"RedAcer" wrote in message
...
On 09/08/15 14:59, Alastair wrote:
On Sunday, 9 August 2015 07:30:58 UTC+1,
wrote:
....
I hope you will now realise that you are wrong, will apologise
and admit your mistake. Cold radiation does exist.

Cheers, Alastair.

There is no such thing in Physics as "cold" - just lack of heat.

I am not saying "cold" exists. I am saying "cold radiation" exists,
in the same way cold water exists.

No. You are talking about the human experience of temperature. We are
trying to explain to you how physicists, engineers, scientists talk
about heat.
(do you really have an engineering degree? - I find that hard to believe
- what was it in?)

Why do you start your post with insults? Is that the way you were taught
science at school? Oh, I have just realised, your teacher was Dawlish!

If your hands feel extremely cold and you put them in 'cold' water from
your tap you may 'feel' the water as 'warm. Conversely if you feel
extremely hot and you put your hands in water at the same temperature
you would feel it as 'cold'.
The temperature of the water hasn't changed.

If the radiation arrives at an object and it is colder it will warm it, and
we can call the radiation hot radiation, just like your hot water.
If the radiation arrives at an object and it is warmer it will cool it, and
we can call the radiation coldradiation, just like your cold water.

Your water hadn't changed and neither has my radiation.

The point of science is to use definitions and talk precisely. Why can't
you accept this.

My definition of cold radiation IS precise. It is cold radiation if it
originated from a source colder than where it is absorbed; the difference in
temperature can be as small as you like. Can't get more precise than that!

Scientists don't talk about cold radiation.

How many do you know?

Are gamma rays 'hot radiation' or just photons with a specific
frequency/energy?

Can't tell if it is hot radiation until I know where the photons are
arriving.

Cheers, Alastair.