wrote in message
oups.com...

James Toupin wrote:
(snipped)

While I am not a professional scientist, I do have a "scientific mind",
as
you put it. I have not forgotten volcanic ash or meteoric ash and dust as
an
agent in cooling the atmosphere. However, volcanic ash or dust ejected by
the impact of a meteorite is not at all similar to "aluminums sequins".
Both
volcanic ash and impact debris does not so much reflect solar radiation
away
from the earth as simply blocking the radiation from striking the
surface,
particularly in the visible and infrared wavelengths. And, oddly enough,
while it cools the earth by blocking sunlight from reaching the earth's
surface, it also acts as a thermal blanket trapping whatever heat is
generated by the planet and it's life processes thus keeping the
temperature
from droping as dramatically as it would otherwise.

Sorry to say, but you lack a scientific mind when you do not realize
that an analogy of factual data disprove your argument. You admit that
volcanic dust cools Earth. You admit that meteoric ash cools Earth. But
then your unscientific mind refuses to believe that Aluminum Aluminium
Sequin would magnify by powers of 10 the cooling of Volcanic/Meteoric
ash would cool. You admit volcanic ash cools Earth, so why do you
refuse to accept that a Aluminium Sequin particle would cool Earth by
perhaps 10^9 greater than a volcanic ash particle. Unless you are
arguing just to be arguing.

I am sure that aluminium sequins would indeed have an effect on the
atmosphere at the temperature of the Earth's surface. What I don't accept is
your argument that it would only reflect incoming solar radiation away from
Earth and not also trap heat in like a thermal blanket. It's not that I
don't accept it, rather that humanity messing with the environment has not
ever turned out well before. We need to keep that in mind before we do
anything to interfere with the natural processes.




Actually, there is not even a need to invoke the examples of volcanic and
meteoric activity, as this is a fairly well known principle to
meteorologists and a mater of common sense that , I imagine, even grade
school children have perceived. An overcast day is cooler than a clear
one,
while a clear night is cooler than an overcast one. This is because,
during
the night the earth radiates heat energy, in the form of infrared
radiation,
back into space reducing the temperature. The cloud cover stops the heat
from being radiated away and traps the heat in the atmosphere.


In the region of the Equator where the Gulf Sea lies there are a
density number of incoming photons from the Sun and likewise for this
density number of a given cross section of space there is a number of
photons outgoing from the Earth which is very very small compared to
incoming Sun photons. Aluminium Sequin will reflect a very small, very
tiny number of outgoing photons from the Earth surface back to the
Earth surface. But the number of reflected incoming Sun photons is so
huge that to speak of Aluminium Sequin as a blanket to warm Earth is so
ridiculous and that is why I called you lacking of a science mind.

The amount of solar radiation reflected would be dependent upon: the amount
of aluminium used, and the angle at which it is inclined relative to the
incoming solar radiation and the surface of the Earth. If it were simply
allowed to orbit randomly, the aluminium sequins, which I presume you would
have polished to a high reflectivity in order to get the magnitude of order
cooling that you suggest, would tumble in space and not consistently reflect
radiation away from the Earth at all. By extension, if the aluminium sequins
are simply allowed to tumble, why would the reflectivity not be equal when
it was facing the surface of the Earth as when it was facing outward?




Think about what is the proportion of reflected Sun rays by Earth
compared to the number of incoming Sun rays.

The reflection of the "Sun rays" - very scientific - is not the issue.
The
issue is how much solar radiation, particularly in the infrared
wavelength
is absorbed by earth's ocean and how much heat, generated by that
radiation
striking the earth, is allowed to escape back into space. It is a
precarious
balancing act and one that has already been affected by the release of
carbon-dioxide into the atmosphere through industrial processes. This
carbon-dioxide produces the very "thermal blanket" effect that I have
already cited above, which traps the heat in earth's atmosphere that
would
normally be radiated out into space.


What makes you think that Aluminum/Aluminium Sequin does not reflect or
absorb infrared wavelength and thus preventing those photons from
heating up the oceans. What makes you think that since volcanic ash and
meteoric ash can absorb the infrared that the Aluminium does or does
not absorb the infrared. And what makes you think that Aluminum does or
does not reflect infrared wavelengths. So what is your scientific
source for your denial of aluminum as absorbing or reflecting?

I don't deny it. The basis for my arguing against it is because I agree that
it would indeed reflect and absorb solar radiation. The problem is knowing
exactly how that would work in practice. Aluminium sequins allowed to simply
tumble would, in essence, scatter the incoming sunlight; reflecting a
portion away from the Earth and reflecting a portion towards the Earth.
Knowing precisely what these proportions would be is of utmost importance in
predicting the effects upon the Earth and it's climate. Also, assuming that
these aluminium sequins would be in a geosynchronous orbit to have the
desired effect on a particular region, what portion of the heat that was
produced during the day would be reflected back towards earth when the
region passed into night time? What if cloud cover develops in the same area
during the day and intensifies the cooling effect? Or at night and
intensifies the thermal blanket effect? There are simply far to many
variables for a system such as this to work effectively and as intended.



As for aligning the sequin, I do not need to do that. Aluminum sequin
is the lowest tech for a Earth Air Conditioner and will be the first
such engineering. But after it is in orbit, there is no doubt in my
mind that future engineers will make it higher tech with the ability to
perhaps align the particles.

Perhaps the lowest tech solution would be to simply release dust into the
upper atmosphere, or low earth orbit, rather than using reflective
aluminum
sequins at all. This would not even require the refining process needed
to
produce aluminum, simply dig up a mound of dirt somewhere. Of course
there
is still the nasty business of unintended consequences: how would the
rest
of the climate be effected by the change you purpose? The Gulf Stream and
the Global Conveyer are integral to balancing the heat exchange between
the
middle and lower latitudes.


No need for dust when Aluminum by a factor of 10^9 does a better job of
cooling Earth.

And what effects of this extreme cooling of one part of the ocean produce
globally? That is a bit of a worry, wouldn't you agree?


There maybe a plant material that may do as well of a job as aluminium
sequin. The chaff of agricultural harvesting such as corn stalk chaff
or cotton chaff may provide a better material. Perhaps some leaves such
as the raking of Fall leaves chaff would be about 1/2 the weight per
volume of aluminium sequin.

Improvements to Earth Air Conditioner will go on as long as humanity
exists, but what I am interested is getting the first one built, made
of aluminum sequin.


As I said earlier Order is happiness and the more order we have means
the more controlling of Hurricanes and also controlling Earth Air
Conditioner. Some future day we could perhaps control weather for most
of the continental land masses.

Order is not always happiness. If you need proof of that simply ask
anyone
who suffered at the hands of Nazism or Communism, both big believers in
order.


I am afraid it is. And a sign of a nonscientific mind such as James is
to constantly argue against whatever the other person says, and the
inability for that mind to ever be "open minded".

I am open minded. I am open to many ideas and possibilities. I am also open
to the idea of unintended consequences. I feel that the unintended
consequences of this plan outweigh any advantage that you may perceive.

James

As for Nazism and
Communism and tyrants and relition-run-states are systems of dogma,
just as religion is dogma. At least in the Democratic process as a
system there is room in the process to remove falsity and corruption.
In dogmatic political systems such as Nazism, Communism,
Religion-states, and dictator states there is little to no room to
remove corruption or falsehoods and whenever you have corruption and
falsehoods you have disorder. Democracy begs and pleads for order to
run the country. Democracy hates an environment of corruption, an
environment of disorder, an environment where the rule-of-law is not
attended to.

The concept of happiness and being happy are one and same as the
concept of order, whether the order is in controlling hurricanes so
they do not destroy your life or whether it is the happiness that your
government enforces rule of law.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies