On Monday, August 10, 2015 at 10:05:00 PM UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Monday, August 10, 2015 at 9:14:39 PM UTC+1, Alastair wrote:
On Monday, 10 August 2015 17:00:21 UTC+1, RedAcer wrote:
On 10/08/15 13:06, Alastair wrote:
It is a while since I had read the Pictet paper

You haven't read it with comprehension. It's pointless starting another
long thread trying to explain it to you if you can't understand any of
the many explanations which have been given to you so far.

No-one has explained to me how the radition from a flask of snow can cause the temperture recorded in a thermometer to fall. Nor why I should not call the radition from the snow to the thermometer cold radiation.

Are you really being serious, or are you just try to prove how clever you think are? What was it? Dunning-Kruger effect?

Apart from both of the links I provided for you - but you abjectly failed to read. Scroll back and read them both.

Why? Do they mention Pictet or cold radiation?

Oh, you don't mean the first two links. You mean the one from the Scandanavian professor who believed that global warming was not a threat because radiation only travels in one direction? I think even you will admit that it travels both from the source to the object and from the object to the source.. You do don't you?

The other was the link to the Pictet paper which I have read in the past, but only skimmed this time until I reached the experiment which I have posted. Have you read that?

I agree most of the paper is just a history of late 18th scientific thought about heat, and does not really explain why the American double agent for the British and Bavarians, Count Rumford, founder of the Royal Institution is a colourful character. They mention that he married the widow Madame Lavoisier, but don't mention the massive falling out that ensued because she was a party animal and he a scientific loner.

No point in asking if you have changed your mind now, since it isn't broad enough for ideas new to you to fit in. Just one idea, that you repeat endlessly "Cold radiation does not exist." Don't you think that a rather narrow view of life?