The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Is heat attracted to cold ?  (Read 1080 times)

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 46 times
    • View Profile
Is heat attracted to cold ?
« on: 20/07/2016 08:44:02 »
A heated rock will share its heat with a cold rock, why does the heat travel to the cold rock ?



 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 154
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #1 on: 20/07/2016 12:43:25 »
The heat source is a hole, the heat is and was never provident from the atomic structure but from the background, atoms and particles are the means to, the temperatures happens and belongs to dark energy, so why a hole is attracted to the other? The same reason why two holes in a water pool will always become one, "momentum"...
  Add a great attractor that is adding momentum to the universe sphere, and anything existing within the exited dark energy flow, will inevitable receive momentum, gravity, as consequence, the objective? Be pulled inside and towards the source of the movement, just like a cyclone....
 But in this scenario you have, local cyclonic, I mean local spheres of gravity, that grant you local momentum, picture the universe as large flat horizontal disk of a cyclone, with a sphere like black hole object in the middle adding heat, destroying matter, producing dark energy, giving it momentum, and the galaxies are medium cyclones, and the solar systems even smaller cyclones, but at the end all are the same event...
  Remove the heat from the rocks possession and attribute it to the background, will make kind of sense...
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3927
  • Thanked: 55 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #2 on: 21/07/2016 00:40:35 »
I could try to explain thermodynamics but it may be better if you read the following and ask questions about what you don't understand.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_energy
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1879
  • Thanked: 145 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #3 on: 21/07/2016 01:04:50 »
The heat source is a hole, the heat is and was never provident from the atomic structure but from the background, atoms and particles are the means to, the temperatures happens and belongs to dark energy, so why a hole is attracted to the other? The same reason why two holes in a water pool will always become one, "momentum"...
  Add a great attractor that is adding momentum to the universe sphere, and anything existing within the exited dark energy flow, will inevitable receive momentum, gravity, as consequence, the objective? Be pulled inside and towards the source of the movement, just like a cyclone....
 But in this scenario you have, local cyclonic, I mean local spheres of gravity, that grant you local momentum, picture the universe as large flat horizontal disk of a cyclone, with a sphere like black hole object in the middle adding heat, destroying matter, producing dark energy, giving it momentum, and the galaxies are medium cyclones, and the solar systems even smaller cyclones, but at the end all are the same event...
  Remove the heat from the rocks possession and attribute it to the background, will make kind of sense...

this is very interesting, but totally wrong... on so many levels...
 
The following users thanked this post: jeffreyH

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1921
  • Thanked: 125 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #4 on: 21/07/2016 09:02:10 »
this is very interesting, but totally wrong... on so many levels...
It even has hidden depths of wrongness.

Avert your eyes Mr Box
 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 154
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #5 on: 22/07/2016 00:10:54 »
Alright, I admit I do not understand the concept of thermal energy, but I do understand the existence of thermo dynamics, its just that I do not believe that space fabric, dark energy has any kind of energy, its just feels more like any ordinary ideal gas, but than it diverges from any sort of gas, something like a gas like substance one without any kind and without enough energy to form atomic structure...
   Se the rock, s made of atoms, atoms have internal energy, internal energy alone nor heat, happens that dark energy, in my scenario dark energy, exists within almost everything and surely exist on the space within the atoms, the internal energy of an atom, "existing within dark energy space", generates heat, the heat than never belonged to the atom only the energy, the heat, more simpler than this any sort of temperature, belongs to the background, and happens in the presence of atoms, the energy of the atoms attracts particles that create electromagnetism, the electromagnetism stabilizes the structure by conserving the energy...
  The heat can be increased and reduced even without add internal energy to the system cause the heat will be increased by the interaction of the measurement, the fact that the heat was a little bit increased on a experiment as in nature, doesn't need to add internal energy, the extra heat will be being produced by external sources of any kind... Change the atomic "structure" you can increase or decrease the electromagnetic field it will produce, diverging elements from gas, liquid, solid...
 The internal energy of the atoms itself would be almost equal without being relevant witch kind of element we are measuring, the atom itself being composed by even smaller components, and the internal energy, shape of those components that forms the atoms being than formed and determined by the interaction they cause within dark energy, resulting in heat, the heat is emanated , "transferred", from the exterior as it is being transferred to the interior, against the atom, this interaction providing to the energy contained into the atom a reliable mean to conserve itself with almost zero cost, hard to describe indeed...
  I do not believe that cold, not the concept, but the word cold, as being absence of heat, for me no matter to where or into what this universe diverges, as long there is dark energy there will be temperatures, without the presence of dense atomic structure it stand still inactivated, conserving, and if you add the meaning that is the atomic structures, dark energy will start to react to the energy, start to transfer external energy and also adding internal energy to the system, doesn't need to be a proportional injection, external sources of energy nearby can affect the proportion of internal energy being injected on the system, this interaction of atoms over dark energy, will, when proportional to the mass/electromagnetism/acceleration, will triggers the interaction of one system with the other, like two objects being not necessarily attracted one by the other, not wrong to say this, but seems more, from space perspective of this, that dark energy is interacting within itself, and as for conserve energy, again thermo dynamics, it will try to join, "it always was", trying to join one energy source with the other....

  I refer as heat as being interpreted as a hole, referring to large objects like planets in specific, they are heat source too, one that grow and became to dense for dark energy effectively directly interact with the heat source, the inner core, I understand that there are kilometers of layer and rock, but space does not need to know, the mass will be felted and the attraction will be proportional to the mass/electromagnetism and resulting in heat when exciting the space within the atoms...
  For me the answer for all the questions would be achieved if we could possible spy the inner core of any planet with an activated magnetosphere, it will explain all the rest including black holes...
 Unfortunately we need to walk step by step so I indeed accept and share the things I don't understand, but there is a point where even science will know to have begin wrong about something, and will have not to recalculate the equation, but to start it all over again....
 Because, despise the tons of theories one is shared within us all, the one that our modern science have missed hugged back there, from that mistake, whatever it was, everyone can calculate ad observe unique and exclusive events, but following the rules no one will ever be able to understand how or why, no one could possible do it, without being 100% wrong, if following the rules...
 
 Since for me heat is and belongs to dark energy when interacting with atoms, is acceptable that heat interacts with itself without necessarily adding internal energy into the system, different levels of heat interacting one with the other will start to produce interesting effects...
  Imagine a human as a dense atomic structure that is less mass proportional than the planets, planet has more energy so more heat, the immense energy of the planet invoke dark energy from surrounding areas, giving the planet momentum, translation, and at the same time pushing you against the planet.... So the is the earth being constantly pushed towards the sun...
 Suns have lower density but they produce enormous amounts of electromagnetism and heat, with is able to push back the external compression of dark energy falling against it, expanding against it...
  Of course I'm aware to not be providing proof of nothing, just thinking loud, but that's the point, someone more prepared may read and think, decide that the perspective is valid or not is not an expectation to me...
« Last Edit: 22/07/2016 00:14:48 by Alex Siqueira »
 

Offline Spring Theory

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #6 on: 29/07/2016 01:15:50 »
At the risk of over simplifying the point, I will try to explain the concept of heat:

There is a particular wavelength of photons that all atoms absorb and emit extremely easy.  These are infrared photons. They just happen to be in the middle of the electromagnetic spectrum (wavelength wise).

Variations in heat or cold (depending on your perspective) are determined by the amount of infrared photons in a particular system. For example, if a room is at 70 degrees F, then a certain concentration of infrared photons are constantly being bounced around, absorbed, and emitted between all atoms in the room. 

If you introduce a block of ice into the room at 32 degrees F, then this block will have a lower concentration of infrared photons and will start absorbing the room infrared photons more readily than the rest of the atoms in the room until it is at equilibrium (or the same temperature) with the room. At the same time the atoms in the room will experience a slightly lower concentration of photons and appear slightly cooler in temperature.

Is that too simple?
 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 154
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #7 on: 30/07/2016 19:04:24 »
Very well explained, I believe no one will possible disagree cause there is nothing to discuss about the results...
 
 My only concern focused only on the meaning, the final result I share with you and your concept, except that the room original temperature, hot, will also be affected by the block of ice, because it will, it is composed by atoms, atoms have energy, the energy will respond to the wavelength frequencies that are being used to irradiate the room and produce heat, in the most short explanation if you make your room become the size of a planet, and consider that inside of it you have added ice blocks so many of them that there is almost no space left within the atoms, the heat will start to heat up the material and melt, the space within the atoms, trapped inside the planet, like oxygen inside a bubble of water in zero gravity when added motion to the system, as being the lighter element will be pushed to the center, among with oxygen and empty space... Not empty space, but dark energy, or give it the name the suit your the most, at this moment even with the crost in the middle of the way, the outerspace cold dark energy will be attracted by the super hot one on the inner core, and in the case of a rocky planet they will not interact one with the other, the forces of attraction from outside, and expansion from inside will be spread trough the crost and atmosphere, in case of earth the encounter happens at the edge of the atmosphere, the atmosphere is the region where the inner expansion is compressed by the other dark energy that is being attracted by and trough earths energy source, the inner core, it can't reach, so it squishes the planets on the attempt, forming almost perfect spheres, as long the super heated inner dark energy does not interact with the outer space cold one, there will be no nova nor super nova, open by any means a fissure exposing the outer core and the crost will be pushed away as the dark energy attraction is able to penetrate the crost trough the fissure and the interaction of both push everything around the inner core away from it...

 This about a flame that is burning oxygen to keep burning the flame need two things a flammable substance like wood to keep adding energy into the system, but what is truly burning is the oxygen, the oxygen nearby is constantly attracted by the gap in the area that the flame has being burning, at the same time this process releases different elements from the original oxygen, but this is not relevant, what matter is that dark energy outhere could be something as a super massive photon, and light and spectrum as being the source of its density...
  As soon as the flame started to burn oxygen, you can assume that your among of oxygen after is different from the original one before the flame, and so its with space, as long as light is being produced, matter will be destroyed and decomposed by the wave length frequencies it produces, irradiating other particles, destroying one another, "their structures", this process releases the energy with momentum and also produces enormous amounts of heat in the quantum level, this heat evoke the same gravitational pull that a sun does, and the energy is trapped inside a brief moment, trapped by space attraction, dark energy, at this very moment, dark energy on the are where the collision happen have instantaneously created a photon, of the type correspondent to the mix of energy that was released, this is what we has being called as "a photon", they energy will be conserve in form of momentum for as long as it doe not hit another dense atomic structure like a wall or planet as example...

  You don't have to accept this, not t all, its just that is very difficult to ponder about something that need to be consider and impossible to be tested by measurement and experiment, you can trap a photon with a electromagnetic field, but this means that the photon will not hit the anti-photon.
 The anti-photon as being any dense wall on its path, so yeas you can isolate a photon but as soon it hits something dense the energy will be released on the area without momentum, and this can be consider as heat, energy being transferred to inside the system, object, and than expelled from inside out the same object...

  In resume, in the case of the flame, wasn't oxygen that is moving trough the flame attracted by it, it is the blackground, there was oxygen or any ordinary gas that was there, there was a specific density on the "whole" area surrounding the flame, when the flame started to burn it was releasing the energy as spectrum and heat, it was literally destroying matter, oxygen, and releasing photons, light, infrared, a perfect balanced convention of matter into energy, this energy will be transferred as heat trough the dark energy, but nothing has being lost except for the density of the area of the flame, dark energy will always readopt the area, fill the gasp that the flame have left on the atmosphere, reajusting the density of what is there, in this case, oxygen...
  If you ask me if the flame would burn if there was no dark energy, well I'd say it won't, dark energy is the blackground, the flame converted matter into energy, this energy was spread trough the cosmos as spectrum, but nothing was lost only converted, the heat "energy being transferred trough dark energy", was the thing that heat up the flame and the same thing that give it meanings to conserve internal energy to keep burning, slowly, this transfer rate is directly related with the density of dark energy present on the star sphere of the system in our case the density of dark energy inside the solar system, determined by the sun ...  And this density of the solar system dark energy is what we call as time, the speed witch the energy is and can be transferred, from inside the system to outside of it, also being proportional in large scale with the orbits of the planets around the sun's energy and the planets energy, this relation plus the density of space between both will determine the speed of the acceleration, the acceleration will determined how fast events can occur...

 What I mean is that, 1Lt of kerosene can been much faster or slower when burning inside another sphere, in another ordinary part of the cosmos, one that has a different type of sun... The power of the sun determinate the density of dark energy on the sphere, and this density will determine the occurrence of speed of wavelength frequencies, this will inevitable alter the speed of time...

 I agree with your explanation as being short and assertive, but I diverge on the concept of photons, for you they are created independently of the blackground, for me photons as particle like, only occur and are given from the blackground as a meaning to transfer the information on the wave length frequencies, energy is from matter, heat is from spectrum, and spectrum is and belong exclusively to dark energy...

 In resume, the photon does not carry ht, the photon caries momentum, it is from the blackground and it It the blackground, it, the act of transferring energy from a system into another, produces speed and acceleration, the heat is and happens when h energy that was being carried by he temporary wave of photons hits another dense atomic structure, the photons cease to exist, the momentum and the energy is than transferred to and trough the systems of the dense atomic structure it have collide with, can be liquid solid or gas, the final result will be the same, the system will try to cool down to its normal temperature, for that it will expel this heat from its system, releasing the energy in form of spectrum, and this energy will be retransmitted, but this time caring different information...

 Our only divertion and the very purpose behind the question, there is such thing as thermal energy? Or heat is simple the energy being transfered as spectrum, being than injected into another system and subsequently expeled from it, and so on and on... This raises the question the mind, is the photon that we thing we capture real particles, or simple motion that we conserved by using measurement and electromagnetic fields? Is the photon a true particle or it is a instantaneous creation of dark energy, one that will desapear as soon it hits dense atomic structure?
  The photons would than hit the glass bottle and only the energy would be transfered trought the space within the atoms of the glass, and by doing so the energy will be transfered to the electrons inside the bottle, simple cause inside the expermient there was already dark energy to create new photons... Its not worng to say that the photons released the electrons, but was it the same was that started outside of the expermiment?  If the photons where the blackground, they wouldn't need to be mass less, cause they will not have to travel trough the speed of frequencies... Just wondering, simple cause one can't observe a photon without interacting with the whole, an the interraction, the observation and measurement would affect the result...
 

Online ProjectSailor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 83
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #8 on: 02/08/2016 12:02:37 »
Okay, you all gone talked about radiation heating, but forget there is another form, conductive/convective heating (which is pretty much the same thing really but with a 'source').

Heat energy in a system increases the kinetic energy of the system, which can be directly transferred by physical interaction of the system.

There is too much evidence available to be able to disconnect heat energy with kinetic energy to drop it as a primary carrier for heat energy.

I dont know how dark energy has anything to do with it.

And all that is how and for why, its conservation of energy and the 2nd law of thermodynamics.. one system has lots of kinetic energy and gives it to one with less kinetic energy until they both have the same.

Photon concentration makes no sense unless you boil energy down to existing just as photons, which I am told is untrue.
 

Online Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #9 on: 10/08/2016 16:49:39 »
A heated rock will share its heat with a cold rock, why does the heat travel to the cold rock ?
It's all about balance and equilibrium Mr. Box. A heated rock will share the energy of it's greater temperature with the cooler rock warming it up. If I were you, I would take Jeff's advice and check out the link he provided.
 

Offline William McC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 158
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #10 on: 14/08/2016 03:40:03 »
A heated rock will share its heat with a cold rock, why does the heat travel to the cold rock ?

Heat just like electricity it moves from an area of higher heat to lower heat. Electricity as well moves from an abundance of particles of electricity to a shortage or less abundant area. Just like electricity there are exceptions when extreme situations occur.

If you beam DC current in a medium vacuum from a large electrode to a small electrode. The small electrode charged (+) as on a modern car battery, you can steer those rays emitted from the small electrode, with a magnet or low voltage.

If you reverse the current in the original experiment, you can no longer steer the rays that are emitted from the small electrode.

With heat if you quench hot aluminum, in water the heat will actually move towards and back away from the water it is being quenched in.

Very much like electricity moving away from the cathode charged (+) as on a modern car battery, in a medium vacuum cathode ray tube. That emission is moving against the flow of particles of electricity from the power supply. Just like lightning moves against the flow of electricity from the earth to space. Lightning is not a straight A to B communication of electricity. Lightning is an ARC it can be steered. That is what Benjamin Franklin was known for steering electricity away from American homes.

Electricity travels from A to B in a rather straight line, an ARC can go to any place of less voltage in a slow jagged meandering path. ARC is high voltage. That is why people that work with low voltage sometimes get hurt or shocked when they create an ARC, especially where you have neon or other inert gases that can charge to very high voltages very quickly, and hold a lethal charge. You can create disintegrative, initiating voltages.


youtu.be/dYReqtnmM4Q

This video demonstrates first the tungsten electrode charged (-) as on a modern car battery. In the second demonstration it shows the tungsten charged with alternating current just like sine wave power from the power company. In the third demonstration it shows the tungsten electrode charged (+) as on a modern car battery.

The tungsten limits the effect of the last demonstration because it is barely liquid and only partially molten. Other substances like ARC rods designed especially for that polarity, and clouds reciprocate with much more vigor and power than does a tungsten. However for the sake of the experiment, it was necessary to use the tungsten all three times.

Sincerely,

William McCormick


« Last Edit: 14/08/2016 03:45:22 by William McC »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 46 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #11 on: 14/08/2016 07:48:54 »
Well! Hmmm!  HUh?


Heat is a part of our sensory perception, heat is a feeling and not  a thing.
 

Online Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #12 on: 14/08/2016 17:47:17 »
Well! Hmmm!  HUh?


Heat is a part of our sensory perception, heat is a feeling and not  a thing.
Heat is a measure of molecular activity Mr. Box. And therefore, is most assuredly a "thing". I fail to see any relevance nor any profit to be realized from your continual quibbling over meaningless, frivolous and contestable positions which always lead to zero productivity. But then again, that is exactly your aim isn't it Mr. Box? Stay confused Mr. Box in the hopes that it might rub off on the rest of us. I wouldn't be holding my breath if I were you...................................



 

Offline William McC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 158
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #13 on: 14/08/2016 23:07:30 »
Well! Hmmm!  HUh?


Heat is a part of our sensory perception, heat is a feeling and not  a thing.
Heat is a measure of molecular activity Mr. Box. And therefore, is most assuredly a "thing". I fail to see any relevance nor any profit to be realized from your continual quibbling over meaningless, frivolous and contestable positions which always lead to zero productivity. But then again, that is exactly your aim isn't it Mr. Box? Stay confused Mr. Box in the hopes that it might rub off on the rest of us. I wouldn't be holding my breath if I were you...................................

I was taught heat is a slow down of particles carrying the heat or heat rays. An actual slow down of the material being heated or giving off heat. In other words something chilled to minus 145 degrees Fahrenheit, is actually moving internally at a higher frequency than the same material at room temperature. Shorter movements, however faster movement. The same hot objects molecules are moving more slowly, but move a further distance.

We know that it takes heat to keep hydrogen from solidifying at some insanely low temperature. Perhaps a temperature we may never know here on earth. So although it takes heat to keep hydrogen from freezing at 459.67F, most individuals would not believe there is any heat present. Mr box, might be extracting the philosophical from the technical training individuals used to get years ago. I cannot say for sure. But there were always a lot of often startling realizations about heat, and that it is everywhere. The whole universe is heated every square inch.

I totally understand the importance of correctly identifying what is happening at different temperatures to different materials though. I do believe for many years they were teaching kids in school that heat and light was an excitement of matter or the rays carrying heat or light. Which I had already been taught was not the case, and given many examples as proof. I think Mr. Box was just rocking the boat with some old school analogies and philosophy, knowing that in the end he is not that far off from reality, especially when modern education appears to have it wrong. I think Mr. Box was trying to create some mysticism.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

 

Offline William McC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 158
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #14 on: 14/08/2016 23:31:01 »
This is a short movie showing how ambient radiation at different velocities travels through matter. Not just the velocity of the particle is different, the path is different. This movie demonstrates by an exaggeration, of the spiral path of a particle, that there is less resistance to forward progress, over the same distance at different radius spiral or helical paths.

youtu.be/jGF8DvxCScs

There are many variables in these experiments that could be easily contested. However you might be able to see that this theory is plausible. It was how I learned it in school. 

You could relate the large diameter helical path to radiation passing through an object at say 0 degrees Fahrenheit, and the medium diameter path to the same object at 100 degrees, and the smallest diameter path to the same object at 212 degrees.

Or you could relate the path to different color light. Blue light being the largest diameter path, Yellow, being the medium diameter path and red being the smallest diameter path.

Sincerely,

William McCormick
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 46 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #15 on: 15/08/2016 09:47:19 »
Well! Hmmm!  HUh?


Heat is a part of our sensory perception, heat is a feeling and not  a thing.
Heat is a measure of molecular activity Mr. Box. And therefore, is most assuredly a "thing". I fail to see any relevance nor any profit to be realized from your continual quibbling over meaningless, frivolous and contestable positions which always lead to zero productivity. But then again, that is exactly your aim isn't it Mr. Box? Stay confused Mr. Box in the hopes that it might rub off on the rest of us. I wouldn't be holding my breath if I were you...................................


Wrong Ethos, temperature is a measure of molecular activity, heat is what is felt.
I realised my topic title was wrongly worded sorry my aim was not to ''trip'' people up.

 

Online Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #16 on: 15/08/2016 13:49:47 »



Wrong Ethos, temperature is a measure of molecular activity, heat is what is felt.

I'll have to give you that one Mr. Box. Words do have meaning don't they? However, because heat is a form of energy, and Webster's defines "heat" as a noun, please remember the definition for a noun:

Noun..............Person, Place or "Thing"

So when you say; "heat is a feeling not a thing", you are WRONG as well.
« Last Edit: 15/08/2016 14:03:19 by Ethos_ »
 

Online Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #17 on: 15/08/2016 14:02:01 »
Well! Hmmm!  HUh?


Heat is a part of our sensory perception, heat is a feeling and not  a thing.
Remember this remark Mr. Box?
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 46 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #18 on: 16/08/2016 09:04:14 »



Wrong Ethos, temperature is a measure of molecular activity, heat is what is felt.

I'll have to give you that one Mr. Box. Words do have meaning don't they? However, because heat is a form of energy, and Webster's defines "heat" as a noun, please remember the definition for a noun:

Noun..............Person, Place or "Thing"

So when you say; "heat is a feeling not a thing", you are WRONG as well.

Ever thought the definition is wrong?  I already admitted I was wrong with my title  defining heat as a thing, things that are hot have a high temperature, our sensory perception interprets this as heat felt. Heat is not a form of energy the energy is hf in various forms, mostly radiation, I do admit we use the word heat for generalisation terms, but I was in error with my title.

re- new title

Is ''heat'' attracted to ''cold''

That would be the correct title now.

I get ''heat'' always expands, (because likewise charges repel).

I get some ''heat'' is retained and held by the ''cold''. 


I get ''cold'' is the the super ''glue'' of the Universe. Things that are ''cold'' stick together, things that are ''cold'' and are ''heated'', expand.


re-new title

The thermodynamic volume expansion and volume contraction of matter by entropy loss and gain.

An object travelling away from a light source will contract in volume , an object travelling towards a light source will expand in volume.

+ve=-F(c)=-hf=<4/3 pi r

-ve=+F(c)=+hf=>4/3 pi r

P.s This is a real physical expansion and contraction and not the visual lorentz contractions of light and angle.









« Last Edit: 16/08/2016 09:24:29 by Thebox »
 

Online Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #19 on: 16/08/2016 14:18:43 »



Wrong Ethos, temperature is a measure of molecular activity, heat is what is felt.

I'll have to give you that one Mr. Box. Words do have meaning don't they? However, because heat is a form of energy, and Webster's defines "heat" as a noun, please remember the definition for a noun:

Noun..............Person, Place or "Thing"

So when you say; "heat is a feeling not a thing", you are WRONG as well.

Ever thought the definition is wrong?

So now you want to ignore Webster's and publish your on version of a Lexicon?
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 46 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #20 on: 17/08/2016 07:32:42 »



Wrong Ethos, temperature is a measure of molecular activity, heat is what is felt.

I'll have to give you that one Mr. Box. Words do have meaning don't they? However, because heat is a form of energy, and Webster's defines "heat" as a noun, please remember the definition for a noun:

Noun..............Person, Place or "Thing"

So when you say; "heat is a feeling not a thing", you are WRONG as well.

Ever thought the definition is wrong?

So now you want to ignore Webster's and publish your on version of a Lexicon?

I do not ignore anything, I state what it is, heat is a generalised term we use that expresses differences in temperature felt by a person or animal or a thing.

We say things are hot or cold, can you feel the heat off that and likewise.   It is not for me too change versions I am not the ''man'', only the ''man'' can change things.


I try to remove ambiguity from ''my' definitions.


 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Is heat attracted to cold ?
« Reply #20 on: 17/08/2016 07:32:42 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums