I have recently (and finally) published:
Reinterpreting and Augmenting John Tyndall’s 1859 Greenhouse Gas Experiment with Thermoelectric Theory and Raman Spectroscopy
at:academia.edu/ and http://vixra.org/abs/1504.0165 .
Original Post 1, 2014.
Reworked 2014 05 27
The Gassy Messenger.
Explaining the missing 98% of our 'greenhouse' atmosphere.
Modern climate science's fundamental premise - stated by all parties in the great climate debate - is that the greenhouse gases (less than 2% of the atmosphere) are so because they absorb radiant infrared (IR) heat (as derived by IR spectroscopy), and are (to carbon-climatologists) a main climate driver, past present and future.
This premise has its origins with the John Tyndall 1859 thermopile infrared gas analysis experiment. The (remaining) non-greenhouse gases (N2 nitrogen and O2 oxygen, more that 98% of the atmosphere) are distinguished from the greenhouse gases by their (said) inability to absorb (infrared) heat - deduced or inferred from the same experiment.
All IR instruments use the same basic technology, thermopiles. Tyndall's apparatus is today cheaply and easily available and is used in infrared thermal cameras and non contact infrared thermometers. Standard practice of these instruments suggests his findings and conclusions to be false, and extrapolations thereafter an illusion.
Is Tyndall's experiment a lasting remnant of 19th century trickery surrounding electricity - electrickery?
Greenhouse proponents argue: it is the gases - due to their molecular vibrations - that are special. They either trap heat, or don't.
I argue: it is the instrument that is special, they either register a gas - on its molecular vibrations - or they don't.
My argument is supported by the facts:
- The non greenhouse gases trap heat, they have a temperature;
- The physics: substances are either IR active, or not; or a mixture of both;
- Standard practice and knowledge of IR instruments.
- Knowledge surrounding Raman spectroscopy.
It is well understood by practitioners of (thermopile) IR instruments that (thermopile) IR detectors do not always measure the real temperature of a substance: they discriminate on substance properties that are not at all thermal properties, and so give a wrong picture of our atmosphere. This premise has lead to a false belief in, and development of, the so called greenhouse climate theory. The cause of this transparency is to do with the symmetric vibration of some substances.
Correcting for this discrimination, N2 nitrogen and O2 oxygen are also greenhouse gases; they have a measured real temperature, they 'trap heat', but as they are invisible to IR detectors. IR (thermopile) instruments will, by the laws of physics, register them as having no temperature.
Tyndall has confused absorption with opacity - a property of light; and so wrongly concluded that the said greenhouse gases (inferred from the experiment) are special, when it fact it the instrument that is special.
An analogy:The IR detector may be analogous to the radar. The radar 'sees' the classical fighter jet - the likes of the F-15 Eagle - but it will not see the 'stealth' F-22 Raptor. The IR thermopile detector measures the 'greenhouse' gases, but not the non 'greenhouse' gases.
Putting numbers to the analogy: jets (non stealth) per per million Aircraft - just like the 'parts per million volume' greenhouse gases. We would see with our eyes: 1 million aircraft total; 2% or 20,000 would be classical non stealth fighters like the F -15, and the remaining 98% 980,000 would be stealth like the F-22.
It would be wrong to conclude from these instruments that the Raptor (and the non 'greenhouse' gases) are not there and are benign just because they don't show up.
If we only used radar, we would have a totally wrong picture of the reality.
The germanium sauna:
Imagine a sauna made with walls of IR transparent germanium, and heated to sauna temperature. To a noncontact IR thermometer it would show – unlike the traditional thermometer – the outside temperature. It would ‘see’ right through it (apart of course for the water vapor and other trace gases). It would be useless.
In an earlier entry I cataloged the evidence of the evidence of CO2's heat trapping property. Having found that CO2 doesn’t show any evidence or repetition (at least at any significant level so as to be measurable or notable) I set about in this entry to explain why CO2's heat trapping doesn’t repeat. Why is it that we think it does? My conclusion is very disturbing: the foundation argument or premise of 'heat trapping, climate changing, CO2 does not appear to be consistent with the related fundamental laws and textbook knowledge of physics. I have found all of the foundation arguments can be (easily) refuted, just by studying these laws in detail. Inspired by the work of Galileo, I am calling this entry ‘The Gassy Messenger’, I could have equally called it the Dark Climate.
The following experiments (including the Tyndall experiment) can be demonstrated (for one's self) by the use of an affordable non-contact IR thermometer that can be bought online or at any hardware- tech store. Google search: images of non contact thermometers
Everybody who discusses greenhouse climate theory should be aware this instrument (just as with a telescope to the astronomer) and have experimented and discussed their findings in light of the following theory and industrial application of the devise.This entry was written by me, an amateur, but the knowledge was attained from all fields of physics - including astronomy. I call upon all physicists to explain their position on climate change, not in terms of changes in climate, but in terms of, and in reference to the problem below. This entry is not set as crystal, is still liquid, but in time I will get there.
In this (following) entry I shall: review the Tyndall experiment and its implications; show that the experiment's findings are wrong, misinterpreted and misattributed; and go on to - with reference to industry publications - reveal the real life problems associated with measurements taken from IR instruments. I shall then go on to show - using both primary and secondary publications - that the atmosphere is made up of (only) greenhouse gases – i.e. that oxygen and nitrogen are also heat absorbent. I will show that CO2 is thermally typical, and not at all special.
The Greenhouse Effect
Below is a typical reference to the greenhouse gases and effect definition:
A greenhouse gas (sometimes abbreviated GHG) is a gas in an atmosphere that absorbs and emits radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect. The primary greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
..and the non greenhouse gases:
The 'greenhouse effect' has as its centre premise - held today by all climate scientist's - conclusions made from the 1859 Tyndall experiment. John Tyndall experimented using newly developed electrical technology (the thermopile) and discovered (what he thought were) a small set of gases that absorbed heat; gases now known as the greenhouse gases (water vapour, CO2, ozone, and methane).
But his conclusion leaves us with a paradox even catastrophe, and has us begging the question:
- How is it the atmosphere is warm at all when less than 2% of the atmosphere are GHG's and trap heat?
- How can atmospheric convective phenomena - the likes of the sea breeze - be explained by these (heat trapping) greenhouse gases alone?
- Where have the 98% (dark gases from dark matter and dark energy) of our atmospheric gone?
To cover this new knowledge these limitations, all IR measuring instruments come with an operating manual, that are readily available to read on the internet. There are also training videos such as the one below on IR cameras and transparency.
Glass: a greenhouse solid?
Air and CO2 gas transparency and opacity is demonstrated in the clip below? Is the clip measuring temperature, or CO2 opacity? Opacity. In fact the clip basically demonstrations how CO2 concentration detectors work.
On the other hand, there are some materials that are semi transparent to IR instruments (just like atmospheric N2 nitrogen and O2 oxygen), these are germanium - as demonstrated in the clip above, salt crystal, and thin plastic: again, because of this transparent property of the substances it is not to say these substances don't hold heat, but rather the instrument discriminates on their opacity - they don't measure.
That N2 nitrogen and O2 oxygen are transparent to IR is not to say they are not absorbent to heat: proof of this is they both have a heat capacity, they are both the majority gases of the atmosphere, and the atmosphere is warm and not absolute zero. It is to say they are transparent to IR instruments, and do not measure.
In light of this knowledge, theory, and application of modern day IR instruments, the early Tyndall conclusions seem to be outdated: his conclusions need updating. The instruments measure a property of light and not the temperature: air maybe IR transparent, but it is warm, it has a temperature.
The Tyndall / Dr Stewart IR thermopile experiment revisited:
This clip, and the original 1859 Tyndall Experiment, is not a demonstration of heat (absorption), but rather a demonstration of the physical transition properties (opacity) of (infrared) light and its affect on different substances, namely, in the case, air and CO2.
If not used properly or understood, findings from IR instruments risk deceiving: if gases (just like the solids) are transparent to IR, it does at all mean they don't absorb heat. And the question is still begged, how is it N2 and O2 are warm?
To expose why (and what) IR detectors don't see, we need only understand Raman spectroscopy.
Raman Spectroscopy is a known complement to IR spectroscopy for analysing the vibrational properties of substances: it ‘sees’ what IR spectroscopy can't. reference
Raman spectroscopy is well explained in the following clips. I suggest you play them more than once to yourself as they are very insightful and offer perfect solution to the dark climate (N2 O2 invisibility) paradox.
CO2 and Raman Spectroscopy
As shown in the above video clip CO2 has a predicted IR band that only shows with Raman Spectroscopy. This is supported by the following images/references. In the first the symmetric stretch at 1537 cm-1 is predicted 'B', and in the following image below, a 'cartoon' image of CO2 clearly showing bands A, C and D of CO2 in the IR (spectroscopy) spectrum, and in the lower cut, the 'green' Raman CO2 showing the predicted band B of the above cut. This shows that IR detectors are discriminant to only anti-symmetric movements.
Chemistry tutorial notes: Chemistry 362 Dr. Jean M. Standard:
This hidden Raman signal (well inside the mid IR) may explain why the atmosphere is warm.
Why is it thought that IR spectroscopy is the complete picture, when it is clearly discriminants out (by the exclusion principle) symmetric vibrational and rotational modes?
With a knowledge of Raman and IR spectroscopy, the properties of light, and of substances, it is clear that the GHG’s and its GH theory are derived by cherry-picking only one side of the knowledge.
To add to this, I have learnt (and have many references to the fact) that the degrees of freedom and vibrational movements of molecules are secondary and accentually a smoke screen, to the real elephant, the Specific Heat Capacity (SHC) of a substance. The SHC of a substance is derived from the degrees of freedom/ vibrational movements of a molecule. On the grounds of the SHC, CO2(0.8 no units) is nothing special relative H2O vapour (2 ): but this property again opens another cherry picking opportunity - as substances with low SHC’s heat faster when energized, than that those with higher, when in isolation.
Tyndall’s apparatus (the thermopile) discriminates on atomic properties that are not at all associated with real thermal properties. If there is thought to be a relationship, it is an illusion.
Both N2 and O2 are vibrational symmetrical by nature: they will never show up in IR detectors or spectroscopy, but will in Raman spectroscopy - IR's complement. Molecules such as CO2 - which are both symmetrical and anti-symmetrical, will show in both.
If Raman spectroscopy was the only test we had to analyse the IR spectrum of substances, we could have equally have concluded that N2 and O2 are the (only) greenhouse gases. This discrimination renders IR thermal detectors inadmissible.
Thermal and energy properties of substances are measured in terms of specific heat capacities.
With the IR detector inadmissible: all gases are greenhouse gases, and the (special) greenhouse climate theory myth.
The 2% (volume) of said greenhouse gases should be revised and relegated to 100%, by adding N2 and O2 (and others if so). Any assumptions by any climate models,or climate knowledge, or claims that the atmosphere consists of around 2 % (volume) special greenhouse gases will need reviewed – as said above.
Thermal and energy properties of substances are measured in terms of specific heat capacities.