## onsdag 30 januari 2013

### The BIG BLUFF of CO2 Alarmism: DLR

Inside this building the False Stefan-Boltzmann Law of two-way radiative heat transfer underlying CO2 alarmism was fabricated.

The road to CO2 alarmism paved by IPCC is covered with fabricated stories of hockey-stick temperatures, melting glaciers and suffering ice-bears. But these stories can be viewed as minor bluffs compared to the BIG BLUFF of "Downwelling Longwave Radiation DLR" as radiation from "greenhouse gases" in the atmosphere with a proclaimed warming effect of the Earth surface of about 300 W/m2, almost twice as much as the 170 W/m2 of absorbed shortwave radiation from the Sun, and a specific "radiative forcing" of about 3.7 W/m2 from doubled CO2 with an alarming warming of 3 C.

The BIG BLUFF is documented in Guide to Meteorological Instruments and Methods of Observation (2008) issued by World Meteorological Organization WMO by the stipulation to measure DLR = L-arrowdown using a DLR-meter (pyrometer, bolometer, radiometer) as follows:
• DLR = V/K + sigma x T_s^4 = DLR-meter Formula
where sigma = 5.67 10^-8 is Stefan-Boltzmann's constant, T_s is measured temperature of the DLR-meter, V is the voltage reading of the thermopile as the effective recording element of the DLR-meter and K is a sensitivity coefficient determined by calibration, as expressed in the following excerpts from Chapter 7 of the Guide:

The DLR-meter Formula has a the form
• DLR = sigma T_a^4 = V/K + sigma T_s^4 = Net-Input + ULR
• ULR = sigma T_s^4 = "Upwelling Longwave Radiation" from the DLR-meter
• DLR = sigma T_a^4 = "Downwelling Longwave Radiation" from the atmosphere
• Net-Input = V/K = net absorbed radiation by the DLR-meter
which is supposed to be a reformulation of Stefan-Boltzmann's Law
• Net-Input = sigma (T_a^4 - T_s^4) = True Stefan-Boltzmann Law
of the form
• Net-Input = sigma T_a^4  -  sigma T_s^4 = False Stefan Boltzmann Law,
• sigma T_a^4 = Net-Input + sigma T_s^4  = False Stefan Boltzmann Law,
obtained by algebraic reformulation of the True Stefan-Boltzmann Law. But the seemingly innocent algebraic reformulation leads to a False Stefan-Boltzmann Law, because the algebra has no physical meaning:

To rewrite Net-Input as the difference of the gross quantities sigma T_a^4 and sigma T_s^4 has no physical meaning, since sigma T_a^4 is the radiance from the atmosphere into a surrounding at 0 K and sigma T_s^4 is the radiance from the DLR-meter into a surrounding at 0 K, and this is not the physics of the interaction between atmosphere and DLR-meter described by sigma (T_a^4 - T_s^4) according to the True Stefan-Boltzmann Law.

WMO refers to a False Stefan-Boltzmann Law expressing simultaneous two-way heat transfer between
two bodies in radiative contact, gross heat transfer from warm minus gross heat transfer from cold,
while the True Stefan-Boltzmann Law expresses one-way net heat transfer from warm to cold.

WMO thus prescribes to use of a False Stefan-Boltzmann Law when measuring DLR and thus fabricates physics, which is false physics. The bluff in giving the unphysical algebraic reformulation of the True Stefan-Boltzmann Law, a physical meaning as DLR measured by DLR-meters, has such big dimension that it has become a truth not questioned by even strong critics of CO2-alarmism.

This means that critics of CO2 alarmism have been diverted to focus efforts on revealing little lies, while the BIG BLUFF has been left free to fool the world that massive DLR from greenhouse gases with "radiative forcing" of 3.7 W/m2 of doubled CO2, is threatening to over-heat the globe.

That it is a False Stefan-Boltzmann Law, obtained by a non-physical algebraic manipulation of the True  Stefan-Boltzmann Law, which underlies CO2 alarmism, is so unbelievable, that it has become a truth, like a bluff poker bet which so high that it cannot be matched. The bet is maintained by requirements of universal calibration in the hands of WMO, which effectively makes it impossible to question the false physics:
• These instruments should be calibrated at national or regional calibration centres by using black- body calibration units. Experiments using near-black-body radiators fashioned from large hollowed blocks of ice have also met with good success. The calibration centre should provide information on the best method of determining the atmospheric irradiance from a pyrgeometer depending upon which of the above recommendations are being followed.
The fact that in our time a False Stefan-Boltzmann Law by universal calibration can be twisted into a true physical law, can only be understood as an exodus of physicists from physics.

The concept of "man-made" global warming as evidenced by DLR-meters is by WMO taken to an unprecedented level in the history of science by
• promoting cooperation in the establishment of networks for making meteorological, climatological, hydrological and geophysical observations, as well as the exchange, processing and standardization of related data, and assisting technology transfer, training and research..
To understand that this is a BIG BLUFF requires understanding of the True Stefan-Boltzmann Law which can only be properly understood by understanding the elements of its mathematical proof.  A proof of the True Stefan-Boltzmann Law and a further discussion of the False Stefan-Boltzmann Law, is presented in Mathematical Physics of Blackbody Radiation and in Computational Blackbody Radiation from Slaying the Sky Dragon.

The BIG BLUFF of DLR is so cleverly concocted that even clever critics like Lindzen, Singer, Monckton, Spencer,  WUWT and many others, have been been fooled.

PS Here is the terminology postulated by WMO with an abundance of symbols with arrows up and down supposedly representing (non-physical) two-way heat transfer in "downward" and "upward" radiation:

Recall that to make a lie convincing, make it big and make incredible; the bigger and the more incredible, the more convincing: To motivate the Iraq war, Bush presented evidence that Saddam was in possession of weapons of mass destruction, like long-distance rockets with nuclear heads ready to be launched, and the utter improbability of anything like that made the lie into a truth which could be used to start a war. WMO is now using the big improbable story about DLR to motivate a war on climate.

Notice that what WMO effectively does is to rewrite 0 = 1 - 1 and then use algebra to get 1 = 0 + 1 or DLR =  Net + ULR with DLR = 1, Net = 0, and ULR = 1, which miraculously generates DLR = 1 from observing Net = 0, or DLR = 10 by rewriting 0 = 10 - 10, or DLR = 100....

The innovative idea of creating values from nothing has created fictional financial markets, which we now see imploding under the weight of realities, and fictional science will also eventually meet reality.

#### 20 kommentarer:

1. Claes, do I understand you right that a colder blackbody, surrounded by a warmer blackbody, does not emit electromagnetic radiation.

2. There is no heat transfer by radiation from a clod body to a warmer surrounding. Your question if the cold body does "not emit electromagnetic radiation" is unclear since you do not specify what you mean by "emit electromagnetic radiation". What do you mean by this expression?

3. Any accelerated charged particle (ion, dipole) emits electromagnetic radiation.

4. First you speak about a cold blackbody emitting electromagnetic IR radiation, now it is an accelerated charged particle emitting electromagnetic radiation. Is it the same thing?

5. There are lots of accelerated charged particles on a blackbody surface at temps > 0´K

6. My answer to your question is that a blackbody does not transfer heat energy by radiation to a warmer surrounding. Instead the blackbody is radiatively heated by a warmer surrounding. What we are speaking about is heat transfer by electromagnetic radiation and not electromagnetics in general.

7. Hey CJ, I have a question: You're not the only one that knows this, are you? Because based on the level of knowledge, certainly you are not the only one.

I wonder: How long will it take before the entire thing falls apart? It seems AGW hysteria is truly beginning to die.

And, once it does, what other topics will you cover? Will you return to dark matter/energy?

8. It would help if physicists carried their responsibility to uncover false physics. But it seems that this is to ask too much.

9. Your discoveries are truly revealing. The fact that neither upwelling nor downwelling radiation is happening into 0 K surroundings, and therefore Stefan-Boltzmans Law is not applicable. But the instrument detects some kind of signal converted to Volage; what is this signal and what would be the correct matemathical interpretation of this signal?
PetterT

10. A pyrgeometer measures a temperature difference recorded as a voltage. Nothing mysterious.

11. Ok, so you admit that there is some kind of downwelling electromagnetic radiation from the atmosphere. But, there are not differen kinds of E-M-waves, they are all the same, with different frequencies and amplitudes. There are not some carrying heat and others which don´t. It only depends on the receiver if it will absorb energy from the E-M waves. So DLR of course exist, but whether or not the earth absorbs it (amd reemits it) is quite another question. All this has been dxiscussed here before.

12. Yes, I have discussed this before and written on the topic in books on this blog. No, there is no physics behind "downwelling longwave radiation" DLR measured in W/m2 which is like rain descending to the Earth surface from the sky and which is heating the surface with 300 W/m2. This is misleading fiction and there is no physics behind DLR. There is no true SB-Law describing the quantity DLR in terms of physical quantities, only a False SM Law stating that DLR = epsilon sigma T_a^4 with T_a the temperature of the atmosphere. The true SB expresses the radiative exchange between the surface and atmosphere as epsilon sigma (T_s^4 -T_a^4) with T_s the surface temperature. The DLR quantity as epsilon sigma T_a^4 expresses the radiance from the atmosphere to outer space at 0 K, and to twist this into radiation from atmosphere to surface is violation of basic physics and logic. I think you understand this so that you no longer have to go fishing for radiation emitted from a blackbody without a receptor of radiation at some temperature. There is no two-way street of heat energy emitted by two bodies in radiative contact, only a one-way street from hot to cold.

13. DLR exists and is reemitted or reflected back into the atmosphere. I don´t think this violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. (The net radiation always goes from warm to cold.) If it does the 2´nd law of t-d has to be rewised. And perhaps this is a clue. The electromagnetic waves were not discovered at the time when the 2nd law was formulated.

14. You insist. What is the evidence of physical reality of DLR? Measurement by a DLR-meter?

15. Because all charged accelerated particles emit e-m radiation (carrying energy).

16. How much DLR and how is it measured? You just give a qualitative statement without precision.
It is like saying that all material particles have mass. The question is how much and how to measure mass. So, how is DLR measured?

17. I don´t think they would send up the IRIS sattelite without being sure of what it measures.
Does a DLR-meter function if the two way energy transfer SB-law is valid? Yes.
And why is the one way SB-law wrong? Because it is unphysical, it leads to absurd results, e.g. there will be e-m waves without energy.

18. If you want to believe in what you are fed by those who measure DLR with special DLR-meters, then there is nothing I can do about it. I have studied the problem and come to the conclusion by arguments I have presented, that DLR is non-physical fiction. If you study the problem with open mind you will also see this.

19. The real question is,I think, which of the one way resp two way SB-law is valid?
If the "two way" is valid, there is no problem, or?

20. There is no two-way SB. There is only one SB and it is one-way.