Just one more reason why your Climate Model doesn't work.
Surprising “photomolecular effect” discovered by MIT researchers could affect calculations of climate change and may lead to improved desalination and drying processes.
It’s the most fundamental of processes — the evaporation of water from the surfaces of oceans and lakes, the burning off of fog in the morning sun, and the drying of briny ponds that leaves solid salt behind. Evaporation is all around us, and humans have been observing it and making use of it for as long as we have existed.
And yet, it turns out, we’ve been missing a major part of the picture all along.
In a series of painstakingly precise experiments, a team of researchers at MIT has demonstrated that heat isn’t alone in causing water to evaporate. Light, striking the water’s surface where air and water meet, can break water molecules away and float them into the air, causing evaporation in the absence of any source of heat.
The astonishing new discovery could have a wide range of significant implications. It could help explain mysterious measurements over the years of how sunlight affects clouds, and therefore affect calculations of the effects of climate change on cloud cover and precipitation. It could also lead to new ways of designing industrial processes such as solar-powered desalination or drying of materials.
The findings, and the many different lines of evidence that demonstrate the reality of the phenomenon and the details of how it works, are described today in the journal PNAS, in a paper by Carl Richard Soderberg Professor of Power Engineering Gang Chen, postdocs Guangxin Lv and Yaodong Tu, and graduate student James Zhang.
The authors say their study suggests that the effect should happen widely in nature— everywhere from clouds to fogs to the surfaces of oceans, soils, and plants — and that it could also lead to new practical applications, including in energy and clean water production. “I think this has a lot of applications,” Chen says. “We’re exploring all these different directions. And of course, it also affects the basic science, like the effects of clouds on climate, because clouds are the most uncertain aspect of climate models.”
A newfound phenomenon
The new work builds on research reported last year, which described this new “photomolecular effect” but only under very specialized conditions: on the surface of specially prepared hydrogels soaked with water. In the new study, the researchers demonstrate that the hydrogel is not necessary for the process; it occurs at any water surface exposed to light, whether it’s a flat surface like a body of water or a curved surface like a droplet of cloud vapor.
Because the effect was so unexpected, the team worked to prove its existence with as many different lines of evidence as possible. In this study, they report 14 different kinds of tests and measurements they carried out to establish that water was indeed evaporating — that is, molecules of water were being knocked loose from the water’s surface and wafted into the air — due to the light alone, not by heat, which was long assumed to be the only mechanism involved.
One key indicator, which showed up consistently in four different kinds of experiments under different conditions, was that as the water began to evaporate from a test container under visible light, the air temperature measured above the water’s surface cooled down and then leveled off, showing that thermal energy was not the driving force behind the effect.
Other key indicators that showed up included the way the evaporation effect varied depending on the angle of the light, the exact color of the light, and its polarization. None of these varying characteristics should happen because at these wavelengths, water hardly absorbs light at all — and yet the researchers observed them.
The effect is strongest when light hits the water surface at an angle of 45 degrees. It is also strongest with a certain type of polarization, called transverse magnetic polarization. And it peaks in green light — which, oddly, is the color for which water is most transparent and thus interacts the least.
Chen and his co-researchers have proposed a physical mechanism that can explain the angle and polarization dependence of the effect, showing that the photons of light can impart a net force on water molecules at the water surface that is sufficient to knock them loose from the body of water. But they cannot yet account for the color dependence, which they say will require further study.
They have named this the photomolecular effect, by analogy with the photoelectric effect that was discovered by Heinrich Hertz in 1887 and finally explained by Albert Einstein in 1905. That effect was one of the first demonstrations that light also has particle characteristics, which had major implications in physics and led to a wide variety of applications, including LEDs. Just as the photoelectric effect liberates electrons from atoms in a material in response to being hit by a photon of light, the photomolecular effect shows that photons can liberate entire molecules from a liquid surface, the researchers say.
“The finding of evaporation caused by light instead of heat provides new disruptive knowledge of light-water interaction,” says Xiulin Ruan, professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University, who was not involved in the study. “It could help us gain new understanding of how sunlight interacts with cloud, fog, oceans, and other natural water bodies to affect weather and climate. It has significant potential practical applications such as high-performance water desalination driven by solar energy. This research is among the rare group of truly revolutionary discoveries which are not widely accepted by the community right away but take time, sometimes a long time, to be confirmed.”
Solving a cloud conundrum
The finding may solve an 80-year-old mystery in climate science. Measurements of how clouds absorb sunlight have often shown that they are absorbing more sunlight than conventional physics dictates possible. The additional evaporation caused by this effect could account for the longstanding discrepancy, which has been a subject of dispute since such measurements are difficult to make.
“Those experiments are based on satellite data and flight data,“ Chen explains. “They fly an airplane on top of and below the clouds, and there are also data based on the ocean temperature and radiation balance. And they all conclude that there is more absorption by clouds than theory could calculate. However, due to the complexity of clouds and the difficulties of making such measurements, researchers have been debating whether such discrepancies are real or not. And what we discovered suggests that hey, there’s another mechanism for cloud absorption, which was not accounted for, and this mechanism might explain the discrepancies.”
Chen says he recently spoke about the phenomenon at an American Physical Society conference, and one physicist there who studies clouds and climate said they had never thought about this possibility, which could affect calculations of the complex effects of clouds on climate. The team conducted experiments using LEDs shining on an artificial cloud chamber, and they observed heating of the fog, which was not supposed to happen since water does not absorb in the visible spectrum. “Such heating can be explained based on the photomolecular effect more easily,” he says.
Lv says that of the many lines of evidence, “the flat region in the air-side temperature distribution above hot water will be the easiest for people to reproduce.” That temperature profile “is a signature” that demonstrates the effect clearly, he says.
Zhang adds: “It is quite hard to explain how this kind of flat temperature profile comes about without invoking some other mechanism” beyond the accepted theories of thermal evaporation. “It ties together what a whole lot of people are reporting in their solar desalination devices,” which again show evaporation rates that cannot be explained by the thermal input.
The effect can be substantial. Under the optimum conditions of color, angle, and polarization, Lv says, “the evaporation rate is four times the thermal limit.”
Already, since publication of the first paper, the team has been approached by companies that hope to harness the effect, Chen says, including for evaporating syrup and drying paper in a paper mill. The likeliest first applications will come in the areas of solar desalinization systems or other industrial drying processes, he says. “Drying consumes 20 percent of all industrial energy usage,” he points out.
Because the effect is so new and unexpected, Chen says, “This phenomenon should be very general, and our experiment is really just the beginning.” The experiments needed to demonstrate and quantify the effect are very time-consuming. “There are many variables, from understanding water itself, to extending to other materials, other liquids and even solids,” he says.
“The observations in the manuscript points to a new physical mechanism that foundationally alters our thinking on the kinetics of evaporation,” says Shannon Yee, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Georgia Tech, who was not associated with this work. He adds, “Who would have thought that we are still learning about something as quotidian as water evaporating?”
“I think this work is very significant scientifically because it presents a new mechanism,” says University of Alberta Distinguished Professor Janet A.W. Elliott, who also was not associated with this work. “It may also turn out to be practically important for technology and our understanding of nature, because evaporation of water is ubiquitous and the effect appears to deliver significantly higher evaporation rates than the known thermal mechanism. … My overall impression is this work is outstanding. It appears to be carefully done with many precise experiments lending support for one another.”
The work was partly supported by an MIT Bose Award. The authors are currently working on ways to make use of this effect for water desalination, in a project funded by the Abdul Latif Jameel Water and Food Systems Lab and the MIT-UMRP program.
255 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 255 of 255No, not one big code. Thousands of little aps that can play and interact under one OS.
Whatever... it's all code.
...SINGLE BUT COMPLEX? oil molecules in LabreA'S TAR-PIT (CONTAINS LOTS OF FOSSILS") Primordial Soup.
So's DNA... but not "binary". quantum.
programmers practicing DECOMPOSITION in smaller entities... from long ago.
And it -- have limits too.
That's why, it cannot be that straightforward.
And that whole problem.
The brain is merely one (conscious/unconscious) aspect of the OS.
That's your problem. The whole problem isn't needed. Just the relationship between assembly "layers". You want to start with "all the code on the internet" problem? You'll never solve/compile that.
So pick an assembly layer (after 15)... and solve it.
Cuz "chemistry" is solving the 1st 15.
Yet another trivia of programming -- write NEW coder always simpler than trying to improve existing. ;-)
Or... from systems engineering -- to improve system, especially from inside, is nearly to impossible.
Better create NEW system. ;-)
It's a shame that the "soup" can't be in a sun's factory, producing the necessary chemical elements.
Create a new system in defiance of physics?
Good luck!
That's why I call it engineering.
Because it not based on GENERAL solution.
But on trial and error, build up a little and watch what'll happen.
And as such -- more realistic.
Because theory and practice will go hand in hand -- empowering each other.
\\\Create a new system in defiance of physics?
How??? Why???
Engineering do not work with what do not exist.
In math, as in computer programming (ie- climate models) Numbers and letters can do anything. Physics attaches precise and specific physical and process meanings to the letters and numbers. Make sure your "new" programs do the same.
Engineering do not work with what do not exist.
???
Stage 1 (Build a c*ck sucking fish) -> Stage 2 -> Stage 3 (Colonize planet in new solar system)
;P
Don't feel bad. Science has the same hole...
Chemistry -> G_d-like Miracle -> Biology
Fill THAT gap, and now science can do "anything".
I think it get's filled with "intelligence".
...some kind of electro-magnetic current flow where currents resonate in certain ordered patterns.
Bio-electricity from fields. A "field theory" of biology.
\\In math, as in computer programming (ie- climate models) Numbers and letters can do anything. Physics attaches precise and specific physical and process meanings to the letters and numbers. Make sure your "new" programs do the same.
Eeeeeehm?????!!!
Math and IT -- is NOT the same.
IT uses some math (mostly arithmetic). And in the beginning it was admitted as purely mathematical research (Turing's machine and all).
Same way as other sciences was branches of natural philosophy.
But then... they split their paths.
Well...
You was reading Ancient Greek philosophers...
and I was reading scientists and mathematicians, who explained what and how they doing (something, I never saw and probably NOT exist among philosophers)...
Like Feynman... and Poya.
So... that is "they all in one face"(as they say about foreigners) -- to me.
But as I see... it is for you.
\\Stage 1 (Build a c*ck sucking fish) -> Stage 2 -> Stage 3 (Colonize planet in new solar system)
Well... I agree, to some extent.
While I know how to accomplish it with purely technological side -- what materials to use, how to combine em.
I still not closed that gap -- how to accomplish that from psycho-sociological side -- how to find needed people and organize em.
But that... hardly can be said that it is a miracle needed for that.
Just some resources and understanding I for now lacking...
like, for example.
I came to undersyanding -- that to promote such idea -- I need to know English and communicate with English-speaking people.
I have had little or totally lacking of such abilities (as my communication at DiBi's place showed).
But... I have gained em, considerably. I think.
Why that should mean that to meet OTHER such pre-requisites -- some *MIRACLE* would be needed???? I totally dunno.
Can you reveal your doubts, some more? If Maybe that is true???
Spanning the gap (and all biological gaps) with microtubules...?
I don't think we quite have the "miracle tech" yet.. and more understanding of the function of microtubules in the brain's information structures is needed for an 'adaptive' assembly theory (or self-assembly theory) to work.... to successfully transition from a Stage 1 to a Stage 2. Intra and Inter-cellular communication networks... like nested functional computer networks within self-assembly networks.
I don't know your concepts well enough. You need somebody like Penrose to think about this. I'm just a dumb-ass.
He took some basic observational info from Hameroff, and popularized it enough to get universities to start experimenting to prove or disprove his ideas.
The point is to develop the code that self-assembles all the previous code thrown into Turing's tarpit. Only start with a drop of tar on a microscope slide, and see if microtubules start to connect and assemble the code debris in the tar. Is that possible? I'm not a potter.
All I know for sure is that when you eat turkey at Thanksgiving dinner, it has lots of tryptophan, and the joke is that it makes you fall asleep/ sleepy.
Is tryptophan and microtubules the "magic" of consciousness? I don't know.
But science does seem to "lack" understanding... as in the ape-to-human "missing links".
It's like the TRLs at NASA. We're at TRL 1
...and You're maybe at TRL 2.
...and we don't see the "line of flight" yet
...or at least I don't.
what tech needs to be "deterritorialized" and where they can be "reterritorialized".
\\Spanning the gap (and all biological gaps) with microtubules...?
That's... sciency babbling.
EVERYTHING is QM... because EVERYTHING consist of ELEMENTARY particles that move in accordance QM principles.
So... with that microtubes... or without. It IS QM anyway. ;-P
\\I don't know your concepts well enough. You need somebody like Penrose to think about this. I'm just a dumb-ass.
Naaah.
You mind is perfectly enough.
That is just Learned Helplessness imbued in you by your USA education/propaganda.
That ONLY "those, who know better" (like Penrose in this verse) CAN know and understand such things.
Propaganda that making people dumb -- by making em UN-INTERESTED.
How do I know? Am I some genius (as Penrose %)))))???
Naaaah.
I just one who was living and going to school in USSR... and was fed with similar but adapted to USSR needs: like NOT telling to people how and why Economy working ("that can know... those, who know better -- ones living in Kreml... ONLY).
But then... Iron Curtain fell. And flood of NEW information started.
Like about Western Economy... so I was able to LEARN it separately. And COMPARE... with what was tout in USSR.
Maybe caffein and tryptophan are the neurochemicals affecting the wave function collapse rates in the inter/intra-cellular microtubules. The wave function certainly changes when you fall asleep...
\\It's like the TRLs at NASA. We're at TRL 1
Well... it seems it is Paradign Shift too... :-(((
\\But science does seem to "lack" understanding... as in the ape-to-human "missing links".
Naaah.
There is NO missing link.
Queue of our predecessors are tight enough, already.
What we do not have -- that is Theory, which would explain it -- how mere "clever monkeys"... got smarts...
Well... paradign shift needed, here too, it seems.
And what is paradign shift???
It's just an open-mindness to take into account that information, which was disregarded earlier.
Because it was not acceptable... by older people (usually among "those, who know better" -- mean, who have this or that power to shush dissent) obscure views (like simple ideas of Dr.Semmelveis).
\\Maybe caffein and tryptophan are the neurochemicals affecting the wave function collapse rates in the inter/intra-cellular microtubules. The wave function certainly changes when you fall asleep...
;-P
Wave function -- it's unmeasurable thing. ;-)
Is psi(wave function) a measurable quantity?
Quora
https://www.quora.com › Is-psi-wave-function-a-measu...
No, the quantum mechanical wave function cannot be measured directly. However, its square represents the probability that a particle will be ...
If the wave function never collapses, what is measured ...
10 answers
Aug 11, 2018
What constitutes an “interaction” that collapses the ...
11 answers
Aug 3, 2019
What is the difference between 'unmeasurable' and ...
2 answers
Apr 8, 2023
Why is wave function collapse never considered from ...
3 answers
Jun 10, 2019
More results from www.quora.com
It's as square root "invisible twin".
You surely know. That to make square value, like 4 = 2 * 2... but also -2 * -2 = 4. ;-)
So... every time we do sqrt(4)... we must, if we wanna be precise, say that there TWO possible results -- 2 and -2.
But... we never do.
Because in school they teach us that sqrt(4) means just 2. ;-)
We do tend to take "shortcuts" and later forget them...
Yap.
They became "rules of thumb". Fetishes. Taboos.
That... that "those, who know better" self-proclaimed to protect.
Protect from "trespassing". From "dissent".
And that is whole reasons behind reason why revolutions needed.
Scientifical. Or political.
Irrational following after some outdated notions...
:)
Like in that experiment with monkeys.
Mirror neurons?
Actually.
I have experience with that psycho-social matters. When I tried to push that my other idea (about strategy game) I have meet different people and shared opinions with em.
Well, it was unsuccessful. But also, I have met, I have seen other people -- to which it worked.
So I know two prerequisites of it -- it need to be simple... and compelling. To that particular people.
As it's easy to see... there is no problem with "being simple"... it do not need to be as complex as ACTUAL Ovo ready to settle on the planet at distant star... even something small and simple as that same damn fish-like robot... would suffice.
But...
There's where versatility of it, my tech, plays a dirty trick with me -- if it so universal, I cannot have a clue -- to whom I need to appeal with it????
Is it some people who venerate dikk sukking devices?
Or some starry eyes enthusiasts, who looking for space travels?
Or... some hardcore militarists, seeking for a new toy?
That part... it seems IS that moment where some "*miracle*" needed... :-(((
Sounds like you need to narrow down and target a "rich" market, then pitch a simple/easy and defined "product to focus/ capture it. As you're in the midst of a war facing existential threats, you know where I'd go. Besides, they'd cover all you research/ mfg fixed startup costs, from which you could add new markets and products.
...and you can tell from my blog. "focusing" isn't one of my strengths. ;)
Like that is MY strength. ;-P
Well... actually, that is not liability, but more like benefit.
To a position of coordinator -- which need to have a grasp over all... well, as much as possible issues at hand, because nobody else can do that...
or, am I wrong???
Yesm you are. I am not a "coordinator'. What you need is an influencer, and I am a misanthrope.
Then... here's two of us. ;-P
And well... you are mistaken. As ever.
I seeking for how to build The System... not "operational success" (like Drexler's -- to write a book and got some "fame") ;-P
Post a Comment