On Sunday, 25 September 2016 17:30:38 UTC+1, JohnD wrote:
"Col" wrote in message ...

You don't have to mock the person you disagree with.

Agreed. But Alistair is a particularly persistent repeat offender on this
issue despite extensive exposure to all the contrary evidence - it's
scarcely surprising if exasperation sets in.

What I'm curious about is what the (negative?) energy transfer agent of any
putative cold radiation could conceivably be? We have EM radiation for
normal energy transfer by radiative means. What's the corresponding
wave/particle/whatever for 'cold radiation'?

The problem could easily be resolved without recourse to finding out:
Imagine a spherical light box made with the most reflective substance known....
(or a number of said boxen with a variety of highly reflective linings -just to act as controls since we don't know what is permeable to this radiation's frequency)
....placed in a perfect vacuum (free-falling in Space perhaps) the contents if ice would reach super-cool temperatures without losing any heat.

Except for the fact as Alan has just said, the ice under discussion has a different energy level, being a mere 20C more or less below room temperature..

A point that seems to have escaped the original researchers, in a time before anyone was able to understand the concept of absolute zero, is that if they kept replacing the ice, the temperature at the thermometer; that mirror's focal point, would have reached 0C.

One wonders why they never thought of that or/and why the phenomenon was largely forgotten. Physicists are never too busy for physics. Which is why none of them are at work on the solution just now; obviously. Baaah!