Submitted by Rear-gunner t3_1085n05 in Futurology
Sleepdprived t1_j3ru727 wrote
No! There are other better ways! We need solar radiation for life on earth its the HEAT we have a problem with
ialsoagree t1_j3sk40g wrote
Fyi, solar radiation is converted to heat in earth.
This wouldn't eliminate the earth receiving solar radiation, it would just reduce the amount we receive.
Sleepdprived t1_j3snrss wrote
We can use the solar radiation and expel heat more efficiently. We should not block out life giving sun light
ialsoagree t1_j3sprcy wrote
This doesn't follow. If you capture the light, you generate heat proportional to the energy captured.
If you don't want the heat, you have to prevent the light from reaching the surface.
Sleepdprived t1_j3sqd85 wrote
You oversimplify. We can reject heat at a more efficient rate by aiming for the absorption gap in the infra red spectrum. Heat at that frequency best escapes earth, moving heat in this manner can give us better efficiency.
ialsoagree t1_j3sr0ya wrote
Lol, I didn't over simplify, you did.
How do you plan to covert the earth's heat to a specific IR wavelength?
And how do you plan to do that in a way that's more efficient than simply blocking high energy UV or visible light from passing through the atmosphere to begin with?
Sleepdprived t1_j3sxqkf wrote
By using the heat conductive properties of water I will pull heat out of the oceans and beam it into space. This may not be as efficient but it doesn't require changing our atmospheric chemistry and change the energy that supports the bottom of our food chain.
It takes a certain amount of energy to create.heat, the amount of energy it takes to MOVE that heat is a fraction of that, and depending on how you collect and reject energy you can get efficiency better than 1.
This means we could COOL the oceans with a tiny fraction of the energy it took to HEAT it to the same degree.
I am already having this argument with other redditors so forgive my exhaustion on the subject.
ialsoagree t1_j3sza05 wrote
You didn't address my question.
I'm aware that heat pumps exist. I asked you how you plan to change the IR frequency of that heat.
Sleepdprived t1_j3t4mey wrote
Nano textured materials. It has to be the right "color" NM infra red, then it will expell heat at the wavelength frequency that best escapes the absorbtion spectrum.
If you are aware of heat pumps having efficiency over 1, then you know that while the sunlight would be able to heat 1 unit per calorie, if we could move 50 calories with the 1 unit of power.
The same 1 unit of power moving heat more efficiently means we don't have to alter our light spectrum or jeopardize our atmosphere. We are trying to get nature to do something it ALREADY wants to do, like pushing a ball downhill or getting cold water to sink.
If we oxygenate the dead zones we can u do so.eof the damage already caused to our ecosystem. If we make it so plankton breeds better, and stabilize plankton ecosystems, they will process more co2 out of the atmosphere, if we have more plankton we can use curre t dead zones escapes to expand mariculture and feed people... the synergistic benefits make it a better option than blocking our own life giving sun.
ialsoagree t1_j3t74xw wrote
Can you link me to a nanotexture material that increases the wavelength of IR light just by passing the light through it?
Heat pumps have efficiencies greater than 1 when moving heat on Earth, not into space.
You moved heat from one place to another (and generated some heat to do it), cool, now what?
Heat pumps don't produce light, they heat up a radiator and then blow air over the radiator, so you have to find a way to extract ambient heat from the radiator (energy intensive), then convert the light to a different wavelength (I'm assuming using some kind of stimulated emission process - again, energy intensive - which might help you with the next challenge), and then release that light directly out toward the atmosphere, probably with a laser. Plus you can't do it on cloudy days because of the broader IR absorption/reflection.
And you have to do all that more efficiently than just reflecting UV and visible light back into space.
I look forward to your Nobel prize winning research as you're either a genius in your field of physics, or you have no idea the technological challenges of your idea.
Sleepdprived t1_j3ticrw wrote
So... imagine a nano texture. The light it gives off Is the wavelengths of visible light let's say green. The texture is such that light reflected from it is the wavelength of the texture of the surface. The nano texture is shaped to bounce off 620 NM or deep red. Now we are going to change the texture and therefore the color. We space out the texture to the I frame red wavelength above 780 NM.
You were talking about emitting light, but it is already infra red light emitting from hot objects such as a condenser panel shedding heat. The idea I'd to shed heat to a synch that emits the light at that frequency that best escapes.
How do we controll nano texture?
Soundwave. Place sand on a amplifier and tune it to the right frequency and you can co troll the shape of the sand on top.
We are going smaller. We have to use a different gas mixture than air, and use harmonic resonance to make the particles in the top of a rapidly cooling metal "dance" Into self organized resonant patterns like the sand. We have to "tune" the resonance to the correct infra red "color" the cooling substance keeps this surface texture.
When we shine light through colored glass the light coming out the end matches the light of the glass. Infra red heat light will naturally expell through the texture at the correct wavelength like the light through the filter. Just as built up infra red heat builds up and expresses as actual visible light in "red hot" materials, so too does the nano textured material shine the infra red "color" brightly. The wavelengths vibrate most optimally through the atmosphere up into space.
We target the heat in the oceans because that water has already collected many joules of heat, and the heat transmission through water is much more efficient than through the air. We will likely push some of that heat Into the ambient air, but the main goal is to penetrate the atmosphere without exiting it more.
ialsoagree t1_j3tluow wrote
You fundamentally don't understand light emission, absorption, or reflection.
A material can't reflect light of a given wavelength if that wavelength is never hitting it. Reflection doesn't generate light, it just bounced the light that is there.
Emission generates light. To emit a wavelength higher than what the material is exposed to requires that heat be extracted from the material. This never happens except when a heat source is allowed to heat the material (which means you're emitting light from heat you created, not from ambient conditions) or as a result of a chemical reaction, like a glow stick.
To emit light of a lower frequency than what the material is exposed to requires vibrational relaxation, this is how heat becomes trapped on earth and means that less energy is being released from the material than it absorbed.
The earth can already release lower wavelength IR by covering it to radio waves through vibrational relaxation. You need to find a way to INCREASE the frequency of IR. How do you do that?
Sleepdprived t1_j3tn8sb wrote
Fine I'll use vanta white paint to reflect 99.99% of light on the condenser unit and make it out of marble which is below ambient temp anyways,
I know you also agree. Couldn't find the other video that explained how the radiant infrared panels... already exist. This one mentions them, and other power free cooling with aero gel.
Here is a short one on the panels existing ... 9 years old.
And another!
Hey its like this Info is easily available!
ialsoagree t1_j3tqqgw wrote
If you feel like you're being picked on or something, I apologize, that's not my intent. I'm trying to provide you information to help you learn. I think you're fundamentally not understanding how these things work. For example, you said:
>reflect 99.99% of light on the condenser unit
The radiator - what I assume you meant - is emitting only a very tiny fraction of the overall heat as IR. Most of that heat is being transferred to the air via vibrations. This is because electrons much MUCH prefer to share their energy by bumping into things than by emitting light.
Let's take a step back.
"Temperature" is a measure of the total motion of the particles in an atom, especially the electrons where the vast majority of the motion is happening. So when we talk about "heat" and "temperature" what we really mean is "how much energy the electrons have."
Quantum mechanics gets it's name because electrons can't absorb just any energy. They have to absorb specific amounts of energy. When we talk about the energy that an electron can absorb as being non-continuous (IE. not any amount, only specific amounts) we refer to this is "quantizing." We are quantizing the amount of energy an electron can absorb, and saying that any quantities not of these specific quantities won't be absorbed.
That's where quantum mechanics gets it's name.
Photons are modeled in our system of physics two ways. One is as a particle called a photon. This is a fixed quantity of energy, a quantized amount of energy. The other method is as a wave, which has a wavelength and frequency. A photon is both a particle and a wave, it has properties of both. The wavelength (which is inversely proportional to the frequency) defines the amount of energy the photon has. The two are directly related and you can't have a photon of different energy but the same wavelength. If it's wavelength is x, it's energy is y - ALWAYS.
For an electron to absorb a photon, the photon has to be of one of the specific wavelengths it wants to absorb (it has to be the correct quantized amount of energy).
Once absorbed, the electron has 2 ways of getting rid of it:
- Emit it back out - same energy released, same wavelength.
- Vibrationally relax - bump into nearby electrons, give them some of the energy they absorbed.
Once 2 happens, the electron can no longer emit that same wavelength of light - it doesn't have that energy anymore. It can emit a longer wavelength of light (less energy), but it gave some of the energy to another electron, so it can't emit the same energy it absorbed.
For reasons I won't get into, electrons overwhelmingly prefer option 2. Option 2 is faster, it's less "violent" to the electron, it makes everything easier.
Option 1 only happens in extreme circumstances - usually when option 1 isn't available after a relatively long wait (think nanoseconds for option 2, and 1-2 seconds for option 1).
This is why a radiator won't emit IR radiation of a wavelength matching it's temperature. It'd much rather just bump into the air and warm the air up. And this is why heat pumps can warm your home, versus just shooting a bunch of IR light around while you're freezing.
You have to find a way to take that radiator, get it to emit IR light, and get that IR light to be of a frequency that will pass through the atmosphere (probably using some kind of stimulation to increase the frequency).
But that's not all you have to do. You then have to emit that light very specifically away from the Earth (if it just emits everywhere - not in a straight line like a laser - it'll hit trees and the ground and water and just get absorbed again).
This is a technologically monumental task, and one that is going to require massive amounts of energy (almost certainly more than you can emit in the laser).
Sleepdprived t1_j3ttjic wrote
Did you watch any of the fournlinks to videos or radiant heat I edited in? This is the first you should watch and the best describing the phenomenon.
So the panel is constantly editing infra red light or heat. It is colder than what's around it because it is better at making that light so it absorbes vibrating heat around it and organizes it into the waveform that best escapes. So we make refrigeration loops, that collect heat from the deep water, then organize and concentrate that heat expelling it Into the cold panels (heat exchanger) that emit the light.
I'm not crazy this stuff already exists.
ialsoagree t1_j3tuu0x wrote
Yes, I watched and responded.
Increasing the albedo of the Earth is good - it's the same thing these particles are trying to do.
But there's not enough surface area on every house in the world for you to even make up for the albedo loss of just ice melting. In other words, installing this material on every house in every country on the planet will still result in more sunlight being absorbed than is being reflected right now, because the ice that's melting reflects more light than houses can.
Sleepdprived t1_j3txb50 wrote
This system would allow the efficient rejection of heat into space day and night, the aerosolized particles will only cover day side. These aerosol particles will also fall and need to be replaced, they will also effect life on earth as life on earth Injests them. We watch cancer rates raise daily as it is.
You asked for proof and I provided at least two videos on how what I was talking about was possible.
Explains exactly what I was talking about for transferring the heat, but I want to make aerogel or the metal the vantawhite color using harmonic resonance to make the nano texture.
I am done arguing.
ialsoagree t1_j3ua6dm wrote
Again, you have a fundamental misunderstanding.
This is why you shouldn't get science from YouTube videos.
Sleepdprived t1_j3tq5or wrote
Oh the original video I was looking for an embarassment of riches!
ialsoagree t1_j3tspae wrote
Video 1 is complete nonsense.
The heat in your home is of a continuous wavelength (it'll be of all IR bands). You might have some material that can convert higher IR wavelengths to lower ones and then emit those, but it still kept some of the energy.
It can't convert lower wavelengths to higher ones (where is the energy coming from to do this!?).
But there's an entirely different problem. The ambient air is ALSO emitting all wavelengths of IR radiation. So while the panels may emit light of a particular wavelength, they're also absorbing it from the air. So the net exchange of energy is 0. In fact, the panels will likely absorb some of the heat, causing them to warm, and trapping more heat in your home.
If your house is the same temperature as the outdoors, you can't just "move" the heat from inside to outside without expending energy, no matter what you tape to your roof.
In the second video, they're talking about reflecting SUNLIGHT.
That's exactly the same process that emitting particulates in the atmosphere hope to accomplish. The only difference is, emitting particulates in the atmosphere can do it over a much much larger area, and do it above the cloud layer (EDIT: there's also a bunch of potential problems with emitting particulates that I haven't mentioned but exist).
So while you can put something on your roof to reflect UV and visible light (increasing the Earth's Albedo), the total surface area of the rooves of homes across the planet is much much much smaller than the surface area of ice on Earth - which is melting.
All of this is to say, while helpful to reflect more sunlight from our rooves, even doing this on every roof in the world won't even make up for the lost Albedo of ice melting (the Earth will still be absorbing more light than it reflects, even after you spend the trillions to install this everywhere).
Sleepdprived t1_j3tqzq3 wrote
Is my point t made?
[deleted] t1_j3uyxgo wrote
[deleted]
orincoro t1_j3sxw5n wrote
The earth receives far more sunlight than plants or animals need to survive and thrive. Reducing solar insolation by a few percent will have zero impact on life.
ErstwhileAdranos t1_j3vmxh1 wrote
“Zero impact” would be false. You can’t change something like that by “a few percent” and have a 0% change.
orincoro t1_j3vpzea wrote
Of course. Obviously we’d be doing it to lower temperatures and prevent climate collapse. I mean to say that it would not be harmful to life.
It would have no meaningful impact on the ability of any biosphere on Earth to function as it currently does. We get about 50% more sunlight than we need. The majority of that sunlight (and I mean the enormously overwhelming majority) is converted into ambient heat.
We know this because when the sun dims by several percent over the course of years, nothing happens on Earth, except global temperatures very slightly drop.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments