Posted On: Monday - December 19th 2016 9:13AM MST
In Topics: Global Climate Stupidity
(Continuation of Part 3, which should be just below.)
The hot bar soldering process analysis has been broken up by the writer, though the researcher working on it years back would probably have more to add.
Anyway, with the 3 modes of heat transfer that were modeled, only one of which is based on very accurate theory, the interrelated parts must be put together. The non-technical reader is asked to believe us here, that, no, the problems can NOT be solved separately. Temperature at a part's surface is determined via conduction, but then the convection and radiation transfer not only DEPEND on that temperature, but also "AFFECT" that temperature, and etc. Cause and effect go two ways here, so the model must simultaneously solve the math for all modes (Oh, and don't forget transience, or modelling the process over time.)
When put together, the model will generally produce a lot of garbage data, even with very good models of the individual processes. Then, much "tweaking" and comparison to experimental data must be done to fix unforseen problems in the math.
OK, to compare now to a model of the world's climate, this soldering process sounds, say, at first glance to a mechanical engineering student studying heat-transfer, to be a piece of cake, but it's not. Compare that to all the things (physical processes) going on with the earth's energy transfer and balance that I described in Post 2 as just a start).
I also described in Post 2 how there are many processes, that must be part of the model, that are either not even known to exist or were not considered at all. For my friend's research, he had to learn about "thermal contact resistance" and include that. This is the variation of heat transfer across a boundary of 2 solids. A good example of this concept is that of walking barefoot across a WalMart parking lot one July day. Try it! At least on the rough pavement, not all of your feet's surfaces touch rock and tar. Then, get on a really smooth part (same exact material) and you're gonna be screaming and hopping around after a few seconds. (unless you've been barefoot the whole summer like I have!) There is a pressure-dependent element too, which must be known accurately to be part of the math model. This thermal resistance at the boundary also had been mostly studied empirically. That is just one of possibly more (forgotten since the years have gone by) processes that were not initially regarded as important to a good analysis of the "simple" hot-bar soldering temperature fields.
Compare the idea in the above paragraph with what would be required to be included in any working climate model. Are they missing anything? Wouldn't the causes of the ice ages be really damn important to know, given that the changes are so high compared to what these current models are allegedly forecastng? Yes, they would. Do these alleged models purport to tell us about the next one? Really, enquiring minds really want to know. The scientists must have just forgotten to tell us. Even on a smaller scale, are all the physical processes involved known accurately.
See the unfortunate thing is, an entire model of the climate can not be tested versus experiments. We only have observation, and so far the output that said "no more snow, sell your snow blower on ebay before the next guy!" and "more hurricanes, batten down the hatches, get over to Lowes for more plywood!" 10 years back have not really panned out, in my humble, 2-ft-snow-bound, rotting-10-year-old-plywood-in-the-garaged opinion.
Now, take El Nino, and La Nina, puhleeeze. Wait .....
writing ... too fast ..... more .......... to ..... come....... about this ............ tomorr ...... ohhh ...... must ...... take ........ shower ........... [/Captain Kirk]
Comments: