Nickel Hydrogen battery

On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:53:03 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:45:57 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:18:48 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:09:14 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:49:43 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 7:43:13 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:20:12 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 3:18:11 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 2:29:08 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 1:50:34 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 

<snip>

> > > The warming is coming from the IR excited by sunlight, not the sunlight itself. It's the re-radiation effect that's responsible for insulating the Earth against radiating that IR into space. 
> > Learn some physics. That's meaningless word salad.
>
> Does broad spectrum sunlight have IR in significant amount? 

The Sun is  a black body radiator at about 5800K so it contains a lot of IR - about half the energy comes out at wavelengths longer than we can see.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight

> It's the excitation of atoms by visible sunlight that produces the heat.

Actually the excitation of molecular vibrations. The only atoms in  the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases, mostly argon at 0.93% and none of them absorb in the visible.

Condensed mater has a much broader absorbtion spectrum than atmospheric gases.

> Looks like a light to heat conversion process to me.

You really do need to learn some physics. "Heat" is energy. Light interacting with matter does deposit energy in that matter, but optical photons are just another form of energy.

> > > What are some of the other mechanisms for dissipating atmospheric CO2 besides photosynthesis? 
> > Weathering silicate rocks to carbonate. One entirely practical scheme to combat anthropogenic global warming involved digging up olivine, crushing it and spreading it on beaches, river-banks and fields where it would be damp enough to react with CO2. 
> > 
> > In the oceans phytoplankton could do the job. Some micro-organisms grow carbonate shells which sink to the bottom of the ocean when they die. Giving them the right trace nutrients to get more of them would help too.

> That mineral stuff takes forever. 

But if you enlarge the surface area by crushing it, a shorter period of "forever".

https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=73520

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:53:03 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:45:57 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:18:48 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:09:14 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:49:43 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 7:43:13 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:20:12 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 3:18:11 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 2:29:08 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 1:50:34 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > The warming is coming from the IR excited by sunlight, not the sunlight itself. It's the re-radiation effect that's responsible for insulating the Earth against radiating that IR into space. 
> > > Learn some physics. That's meaningless word salad. 
> > 
> > Does broad spectrum sunlight have IR in significant amount?
> The Sun is a black body radiator at about 5800K so it contains a lot of IR - about half the energy comes out at wavelengths longer than we can see. 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight
> > It's the excitation of atoms by visible sunlight that produces the heat.
> Actually the excitation of molecular vibrations. The only atoms in the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases, mostly argon at 0.93% and none of them absorb in the visible. 

So what is it about molecules that makes the excitation so much more energetic than that of the individual atoms alone?

> 
> Condensed mater has a much broader absorbtion spectrum than atmospheric gases.
> > Looks like a light to heat conversion process to me.
> You really do need to learn some physics. "Heat" is energy. Light interacting with matter does deposit energy in that matter, but optical photons are just another form of energy.
> > > > What are some of the other mechanisms for dissipating atmospheric CO2 besides photosynthesis? 
> > > Weathering silicate rocks to carbonate. One entirely practical scheme to combat anthropogenic global warming involved digging up olivine, crushing it and spreading it on beaches, river-banks and fields where it would be damp enough to react with CO2. 
> > >
> > > In the oceans phytoplankton could do the job. Some micro-organisms grow carbonate shells which sink to the bottom of the ocean when they die. Giving them the right trace nutrients to get more of them would help too.
> > That mineral stuff takes forever.
> But if you enlarge the surface area by crushing it, a shorter period of "forever". 
> 
> https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=73520 
> 
> -- 
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 12:48:27 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:53:03 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:45:57 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:18:48 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:09:14 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:49:43 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 7:43:13 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:20:12 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 3:18:11 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 2:29:08 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 1:50:34 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > <snip> 
> > > > > The warming is coming from the IR excited by sunlight, not the sunlight itself. It's the re-radiation effect that's responsible for insulating the Earth against radiating that IR into space. 
> > > > Learn some physics. That's meaningless word salad. 
> > > 
> > > Does broad spectrum sunlight have IR in significant amount? 
> >
> > The Sun is a black body radiator at about 5800K so it contains a lot of IR - about half the energy comes out at wavelengths longer than we can see. 
> > 
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight 
> >
> > > It's the excitation of atoms by visible sunlight that produces the heat. 
> > Actually the excitation of molecular vibrations. The only atoms in the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases, mostly argon at 0.93% and none of them absorb in the visible.
>
> So what is it about molecules that makes the excitation so much more energetic than that of the individual atoms alone?

Molecules are made up of atoms. Because the atoms are bonded, the bonds can stretch and compress and these vibrations store energy.

There's nothing peculiarly energetic about them - single atoms are confined to absorbing and storing energy by electronic excitations, which tend to be more energetic and correspondingly harder to excite and shorter lived.

Your problem seems to be that you don't have any kind of detailed grasp of what is going on, and persistently make bizarre and unhelpful distinctions.

> > Condensed mater has a much broader absorbtion spectrum than atmospheric gases. 
> >
> > > Looks like a light to heat conversion process to me. 
> >
> > You really do need to learn some physics. "Heat" is energy. Light interacting with matter does deposit energy in that matter, but optical photons are just another form of energy. 
> >
> > > > > What are some of the other mechanisms for dissipating atmospheric CO2 besides photosynthesis? 
> > > >
> > > > Weathering silicate rocks to carbonate. One entirely practical scheme to combat anthropogenic global warming involved digging up olivine, crushing it and spreading it on beaches, river-banks and fields where it would be damp enough to react with CO2. 
> > > > 
> > > > In the oceans phytoplankton could do the job. Some micro-organisms grow carbonate shells which sink to the bottom of the ocean when they die. Giving them the right trace nutrients to get more of them would help too. 
> > >
> > > That mineral stuff takes forever. 
> >
> > But if you enlarge the surface area by crushing it, a shorter period of "forever". 
> > 
> > https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=73520 
 
-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On 9/29/2023 10:30 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

<snip>
> 
> The Sun is  a black body radiator at about 5800K so it contains a lot of IR - about half the energy comes out at wavelengths longer than we can see.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight
> 
>> It's the excitation of atoms by visible sunlight that produces the heat.
> 
> Actually the excitation of molecular vibrations.

> The only atoms in  the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases, 
mostly argon at 0.93% and none of them absorb in the visible.
> 
What do you actually mean? The statement is wrong. You have something
in mind different that what you said. Some kind of ellipsis at work here.

Ed

On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 11:16:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 12:48:27 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:53:03 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:45:57 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:18:48 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:09:14 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:49:43 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 7:43:13 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:20:12 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 3:18:11 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 2:29:08 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 1:50:34 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > <snip> 
> > > > > > The warming is coming from the IR excited by sunlight, not the sunlight itself. It's the re-radiation effect that's responsible for insulating the Earth against radiating that IR into space. 
> > > > > Learn some physics. That's meaningless word salad. 
> > > > 
> > > > Does broad spectrum sunlight have IR in significant amount? 
> > > 
> > > The Sun is a black body radiator at about 5800K so it contains a lot of IR - about half the energy comes out at wavelengths longer than we can see. 
> > > 
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight 
> > > 
> > > > It's the excitation of atoms by visible sunlight that produces the heat. 
> > > Actually the excitation of molecular vibrations. The only atoms in the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases, mostly argon at 0.93% and none of them absorb in the visible. 
> > 
> > So what is it about molecules that makes the excitation so much more energetic than that of the individual atoms alone?
> Molecules are made up of atoms. Because the atoms are bonded, the bonds can stretch and compress and these vibrations store energy. 
> 
> There's nothing peculiarly energetic about them - single atoms are confined to absorbing and storing energy by electronic excitations, which tend to be more energetic and correspondingly harder to excite and shorter lived. 
> 
> Your problem seems to be that you don't have any kind of detailed grasp of what is going on, and persistently make bizarre and unhelpful distinctions.

The subject matter is not that deep.

> > > Condensed mater has a much broader absorbtion spectrum than atmospheric gases. 
> > > 
> > > > Looks like a light to heat conversion process to me. 
> > > 
> > > You really do need to learn some physics. "Heat" is energy. Light interacting with matter does deposit energy in that matter, but optical photons are just another form of energy. 
> > > 
> > > > > > What are some of the other mechanisms for dissipating atmospheric CO2 besides photosynthesis? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Weathering silicate rocks to carbonate. One entirely practical scheme to combat anthropogenic global warming involved digging up olivine, crushing it and spreading it on beaches, river-banks and fields where it would be damp enough to react with CO2. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > In the oceans phytoplankton could do the job. Some micro-organisms grow carbonate shells which sink to the bottom of the ocean when they die. Giving them the right trace nutrients to get more of them would help too. 
> > > > 
> > > > That mineral stuff takes forever. 
> > > 
> > > But if you enlarge the surface area by crushing it, a shorter period of "forever". 
> > > 
> > > https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=73520 
> 
> -- 
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 8:36:53 AM UTC+10, ehsjr wrote:
> On 9/29/2023 10:30 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> 
> <snip> 
> >
> > The Sun is a black body radiator at about 5800K so it contains a lot of IR - about half the energy comes out at wavelengths longer than we can see. 
> > 
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight 
> > 
> >> It's the excitation of atoms by visible sunlight that produces the heat. 
> > 
> > Actually the excitation of molecular vibrations. 
> 
> > The only atoms in the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases, mostly argon at 0.93% and none of them absorb in the visible. 
> >
> What do you actually mean? The statement is wrong.

The only single atoms in the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases. The nitrogen and oxygen atoms are present as diatomic molecules.

They don't get excited by visible sunlight either.

> You have something  in mind different that what you said. 

You seems to have something different in mind from what I said, and you need to spell it out.

> Some kind of ellipsis at work here. 

ellipsis
/&#618;&#712;l&#618;ps&#618;s/
noun
noun: ellipsis; plural noun: ellipses

    the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues.
    "it is very rare for an ellipsis to occur without a linguistic antecedent"
        a set of dots (&hellip;) indicating an ellipsis.


Fred Bloggs didn't seem to understand the difference between atoms and molecules which it comes to absorbing solar radiation. Isolated atoms can't do it on their own.

Molecules have vibrational and rotational modes that can be excited by visible light and the longer wavelength near-infra-red that convey the other half of the sun's output to us.

Condensed matter is essentially molecular, in that the atoms in it interact fairly strongly and have vibrational modes that can be excited by incident radiation.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 10:54:34 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 11:16:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 12:48:27 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:53:03 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:45:57 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 10:18:48 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 8:09:14 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:49:43 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 7:43:13 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:20:12 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 3:18:11 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 2:29:08 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 1:50:34 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > <snip> 
> > > > > > > The warming is coming from the IR excited by sunlight, not the sunlight itself. It's the re-radiation effect that's responsible for insulating the Earth against radiating that IR into space. 
> > > > > > Learn some physics. That's meaningless word salad. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Does broad spectrum sunlight have IR in significant amount? 
> > > > 
> > > > The Sun is a black body radiator at about 5800K so it contains a lot of IR - about half the energy comes out at wavelengths longer than we can see. 
> > > > 
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight 
> > > > 
> > > > > It's the excitation of atoms by visible sunlight that produces the heat. 
> > > > Actually the excitation of molecular vibrations. The only atoms in the earth's atmosphere are the inert gases, mostly argon at 0.93% and none of them absorb in the visible. 
> > > 
> > > So what is it about molecules that makes the excitation so much more energetic than that of the individual atoms alone? 
> > Molecules are made up of atoms. Because the atoms are bonded, the bonds can stretch and compress and these vibrations store energy. 
> > 
> > There's nothing peculiarly energetic about them - single atoms are confined to absorbing and storing energy by electronic excitations, which tend to be more energetic and correspondingly harder to excite and shorter lived. 
> > 
> > Your problem seems to be that you don't have any kind of detailed grasp of what is going on, and persistently make bizarre and unhelpful distinctions.
>
> The subject matter is not that deep.

But deep enough that you clearly haven't immersed yourself in it.

> > > > Condensed mater has a much broader absorbtion spectrum than atmospheric gases. 
> > > > 
> > > > > Looks like a light to heat conversion process to me. 
> > > > 
> > > > You really do need to learn some physics. "Heat" is energy. Light interacting with matter does deposit energy in that matter, but optical photons are just another form of energy. 

<snip>

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney