The Ghost Photons - 2

Fig. 1 The Pelagic Depths

Scientists of various sorts point out that ocean heat content (OHC) and ocean heat flux (OHF) are top issues in oceanography at this time.

The reason those issues are so important is that global sea level change (SLC) and OHC are impacted by the global climate system (The Damaged Global Climate System, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). 

The warming commentariat and research scientists have been informed of the errors in ocean models that measure OHC  (McDougall, 2003, Patterns: Conservative Temperature & Potential Enthalpy, TEOS).

The problem in those models is that they measure an antiquated and error prone variable ("potential temperature") which came about some four decades ago.

The new and highly accurate variable for detecting and observing OHC and OHF that replaces "potential temperature" is "Conservative Temperature" as follows:

"The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), with the endorsement of the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR) and the International Association for the Physical Sciences of the Oceans (IAPSO), has adopted

Fig. 2 Epipelagic

Fig. 3 Mesopelagic

Fig. 4 Bathypelagic

Fig. 5 Abyssopelagic

Fig. 6 Hadopelagic

the International Thermodynamic Equation Of Seawater - 2010 (TEOS-10) as the official description of seawater and ice properties in marine science. All oceanographers are now urged to use the new TEOS-10 algorithms and variables to report their work.

Notable differences of TEOS-10 compared with EOS-80 are:

(1) the use of Absolute Salinity S_A to describe the salinity of seawater; Absolute Salinity takes into account the spatially varying composition of seawater. In the open ocean, the use of this new salinity has a non-trivial effect on the horizontal density gradient, and thereby on the ocean velocities calculated via the “thermal wind” relation.

(2) the use of Conservative Temperature Θ to replace potential temperature. Both of these temperatures are calculated quantities that result from an artificial thought experiment (namely, adiabatic and isohaline change in pressure to the sea surface). Conservative Temperature has the advantage that it better represents the “heat content” of seawater by two orders of magnitude.

(3) the TEOS-10 properties of seawater are all derived from a Gibbs function (by mathematical processes such as differentiation) and so are totally consistent with each other (in contrast to the now obsolete EOS-80 approach where separate polynomials were provided for each thermodynamic variable and they were not mutually consistent)."

(TEOS-10 Working Group, emphasis added, PDF). Who cares about consistency and two orders of magnitude of accuracy?

That consistency and accuracy, which is also called "thermodynamic proportion" correctly identifies, calculates, and matches OHC and OHF through all ocean depths and configurations.

On to the graphs.

In the graphs at Fig. 2 - Fig. 6 you can see, right down to the deepest depths and right down to the infrared photon level, that the Conservative Temperature (top graph line), Potential Enthalpy (middle graph line), and photon patterns (bottom graph lines) match.

Can you say "absolute synchronization and accuracy" at two orders of magnitude better than the "old way" of doing oceanography?!

The patterns show different values (CT is not the same value as h^O, h^O is not the same value as moles of photons) but the same graph line pattern exists at those different depth levels.

This means that even though the OHC and OHF values vary with depth (higher or lower temperature, salinity, heat content, and heat flux), nevertheless the three variables shown remain in an exact pattern of consistent relation to each other at each of those pelagic levels.

On to the photons.

I mentioned "moles of photons" earlier, so let me add two links now (How to Figure the energy of one mole of photons, Two Equations Governing Light's Behavior).

One of the articles uses "Light's Behavior" in it's title, and has this to say about it:

"There are two equations concerning light that are usually taught in high school ... E = hν"

(ibid, emphasis added). So this stuff is taught in high school Dredd?

Yes, it is not "rocket science."

The OHC and OHF of the ocean is about photons in the infra red spectrum that are generally called "heat" rather than "light" because the infrared spectrum is invisible to the naked human eye:

"Infrared radiation is a type of electromagnetic radiation, as are radio waves, ultraviolet radiation, X-rays and microwaves. Infrared (IR) light is the part of the EM spectrum that people encounter

Fig. 7 Ghost Photons at work

most in everyday life, although much of it goes unnoticed. It is invisible to human eyes, but people can feel it as heat. [Can you say ghost photons?]

IR radiation is one of the three ways heat is transferred from one place to another, the other two being convection and conduction. Everything with a temperature above about 5 degrees Kelvin (minus 450 degrees Fahrenheit or minus 268 degrees Celsius) emits IR radiation. The sun gives off half of its total energy as IR, and much of its visible light is absorbed and re-emitted as IR, according to the University of Tennessee."

(What Is Infrared?, emphasis added). The basic quantum of infrared radiation is the same as the basic quantum of visible light: the photon.

So, the patterns in today's graphs are patterns of photons, measurements of heat content, and measurements of heat flux, because heat is transferred by large numbers of photons from warmer seawater to colder seawater (The Ghost Photons; cf. Fig. 7).

The use of the measurement "a mole" of photons in the graphs is because there are so many of them (even more than the Republicans want to spend on duh wall: Snoring While Woke - 3).

If you want to know how many infrared photons per kilogram (kg) of seawater are involved in OHF simply multiply the mole amount indicated in the graphs by "Avogadro's Number" (6.02 x 10²³).

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

---

Speaking of "the down under" (as he sings, listen with the lyrics here) ...

---

---

On Thermal Expansion & Thermal Contraction - 41

Fig. 1 The Real Picture

This long series is generally about the half-truths in current state-of-science articles related to Ocean Heat Content or OHC (The Warming Science Commentariat - 13).

The specific half-truth is that "water expands when heat is added to it" (ibid).

The graphic at Fig. 1 shows that both the maximum and minimum density of water depends on its temperature, which is 4 deg. C for fresh water, but lower for seawater.

If this issue wasn't such a critical issue to current civilization I would not be writing Dredd Blog posts about it (see e.g. The Extinction of Robust Sea Ports, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9).

That half-truth is the foundation for the hypothesis that "thermal expansion is the major or a major cause of global sea level rise" (On Thermal Expansion & Thermal Contraction, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40).

I have noticed that, in the warming science commentariat literature, the percentage alleged in the hypothesis has been coming down from "most", to "half", to "a third", and recently "a fourth".

Fig. 2 WOD Layers

If the direct warming of the oceans by sunlight was the major cause of sea level rise (SLR) and sea level fall (SLF), one would think that the percentage would be going up as the average global atmospheric temperature increases from year to year.

If the ocean heat content is causing the percentage of thermal expansion to decrease, then the ocean heat content must be decreasing too (see On Thermal Expansion & Thermal Contraction - 40).

The reality is that OHC is constantly increasing and thermal expansion never was "the" or even "a" major cause of SLR or SLF.

Sea level change (SLC), whether in the form of SLR or SLF, has always been caused by, and still is caused by, the disintegration of ice sheets (Antarctica, Greenland) and land based glaciers (world wide locations).

Fig. 3a Layer 1 (Panels)

Fig. 3b Layer 1 (Lines)

Fig. 3c Layer 1 (expansion,contraction)

Today, I am presenting graphs from two WOD Layers (see Fig. 2 ... layer locations are indicated by the red numbers on the right side) that show historical evidence to confirm the scientific facts depicted in Fig. 1.

Fig. 4a Layer 2 (Panels)

Fig. 4b Layer 2 (Lines)

Fig. 4c Layer 2 (expansion,contraction)

The graphs at Fig. 3a - Fig. 3c show that at times the maximum density temperature in WOD Layer 1 can be higher (warmer) than the actual seawater temperature there.

Which means that if you add heat to that seawater it will not expand, it will contract (thermal contraction).

The graphs at Fig. 4a - Fig. 4c show the same scheme for WOD Layer 2.

The red line on Fig. 3b and Fig. 3c indicates the maximum density temperature.

The maximum density temperature is the temperature where the seawater cannot be compressed further (it can only expand at that temperature).

The black lines on the graphs at Fig. 3b and Fig. 3c indicate the measured (in situ) temperature converted into Conservative Temperature (CT) by the TEOS-10 software (TEOS-10).

The small squares on Fig. 3c indicate whether the change in temperature (CT) causes thermal expansion or thermal contraction.

Since the CT line (black line) is below the maximum density line (red line) any addition of heat (temperature increase) causes thermal contraction while removal of heat (temperature decrease) causes thermal expansion.

The long and short of it is that, like the graphic at Fig. 1 shows, the temperature of the seawater at the time heat is added or removed determines whether thermal expansion or contraction will result.

The graphs at Fig. 4b and Fig. 4c are depictions of WOD Layer 2.

The same thermodynamic principles apply in Layer 1 and Layer 2.

Anytime a heat content change causes the temperature line to move toward the maximum density line  thermal contraction is taking place and anytime the temperature line is moving away from the maximum density line thermal expansion is taking place.

The other graphs at Fig. 3a (Layer 1) and Fig. 4a (Layer 2) have four individual panels.

The upper left panels show Conservative Temperature (CT) while the lower left panels show Potential Enthalpy (h^O).

The CT and h^O have the same pattern because they are in thermodynamic proportion (Patterns: Conservative Temperature & Potential Enthalpy - 2).

The upper right and lower right panels on Fig. 3a and Fig. 4a depict a different type of proportion.

The upper right Maximum Density and the lower right Absolute Salinity are opposites in proportion in the sense that when one goes up the other goes down.

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

The Ghost Photons

Fig. 1 Let's Not Be Too Expansive

I. Where Da Thermo At?

In my last post I wrote about those who have not yet figured out that ocean heat content (OHC) and ocean heat flux (OHF) are about thermodynamics in general and potential enthalpy in particular (The Warming Science Commentariat - 13).

Thermodynamics must be respected if the research or subsequent paper is to be respectable.

"[Classical Thermodynamics]  is the only physical theory of universal content which I am convinced will never be overthrown, within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts" (Albert Einstein, cf. Water Structure and Science).

Two fundamentals concerning the nature of water are generally ignored in the OHC/OHF discourse of the Warming Science Commentariat (WSC).

One is the half-truth that water always expands when heat is added to it.

That is a half-truth because water also shrinks when heat is added to it.

In the real world of thermodynamics that Einstein was quoted on just above, whether water expands or contracts when heat is added to it depends on the temperature of the water when that heat is added (Fig. 1).

When the water temperature in question is less than the maximum density temperature (4 deg. C for fresh water, less for seawater) adding heat moves the water's density toward its maximum density.

In other words, adding heat will shrink (condense) that mass-unit of water; and if you remove heat from that mass-unit of water it will expand.

Only when the water's temperature is at or above the maximum density temperature will water expand if heat is added (Fig. 1).

II. The Zeroth Law & The Second Law

The "zeroth" law of thermodynamics is even more applicable to OHC and OHF than the popular half-truth mentioned above in Section I:

"The Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics states that two bodies in contact

Fig. 2 H₂O obeys the Laws of Thermodynamics

will come to the same temperature
...
The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us about the direction of processes ... a hot coffee gets colder if it is let to stand—it never gets hotter
...
There is only one way in which the entropy of a supposedly closed system can be decreased, and that is to transfer heat from the system ... "

(Water Structure and Science, cf. Science of Doom). The long and short of it is that hot flows to cold, warmer flows to cooler, and OHC & OHF are governed by the laws of thermodynamics.

The fact that heat entering the ocean will eventually and spontaneously flow in the direction of any cooler water it makes contact with, until equilibrium is attained, is also forgotten or ignored in current oceanography discourse.

The stars of the OHC & OHF show are ocean currents, and in Hollywood science the stars steal the show.

III. The Infrared Photons 

But what if two bodies like the Sun and the Earth are not in physical contact, what happens between them in terms of temperature and heat?

Fig. 3 OHC & OHF @ Equatorial Hadopelagic

Radiation via photons "happens" between them.

Like the ghost water and the ghost plumes, the photons (the quanta of electromagnetic radiation) do not appear (are unseen) in the bulk of the WSC literature.

And those photons are unseen in the deep ocean waters where visible light (photons in the "visible" spectrum) is generally absent, nevertheless in those deep dark regions photons of the infrared spectrum spontaneously flow from warmer molecules to cooler molecules of seawater, whether observed or not (Fig. 2).

I repeat: that flow of the photons in the infrared spectrum is spontaneous, i.e., not caused by the advent of external energy.

That flow of photons is also invisible to the human eye which sees only photons of the visible spectrum (red up to violet).

But that flow is not invisible to instruments used in oceanography to measure the temperature and heat changes as the infrared photons move from place to place (Fig. 3).

The photons are good citizens, so the relevant laws of thermodynamics are obeyed even when no one is watching.

IV. Closing Comments

Regular readers know that I have been proving, and then using, what the experts have been urging us to do in the study of OHC and OHF.

For example, one expert that has spoken loud and clear has pointed out:

"These results prove that potential enthalpy is the quantity whose advection and diffusion is equivalent to advection and diffusion of “heat” in the ocean. That is, it is proven that to very high accuracy, the first law of thermodynamics in the ocean is the conservation equation of potential enthalpy ... A new temperature variable called “conservative temperature” is advanced that is simply proportional to potential enthalpy ... present ocean models contain typical errors of 0.1°C and maximum errors of 1.4°C in their temperature because of the neglect of the nonconservative production of potential temperature. The meridional flux of heat through oceanic sections found using this conservative approach is different by up to 0.4% from that calculated by the approach used in present ocean models in which the nonconservative nature of potential temperature is ignored and the specific heat at the sea surface is assumed to be constant."

"(Potential Enthalpy: A Conservative Oceanic Variable for Evaluating Heat Content and Heat Fluxes, emphasis added; cf. Fig. 3). Those concepts are now in the official software and documents of the Thermodynamic Equation Of Seawater - 2010 (TEOS-10).

These concepts have been fully adopted by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission.

So WSC, it is time for you to get out there and bust the ghost.

The next post in this series is here.