"Stephen Davenport" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 10:52:52 AM UTC-4, Alastair wrote:

[...]

Pictet demonstrated that the reflection of cold can occur, as did others
before him.

[...]


"Useful idiots need to be shown the facts ... . Until then, rational
people can have fun laughing at their ignorance."

=========

And everyone after Pictet showed that it does not. I linked a couple of
days ago in a different thread to one such example. Did you not read it?
Or did confirmation bias not allow you to?

Here it is again:

http://www2.ups.edu/physics/faculty/evans/Pictet's%20experiment.pdf

One-line summary:

"The thermometer, initially at room temperature, now radiates away more
energy than it absorbs, and so suffers a decrease in temperature."

From: "Pictet's experiment: The apparent radiation and reflection of cold"
James Evans, Department of Physics, University of Puget Sound, Tacoma,
Washington 98416
Brian Popp, Department of Physics FM-15, University of Washington,
Seattle, Washington 98195

Here's another quote for you: "The first principle is that you must not
fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." Richard P.
Feynman.

Stephen.

Sorry, about not replying earlier. I had trouble with GoogleGroups because
of so many messages in the thread. Another reason why I started two new
ones. I apologise for not responding/reading. Or I may just have been so
infuriated by something Dawlish wrote I forgot to go back to your message.

Pictet demonstrated that the reflection of cold can occur, as did others
before him.
And everyone after Pictet showed that it does not.

The paper you quote from is where I took the quote describing how Pictet
reflected the blackbody radiation from a flask full of snow onto a
thermometer, which then recorded a drop in temperature. (see section C on
page 741). BTW, he was using an air thermometer which is much more precise
than a mercury one, since the temperature drop he was measuring was very
small. As far as I am concerned that proves that radiation from a cold
object can be reflected and that cold radiation exists.

No one since then has showed that it does not. In fact the last section of
that paper describes how to carry out the experiment with modern
techniques.

You appear to believe that this is the key sentence:

"The thermometer, initially at room temperature, now radiates away more
energy than it absorbs, and so suffers a decrease in temperature."

That is true, the thermometer is radiating away hot radiation (h), but is
absorbing cold radiation (c), so the NET effect (-h + c) is a fall in the
thermometer's temperature, since c h. But the hot and the cold radiation
exist and are not the same, despite what other might claim. They are two
streams of similar things just like hot and cold water.

Here's another quote for you: "The first principle is that you must not
fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." Richard P.
Feynman.

And another from Feynman "It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it
doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's
wrong."

Hope this makes sense,

Cheers, Alastair.