Tom Shula background in climate related sciences

Page 1


Tom Shula background related to climate science

November 29, 2024

My academic training was in classical physics with an emphasis on theoretical and mathematical physics. Disillusioned by academia in graduate school and attracted by the 1970s allure of Silicon Valley I chose a path in industry.

Part of that included extensive experience in the design, development, and operation of equipment for the manufacture of semiconductors and disk drive components in vacuum. These are extreme environments where temperature control is critical and one learns quickly the relationships of radiation, conduction, and convection for transport of heat energy in a myriad of temperature and pressure regimes.

My first piece in the climate conversation, “A Novel Perspective on the Greenhouse Effect”, was borne from this experience. While well received by many, the criticisms have led me to a deep dive into radiative transfer theory which continues.

My singular focus, with Markus Ott, continues to be the “Greenhouse Effect” which is no more than a failed conjecture which has only been modeled and “justified” by mathematical constructs that were developed for the analysis of stellar atmospheres but have no relevance to the earth’s atmosphere. I’ve attached a copy of our essay, “The ‘Missing Link’ in the Greenhouse Effect” for posting. This was discussed on the Tom Nelson Channel in July. With additional work Markus and I have done since I would make some minor revisions, but the core principles are intact.

I recently discovered a most important, recently published book that should be read by anyone who is involved in this discussion. The book is “A Brief History of Radiative Transfer Theory” by Curts Mobley. I encourage any

participant involved in this branch of the discussion read this book. It is very informative and quite enjoyable as a history. It is important because it describes in detail how the discipline has evolved Since the 18th century beginning with experimental radiometry which led to the theoretical discipline of radiative transfer theory (RTT). RTT has been valuable in many other disciplines outside of terrestrial atmospheric physics. Most importantly, it highlights that the discipline as traditionally practiced is a heuristic phenomenological model based on spectral radiance without a connection to the to the electromagnetic nature of radiation, and the implications thereof. The final chapter of the book highlights the work of the late Michael Mishchenko of NASA GISS, probably the greatest mind in the world with respect to RTT. A summary of his perspective can be found at Pubs.GISS: Mishchenko 2013: 125 years of radiative transfer: Enduring triumphs and persisting misconceptions. Mishchenko was able to create the ”bridge” between RTT and Maxwell’s equations with conclusions that are quite impactful to our perceptions of RTT as applied in climate science. I will elaborate on these in posts to follow, but most pertinent are:

The RTT as currently used in climate science does predict the spectral radiance detected by a well collimated radiometer (WCR) such as an IR spectrometer.

The spectral radiance is not a fundamental quantity, but only one component of the Poynting-Stokes Tensor which describes the entire electromagnetic field

The WCR has a limited acceptance angle, therefore it only detects electromagnetic energy transport in on the axis of and within the narrow range of its detection cone. A WCR can only detect the total energy flow under very limited conditions (a collimated beam, for example). It can also detect a signal where there is no net energy flow for example, when immersed in a random polydirectional electromagnetic field (like the random IR radiation field generated by collisions in the troposphere.) Mishchenko explains this clearly in a more detailed paper, Directional radiometry and radiative transfer_ The convoluted path from centuries-old

phenomenology to physical optics.

For the Radiative Transfer Equation to apply, the distance between particles must be much greater than wavelength of the scattered electromagnetic radiation. (Keep in mind that the average distance between air molecules at sea level is about 3.5 nm, while typical IR wavelengths are greater than 1000 nm.)

From the first Mischenko paper in the links above, he states in the Conclusions, “Yet from the fundamental-physics perspective, both the discipline of DR (directional radiometry) and the RTT have been based on phenomenological notions many of which turned out to be profound misconceptions [27, 43, 54, 55]. It has been demonstrated that contrary to the widespread belief, a WCR does not, in general, measure the flow of electromagnetic energy along its axis, while the radiance cannot be interpreted as quantifying the amounts of electromagnetic energy transported simultaneously in various directions.”

I expect that there will be a broad range of reactions to the information, but to those who find it difficult to accept, please be informed via the references cited above.

I’ll be following up with a couple of brief comments on the concepts of photons and spectral radiance, both beginning with the perspectives of Planck.

California

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.