Silly facts two (Update)
Scroll down to go on reading my ‘Silly facts two’ comments about ‘The 3rd Electric Universe Conference’ lecture by Pierre Latour, ‘Engineering Earth’s Thermostat with CO2?|EU2014’
‘Silly facts two, I will update this post soon, but for now, just watch these crops and check quickly in the webpages.’
Let me start with two images, one directly related to the earthquakes, and the other to write about in forthcoming posts about computers, screen resolutions, Android (and others)’s graphics translations and graphics distortion among all these step fixed nowadays widely used system of graphics intervals and resolutions. I am forgetting something important… Oh, two, the number two -> this one ->2, is a natural harmonics series value for any type of waveform, and it does not matter if you multiply or divide by, whether you like it or not…
(12) Science three.
This man leaves totally out of his reasoning the carbonic acid, which is a result of water and CO2 natural (pssst, thus EXOTHERMIC) reaction. So, CO2 becomes an acid and this makes the sea, THE SEA, that despicable part of water in our planet, much more acid and… regardless of other considerations, changes its pH. I think there is a bit of confusion with this also.
Usually people associate pH with acidity, without having a clear idea of what those numbers refer to, thus the normal average dude who has not to think very much far from where or on what to spend their time and | or money, may have the erroneous idea that an increase in the pH number means water is becoming more acid, whereas it works exactly the opposite way:
pH is something good when it is properly understood because it gives the number of the negative power in base ten of the molar concentration of any solution or dissolution, that is to say if you have a concentration of hydrogen (that is what the H in pH stands for) moles of 10 ^ -1, its pH will be 1 and hydrogen concentration is greater than that of pH 2, being this 10 ^ -2 moles of [H] hydrogen. If you don’t understand this, TRUST ME, it is so. Hence, among 1 and 12 which are the minimum-maximum values considered in pH (or its opposite pOH, being this basicity solutions and dissolutions scale; 2 H2O-> H2 + 2 OH), the higher the number, the less acid the solution | dissolution is. And this is not everybody’s knowledge, nor way of normally inferring things, being the natural way of average, thinking an increase means an increase, not a decrease.
Once you know water, any type of, salty, seawater, still water, fizzy water… and watery dissolutions and solutions are dissolving bedrock much faster all over the world. And karst formations, being these the dissolution of rocks effects, have grown much bigger. Do you still think CO2 does not affect our natural habitat?
Solubility decreases, that is true, but being CO2 heavier than O2 or nitrogen, it sticks to the ocean’s surface and becomes carbonic acid releasing heat into both the ocean (or any other source or current of water) and the atmosphere.
(13) Science four.
Well, as this is a technical issue, I will provide some technical images first and then I will make a brief comment about all of them.
Long lengthwaves transmit-translate-transfer-create HEAT. Visible light spectra goes in order of nanometers, that’s one thousand times tinier than microns, thus microns are infrared band lenghtwave length units. Watch these images carefully and think a bit about it.
(14) Science five.
Ahem… Have you ever heard about gravity, gases’ laws, thin layers, the Earth and the atmosphere? No?
(15) Science six.
(A bit of irony for the sake of non-non-sensitiveness).
Well, of course the last quarter of the past century had nothing to do with that ‘natural’ CO2 increase of 0.6 (that’s 0,6 in Spanish decimal mark notation), while half of the world was going through both the exponential growth of vehicles and fuels industries, and postwar recovery of every type of equipments and materials…
(16) Science seven.
This man who’s given this lecture I am commenting, besides being a PhD, has worked in various types of modeling, including computers’ modeling systems, and THERMORREGULATED AUTOMATED CONTROL AND MONITORING PROCESSES AND SYSTEMS. And either he knows perfectly he is lying about all previous equations (which I don’t believe it is the case) and he is as insane as to risk the whole world’s (deployed networks and automatons’ systems) and his own survival, or he is really convinced of what he was taught and checked via passing his exams, at the university in which he was taught physics and chemistry, knowledge on which he gave this lecture in March the 24th last year (2014).
a) He is talking about ice and temperature, believe it or not, nuclear technologies engineers have been taught and pass their exams accordingly absolute zero is 0 degrees Centigrade. There is an absolute difference in starting point calculations of 273.15, I know I told you before, but I am just repeating it. ICE in SEAWATER FREEZING POINT EQUALS -28 degrees Centigrade , -34 degrees Farenheit, 245.15 degrees Kelvin.
b) As he is convinced of the errors he was taught at university, he is just trying to convince people by using some dialectical tactics as saying it is surroundings already warm what melts ice and not temperature change on its surroundings.
c) Isaac Newton’s ‘Principia’, the book in which he himself explained some of his new way of understanding mathematics and calculating operations, base the calculi on variations between initial and final states, being this variation called, delta, increase, decrease… the abstraction is to consider an interval (or some intervals) for functions (processes) graphical representations. When initial and final states are very, very small on the input side they are called infinitesimals, this is used to resolve limits calculations that otherwise are as pure functions indeterminate, such as dividing by zero, or dividing by infinite, or have an infinite as an exponent in power calculations. You can think of it as ‘almost zero’, ‘almost one’, ‘almost infinite’, ‘almost any-number’, that is why in limits calculi there are left and right approaches to the point | number being the object for function studies. So in this case he is TOTALLY WRONG.
(I’ll publish this now, don’t you miss my ‘Silly Facts Three Post’…)