On Sunday, April 5, 2015 at 12:51:05 PM UTC+1, Asha Santon wrote:
On 05/04/15 12:11, Alastair wrote:
On Sunday, April 5, 2015 at 11:23:47 AM UTC+1, Verity wrote:
On 05/04/2015 07:25, Dawlish wrote:
On Sunday, April 5, 2015 at 1:06:13 AM UTC+1, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
Say they know everything, prove nothing.

That's because there is no proof in science. Idiot.


Proof is through evidence. Idiot.

Yes, that is why Dawlish thinks cold radiation does not exist. He ignores the evidence

Evans, J., and B. Popp. "Pictet's Experiment: The Apparent Radiation and Reflection of Cold." American Journal of Physics 53, no. 8 (1985): 737-53.. http://www2.ups.edu/faculty/jcevans/...experiment.pdf


He must be working on the theory that heat radiates while cold sucks.
If he moves his hand towards a heat source, he feels the warmth before
making contact. That, he assumes, is the heat radiating towards him, not
his hand sucking in the heat.
If he moves his hand towards a cold source, he feels the chill before
making contact. That, he assumes, is the cold sucking the heat from his
hand, not the cold radiating towards him.
What he assumes means that heat radiates towards cold whereas cold sucks.

Such a theory implies that if you place a warm and cool object together,
the warm object will always be the active partner in changing the
temperature of the cool one. So, when you place a block of dry ice in a
warm room, the fog will not drift outwards towards the heat.

Pictet used a concave mirror to collect the radiation from a a flask full of ice and another mirror to concentrate that radiation onto a thermometer which cooled. What do you call the radiation passing between the two mirrors?

Saussure's daughter understood the experiment:

"Not long afterwards, Rumford met Albertine Necker de Saussure,the married daughter of the Swiss physicist, and conversed with her on, among other things, Pictet's experiment. He found her "uncommonly well informed. She gave me the best explanation I had ever heard of the curious phenomenon of the reflection of cold [cold radiation]. My explanation and hers differ only in the meaning of the words. She supposes obscure heat [infrared radiation] to be emitted by all bodies and I suppose invisible rays to be emitted which though not hot themselves are the cause of heat in other bodies. These rays I suppose to be merely undulations in the etherial fluid."