow the mainstream media, Al Gore, or some other non-qualified entity to influence my judgement. I don't even pay attention to the IPCC most of the time. I don't think the Arctic sea ice is going to melt anytime soon. But, I do acknowledge that there is enough evidence to say that it is likely that Earth's biosphere is going to warm up in the coming decades and that human's are likely contributing to it. I humbly admit that I don't know the magnitude of either except to say that they are probably not negligible. And I sure as hell don't care about the politics of it all.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017 at 10:53 AM
  12. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,597
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Because if you start reading the chapter linked by the troll AFM you will see:

    All systems are open in nature. (the 2nd is a law of nature)

    We create isolated and closed ones only in our imagination for convenience of solving a task at hand. (the 2nd is true for all)

    Like in my example with charging a battery, - once charged it then will discharge by itself and it will start discharging immediately after it is disconnected from the source of electricity. The same is with plugged in (closed system) and unplugged (isolated system) refrigerator in the chapter.

    So in the first place (what is put in capital letters in the chapter) we make and justify a system, - hot, cold bodies, input/out of mechanical work (electricity in the refrigerator or your AC), boundaries of the systems (isolated/insulated walls of the refrigerator), surroundings if any.

    In our case we have the hotter body – The Sun at Thotter_body, The colder body - The Earth at Tcolder_body and the Surroundings at 0K or 2.756546201K whatever you wish. As well we can omit constants of geothermal, of the Sun emitting to Surroundings and the Earth reflecting to Surroundings during the day and represent the surrounding as the third body at Tthecoldest.

    And now we have to draw the system. We have to draw it. It is in so called steady state:

    Thotter_body -> Tcolder_body ->The coldest

    Whatever goes in goes out. It is in so called steady state

    In this process I may allow your suggestion:

    Thotter_body -> Tcolder_body ->The coldest ↓ Mechanical/chemical energy to biological bodies / animated matter.

    But there is no

    Thotter_body -> Tcolder_body ->The coldest ↑
    Mechanical/chemical/CO2 energy input which

    would take it out of the steady state and bring it to another steady state.

    CO2 is not a source of energy - thermal, mechanical or chemical. And the same is true for any other planet notwithstanding different masses, compositions, starting Temperatures, atmosphere, difference in processes of original formation, etc.

    Do you still have question about Venus or you found my answer? Can you draw and estimate your AC system?
     
  13. iamanonman

    iamanonman Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Okay, great, let's roll with this.

    Thotter = Sun = s
    Tcolder = Earth = e
    Tcoldest = Space = v

    So our system is defined as follows.

    [s -> e -> v]

    Brackets [] are boundaries that we are idealizing so that we can call our system isolated. An arrow -> is the transport of energy and the imposition of work. The Sun (s), Earth (e), and space (v) are themselves subsystems within the bigger isolated system.

    Let's define some more terms.

    S = entropy
    Ss = entropy of Sun
    Se = entropy of Earth
    Sv = entropy of Space

    Let's define St as the total entropy our system such that.

    St = Ss + Se + Sv

    So per the 2nd law the entropy of our isolated system must be increasing such that:

    dSt > 0 or d(Ss+Se+sv) > 0

    Remember, the Sun, Earth, and Space are subsystems within our bigger isolated system. But, individually they are not isolated so it's okay if dS of any of them is negative as long as dS of the whole system is still positive. And this is where things get interesting. We can manipulate the internals of our system as long as dSt doesn't change. Let's model this mathematically with a perturbation P such that our equation becomes:

    St = Ss + (Se-P) + (Sv+P)

    And it follows that the total entropy is still increasing such that:

    d(Ss+(Se-P)+(Sv+P)) > 0

    Is there a P that exists in real life? We think so. CO2 and other greenhouse gases have a unique property. They are more effective at blocking photons that are emitted from the Earth than those emitted from the Sun. This is because they behave differently to different photon wavelengths. Photon wavelengths from the Sun are different than photon wavelengths from the Earth. Because of this the Earth is now accumulating energy. And that's okay because the total energy and total change in entropy dSt of our system hasn't changed at all. The only thing I've done is reduced dSe by P at the expense of increasing dSv by the same P. You read this as Earth is getting warmer at the expense of Space getting colder.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017 at 11:08 PM
  14. Strasser

    Strasser Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,019
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The auto industry spent millions on bribing governments to subsidize roads and tax railroads to pay for that for decades, so it's only natural for them to keep doing that sort of thing. The U.S. used to be covered with 'electric vehicles', they were those street car lines that built up very extensive networks all over the country, even smaller towns could afford them. You could go from Boston to Chicago on them, though not as cheap or quick as a regular railroad, of course. The auto industry killed those off as well, along with the bankers who killed railroads.
     
  15. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,597
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48

    Sure in the “subsystem” Ts > Te, when Ts heats Te, Se<0

    You perturbation P must be dQp/dTp in order to add subtract it to/from any dS. In other words P has to be an input/output of Heat from a body/source with temperature Tp. You don’t have such.

    You keep on acting like a religious fanatic who cannot listen or answer questions or address anything which is said to him and which is different from his religious beliefs. You have not addressed a thing you quoted, but you keep on pushing your idea. You see, I address everything you say or ask, you address nothing I say. You have introduced entropy while I have been avoiding it in order to be as simple as possible. I know people get confused by systems and entropy as rule of a thumb. All I do I quote the 2nd and point that you cannot get around it.

    If you read this as Earth is getting warmer at the expense of Space getting colder you again violate the 2nd trying to make heat flow from a colder body to a hotter body without an input of mechanical work. Not even talking that our colder Space cannot get any colder, it has no change to spare.

    Before we consider CO2 and other greenhouse gases I may need your help. I don’t do much reading and often go by what people say on PF; I usually comment off the top of my head. But sometimes I google and run into some interesting text and find a few minutes to read. Today I spend almost an hour, it is one of my records. And look what I run into, - can you tell me please - do I see what I see?

    http://www.globalenergybudget.com/TF12-Abs.jpg

    341 in = 341 out.

    Exactly what I have been saying all day long. Do you see the same as I do? 102+239 = 341?
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2017 at 6:45 PM
  16. iamanonman

    iamanonman Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    My perturbation P is intended to have units of entropy (Q/T) already. It is not meant to be a source or sink of entropy. It's meant to be a manipulator that controls and throttles the entropy (or heat flux) of a body.

    We are not talking about heat flowing from a colder body to a warmer body here. The Earth is warmer than Space (Te > Tv). What I'm saying is that the flow of heat Te -> Tv has decreased. Since Space is expanding it is also cooling. And since the flow of heat from Earth to Space has been impeded it follows that Space is cooling at a faster rate now. That's what I mean when I say "at the expense of Space getting colder". I didn't mean to imply that Space wasn't already getting colder. I meant that Space is getting colder at a faster rate. And since the WMAP satellite measured Space (Tv) at ~2.7249K it can definitely get colder.

    I do see the same thing. That graphic is meant as a trivial introduction to Earth's energy budget under the assumption that incoming and outgoing radiation are in equilibrium. But, we don't think the Earth is actually in equilibrium right now. If you poke around that website you'll see talk of the current imbalance. Now, this is the first time I've been to that site so I can't really vouch for it's credibility, but at a quick glace I can see they do reference peer reviewed academic literature and estimate the current imbalance at 0.5 W/m2 which is inline with the current scientific consensus so that leads me to believe it (or least parts of it) may be a credible. Now, you might think 0.5 W/m2 is nothing to get bent out of shape over. But, consider this. We think that imbalance is actually increasing. And, 0.5 W is 12 Wh per day per square meter. That is a staggering amount of energy that is being accumulated right now and the pace of accumulation may be increasing.
     
  17. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That's funny. You admit that you don't read much and mostly post from the top of your head and refer to me as a troll ?? Again I have a Masters Degree in Mechanical Engineering - Thermal Systems and a Bachelors Degree in Chemical Engineering. Try drawing a control volume around the earth and then do an energy balance based on the first law of thermodynamics. Quite unbelievable.
     
  18. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Do some reading on radiative heat transfer. The hot sun radiates energy to the much cooler earth. But the much cooler earth also radiates energy to the much hotter sun (and the rest of space including stars much hotter than our sun). And no laws of thermodynamics have been violated. Heat transfer from the sun to the earth and from the earth to space (including the sun) is not accomplished via conduction.

    http://people.atmos.ucla.edu/liou/Lecture/Lecture_2.pdf
     
  19. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,597
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Masters Degree in Mechanical Engineering - Thermal Systems and a Bachelors Degree in Chemical Engineering prevent nobody from trolling. People reduce themselves to pure trolling when their beliefs, everything they devoted their life to, taught their children, shared with their friends and colleagues turns to be all waste.

    Trolling on forums is quite harmless, but when you turn on your children, friends and colleagues especially when they depend on you in one way or another it makes you a climate scientist.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2017 at 11:32 AM
  20. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,597
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48

    You have to define your “manipulator’’, draw it in the given system and write an equation for it.

    You keep on avoiding it.

    I have to repeat – “manipulator’’ has to be either heat in/out or mechanical work.

    In order to warm up a body you have to add dQ=dU+dA. dS=dQ/dT

    Your P and now M and then nobody knows what X, Y or Z you will come up with have to be translated into the above.

    The increase/decrease of the flow of heat is a function of increase/decrease of the T difference.

    The warmer is the earth the more heat will flow out of it per hour,

    the colder is the Space the more heat will flow from the Earth per hour.

    These are basics of basics.

    It seems that even the leaders of AGW who are the authors of the picture understand it.

    They understand that “in” has to come to = “out”.

    You dismissed the 2nd in the form I quoted though it is all over Internet.

    You dismissed Kelvin though you measure T in Kelvins.

    You dismissed the link to experiments.

    Now you are dismissing 341=341.

    Who then is willing to go against all scientists of the world just to push his personal beliefs whatever they are, no matter for or against GW or a half for a half against?

    What all scientists of the world don’t understand is that in order to move a system from one steady state “in”=”out” to another steady state “in”=”out” one has to apply heat or mechanical work to it, as the 1st law requires.

    There is no other way around.

    What all scientists of the world don’t understand is that all systems in nature are open.

    You can charge a battery and accumulate heat in it in the charger – battery system.

    But as soon as you disconnect the charger the battery will start discharging and it will loose its charge in nature.

    As soon as you stop burning coal at the power plant the charger will stop charging the battery.

    You have to keep on shoveling coal. This is the main statement of Thermodynamics.

    God is not shoveling the coal into the system. This is the main assumption all Thermodynamics is built on.

    The Sun and the Earth and all stars and planets will discharge.

    You can accumulate heat by CO2 during the day, but it will start discharging during the night.

    As one cannot consider only battery-charger system, one cannot consider only day time CO2 accumulating heat system.

    That’s why the picture drawn by the leading scientists is illiterate.

    There is an equation of heat exchange between two bodies by radiation.

    In the equation the colder is the body the more heat will flow to it (function of T in the 4th power)

    There is an equation of heat transfer from a body to our Space by radiation.

    In the equation the hotter is the body the more heat will flow out of it (function of T in the 4th power).

    In the both equations heat flows from a hotter body to a colder body.

    These equations as all other equations in Thermodynamics are not logical conclusions based on empirical evidence, they are not mathematical models, but they all results of direct measurements.

    You are more than welcome to use these simple equations and show me where I go wrong.

    It is not the matter of opinion, description or understanding, but it is the matter of the equations.

    If you say something you have to say it in equations or keep equations in mind.

    It is true for all Thermodynamics.

    There is no other way around in Thermodynamics, the discipline about warming.

    I see none in your mind when you say X,Y,Z or P or M.

    But yet, all scientists may be right and I may be wrong.

    In order to prove me that they are right scientists have to build a machine based on the CO2 effect claimed by them.

    There is no other way around in Thermodynamics, the discipline about warming.

    I gave you a link to machines built and proved that there was no such effect.

    You have ignored the link as you keep on ignoring anything which may contradict to your personal beliefs.

    You have accumulated these beliefs during your life time separating right from wrong.

    You came here to tell the world what you have accumulated.

    As the poet said, - It is not important to be born, it is important to be heard.

    I’ve heard it all.

    You are discharged.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2017 at 11:35 AM

Share This Page