I say it again, that was a quote (from http://www.luisprada.com/protected/The_Sun_Is_Cold_I.htm) and not my words. I try to speak plainly. Here again: The space is much colder even when one is infront of the earth facing the sun. High up in earth's atmosphere, snow forms on the tallest mountains. Perhaps, we can hear the points of view from skydivers, hot air balloonists, etc. what they observe. It is obvious though that as you go higher in the atmosphere, temperature drops. Temperature can drop low enough that water vapor in the air begin to form ice crystals that become snow... Halley's comet observed to be made of ice and dust could have not survived several trips around a giant ball of nuclear furnace.
So photons are not hot. Heat we observe is generated. And the heat was not like the flame that is conducted to the surrounding objects. That means heat hitting us is not coming from a giant ball of flame. And what is your proof that because the sun has mass so it must be hot?
Actually no. When you go high in the atmosphere (above 70 miles or so) it gets very hot (above 160F.) Go a bit higher than that and get back to us. Yep. And when you go even higher it gets warmer again, since you are approaching space - and both the radiation and the solar wind from the sun is quite "hot." ("Hot" is in quotes because radiation in and of itself is not hot or cold.) It won't survive several more. The sun will boil away the rest of the ice, at which point it will be just a dark asteroid orbiting the Sun. That is the fate of any icy body closely orbiting a "nuclear furnace."
This is just silly. There's no arguing with a crank like this. His ignorance is not only broad, but it's deep. It's also willful, and thus unshakable and unteachable.
Giant Ball or Furnace? A furnace will most likely not conduct heat when encountering the near vacuum of space. Check how a thermos or a vacuum flasks works: "It turns out that there is an even better insulator than foam: a vacuum. A vacuum is a lack of atoms. A "perfect vacuum" contains zero atoms. It is nearly impossible to create a perfect vacuum, but you can get close. Without atoms you eliminate conduction and convection completely. ...What you find in a thermos is a glass envelope holding a vacuum. Inside a thermos is glass, and around the glass is a vacuum..." - http://home.howstuffworks.com/thermos2.htm Therefore, if the sun is a giant ball of furnace, the near vacuum (between it and the planets) will be an insulator that will prevent or eliminate conduction and convection completely. But this is not the case, because the generation of heat is of a different mechanism than most are assuming. One guy said the sun is giving off some kind of signal that jiggles the molecules and create heat thereof. I tend to agree with this common man's wisdom. Don't leave your common sense in favor of the pronouncement of someone brandishing his credentials as a NASA scientist. NASA - Never A Straight Answer
Is that what teachers were to you, is that why you dropped out in the 5th grade, or are you just pretending you never went to school?
The radiation is via waves or frequency. The molecules hit by the beams resonate, vibrate accordingly and heat is generated. In principle. it can be much like this sound/frequency generator where the source of waves is not hot but it burns salt water and kill cancer cells: http://youtu.be/aGg0ATfoBgo
Think of Neptune. There is presence of water on its surface. That means there is heat generation that is not relying on conduction via a giant ball of nuclear furnace, the sun is taught to be. Much nearer the sun, observe the icy crystal rings around Saturn. They do not melt whereas on Neptune's surface (which is further away) is a presence of melted ice. If you measure the heat on a kilometer square area somewhere on earth's surface and you project that energy towards Neptune, it will be insufficient because of the vacuum it will encounter and the distance involved, That means the creation of heat on the planets is much different than what we experience while watching a fireplace nearby.
Right. Since they are being ionized by the energy from the Sun they are pretty warm. Which sorta disproves your point, eh? Incorrect! The temperatures are quite high; far above 0C. Normal thermometers do not work because they radiate away too much energy. In the thermosphere? Nope - and neither have you. Again, incorrect. The TEMPERATURE is quite high; it can exceed 2000C during the day. The HEAT CONTENT is quite low due to the low density of the gases there. You are sort of digging yourself a hole here. You're making high school level physics mistakes.
A true vacuum does not CONDUCT any heat. However, as you mentioned, it is not a true vacuum; it is a near vacuum. In any case, most of the heat coming from the sun (and received here on Earth) is RADIATED not CONDUCTED. These are two different things. Consult the Wikipedia page on that if you don't know the difference. Yes! That "signal that jiggles the molecules" is also called "radiation." The blackbody radiation of the Sun is how we get most of the solar energy that is transmitted. Again, perhaps a Wikipedia page will clear things up for you. And read a bit before putting your foot in your mouth!
Why? Can you state the governing laws that predict this? And how do you properly state anything without being a slave of the machine you are so afraid of? Not even close. Explain how heat is transmitted from the filament to the glass envelope of a light bulb, which has had the air molecules removed.
Also that special ionized particle attains heat not because of a giant burning furnace, it is activated by resonant reaction to waves/frequency from the sun.
No need to be hurt. Detox away flouride from your pineal glands to regain your composure and your common sense. View again the video and see how frequency can create heat in certain materials without the source of frequency being a blazing furnace.
Are you blind? Have you seen the video yet, demonstrated and documented how frequency can burn while the source is cold? I don't have to create a formula or computation for that. Just watch it! Light bulbs contain inert gas, the oxygen were burned out to prevent oxidation of the filament and prolong the bulb life. Try putting the light bulb within a vacuum flask - that would be more comparable the immense distance of space that sun has with regards to the planets. Here: [video=youtube_share;MlOxGB8Pa1k]http://youtu.be/MlOxGB8Pa1k[/video]
Wait.. What the..? Don't encourage it!:spank: [HR][/HR] And your theory is tantamount to a version that could be found on My Lil' Pony. [HR][/HR] I'll ermm pass this thread on to the higher up's for a review. This is bad for even for this sub-forum.
