For cooling a building you can use highly reflective (99.8%) paint. Such
a building can stay 3C below ambient without addition al cooling.
Search for "Full Daytime Sub-ambient Radiative Cooling with High Figure
of Merit in Commercial-like Paints"
J.W.
On 25.04.2022 15:50, Chris Zell wrote:
Could there be a way to generate energy by ‘transmitting away’ the
earth’s relative charge into neutral space? Using something similar to
this method?
*From:*H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Saturday, April 23, 2022 12:33 PM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:A simpler test
Update...
I haven't done any experiments yet, but I have refined my thinking
about the nature of cooling or frigorific radiation.
Instead of striving for extremely low temperatures, I recently
realised it should be possible to look for cooling radiation between
bodies which have a large relative temperature difference.
Also I was worried that if frigorific radiation were real then we
should readily detect a cooling effect on our eyes or instruments
every time a telescope is aimed into the cold depths of space. Does
the fact that no one has reported such a cooling effect mean
frigorific radiation doesn't exist. Not necessarily. Such a
conclusion is based on the assumption that when a concentrator of a
given size focuses cooling radiation from a colder body the effective
cooling power increases as the temperature of the colder body
decreases in the same way as the effective heating power of a hotter
body increases as the temperature of the hotter body increases.
However, if cooling power does not scale like heating power, then
using a thermometer to detect cooling from radiation from deep space
at 3 degree Kelvin will probably require a concentrator (i.e. a
telescope) that is much larger than any current or planned telescope.
Harry
On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 9:18 PM H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
Some telescopes by virtue of their design should already be capable of
revealing cooling radiation if it existed.
eg. This telescope consists of a primary parabolic reflector and three
secondary mirrors which direct the collected light into an instrument
room several meters away from the primary reflector. See the first few
two photos on this page:
http://www.vikdhillon.staff.shef.ac.uk/teaching/phy217/telescopes/phy217_tel_coude.html
<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vikdhillon.staff.shef.ac.uk%2Fteaching%2Fphy217%2Ftelescopes%2Fphy217_tel_coude.html&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C6c40de11cfcc42272b5308da2546fc60%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C637863284070654675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Sx9LB61KIIrzYTh0HTFHENF3vzd6vQPnM%2BCbe11lLh4%3D&reserved=0>
This telescope should be capable of focusing enough frigorific
radiation it could be sensed by a hand crossing the path of the beam
in the instrument room. It seems unlikely that such an odd cooling
sensation would go unreported. Therefore it is likely frigorific
radiation is not real.
Harry
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:43 PM MSF <foster...@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
> Don't forget to give us the result of your experiment if you do it.
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>
> On Monday, January 24th, 2022 at 9:06 PM, MSF
<foster...@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Now that we have learned about all there is to learn about the
acquisition and preservation of dry ice, I think you're right
about this test. The double parabola test you initially proposed
would not have proved or disproved cooling radiation. The dry ice
at the focus would have been a radiative heat sink and would have
lowered the temperature at the other focus. At least that's my
opinion of it.
> >
> > The simpler test you propose really demonstrates the idea of
cooling radiation as its own wave phenomenon, if it exists.
> >
> > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> >
> > On Monday, January 24th, 2022 at 5:35 PM, H LV
hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > From a fabrication standpoint here is an even simpler test
for cooling
> > >
> > > radiation.
> > >
> > > It consists of a truncated cone lined with reflective mylar
on the
> > >
> > > inside. The wide end is open to the sky and a thermometer is
located
> > >
> > > at the vertex of the cone.
> > >
> > > See diagram:
> > >
> > >
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p7coRgUqwzMGw40DhUQzJACCyHrd8EL5/view?usp=sharing
<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Ffile%2Fd%2F1p7coRgUqwzMGw40DhUQzJACCyHrd8EL5%2Fview%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C6c40de11cfcc42272b5308da2546fc60%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C637863284070654675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=AP9LegjrYacrBpvIuK6SBYCpTP1NJifWdbYK%2BGIZ9Ug%3D&reserved=0>
> > >
> > > If cooling radiation does not exist then the temperature of the
> > >
> > > thermometer should be about the same or perhaps slightly
warmer when
> > >
> > > the cone is above it.
> > >
> > > However, if cooling radiation is real and has wave-like
properties
> > >
> > > then the cone should focus the cooling radiation from the
sky onto the
> > >
> > > thermometer and lower its temperature.
> > >
> > > Harry
>
*CAUTION:*This message was sent from outside the Nexstar organization.
Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender.
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
