The world is warming. All four major analyses of global temperatures measured at Earth’s surface agree the world has warmed, on average, more than one degree Celsius since 1970. Warming has been greatest at latitudes above forty degrees. Average warming has been twice as great in the northern hemisphere as in the southern hemisphere. The greatest warming anywhere, however, was observed on the Antarctic Peninsula where maximum monthly temperatures during summer remained relatively constant but minimum monthly temperatures during winters, when the Antarctic ozone hole was best developed, rose seven degrees Celsius. This was the greatest warming observed on Earth in the past 1800 years.
Warming of one degree is already causing problems for life on Earth. The reason climate scientists are so concerned, however, is that climate models based on greenhouse-warming theory predict average global temperatures could increase several more degrees during this century.
Most climate scientists are convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the primary cause of global warming is increasing emissions of greenhouse gases due to increased burning of fossil fuels. These scientists argue that we must act promptly to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions or face severe harm. Based on this scientific consensus, world leaders agreed in Paris, during December 2015, to work together to keep the increase in average global temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Costs of implementing the Paris Agreement are estimated to be tens of trillions of dollars over many years, a significant portion of global gross domestic product, currently valued at about eighty trillion dollars per year. Many climate scientists question whether plans anticipated under the Paris agreement will be adequate.
Recent discovery of a fundamental mistake in the physics of heat explained below suggests that greenhouse-warming theory may not only be mistaken, it may not even be physically possible. Don’t you think we should re-evaluate the science before spending such large amounts of money?
Since 1798, physicists have thought of heat as being a rate of flow of thermal energy per second—a flux. The greater the flux absorbed, the higher the temperature of the absorbing body is assumed to become. Note that this definition does not require us to specify or even understand what thermal energy actually is physically.
In 1896, Svante Arrhenius quantified greenhouse-warming theory thinking in terms of net flux—the amount of flux of thermal energy absorbed by Earth minus the amount of flux of thermal energy lost into space by Earth. Just four years later, in 1900, Max Planck formulated an empirical equation based on extensive laboratory measurements showing that the physical properties of heat change with the temperatures of the radiating and absorbing bodies and that flux is simply a function of this difference in their temperatures—not a function of the net amount of flux of thermal energy. In other words, what is important for warming is not the amount of radiation flowing, as currently assumed, but the physical properties of the radiation.
Furthermore, in 1900 physicists were just beginning to understand the atomic structure of matter. Electrons had just been discovered in 1897 and the nucleus of atoms would not be discovered until 1909. It would be many decades before physicists began to understand that thermal energy in matter, physically, is the oscillation of all the bonds holding matter together. We are just beginning to understand now that the amplitude of oscillation at each frequency of oscillation is transmitted through air and space via resonance, as described below, much like a radio signal at a single frequency, but thermal energy is transmitted at all frequencies of oscillation simultaneously.
Recent warming and warming throughout Earth history can be explained far more precisely and in much greater detail by observed depletion of the ozone layer caused by chlorine and bromine gases. One atom of chlorine, under the right atmospheric conditions in the lower stratosphere, is observed to destroy approximately 100,000 molecules of ozone, making ozone depletion the Achilles heel of climate warming.
The ozone layer protects life on Earth from the highest energy solar radiation to reach the lower stratosphere. Ozone depletion allows more than usual of this very hot, ultraviolet-B radiation to reach Earth. Ultraviolet-B radiation is 48 times more energetic and has 48 times greater thermal effect on the absorbing body than infrared radiation absorbed most strongly by carbon dioxide. Ultraviolet-B radiation has enough energy to burn your skin and cause skin cancer, cataracts, and mutations.
Climate scientists have dismissed ozone depletion as being unimportant for warming because they failed to understand that the narrow band of frequencies, the small amount of frequencies, contained in ultraviolet-B radiation is far more important energetically than the broad band of frequencies, the large amount of frequencies, of the much less energetic infrared radiation absorbed by greenhouse gases. Ultraviolet-B radiation causes sunburn while no amount of infrared radiation over any length of time can cause sunburn.
Ozone depletion and related warming began to increase around 1970 as humans began manufacturing more and more chlorofluorocarbon gases used as refrigerants, solvents, and foam-blowing agents. These gases, when broken down by ultraviolet radiation in the stratosphere, release atoms of chlorine, depleting the ozone layer. Global warming stopped increasing in 1998 after the United Nations Montreal Protocol had mandated major cutbacks in production of these chlorofluorocarbon gases. Humans appear to have caused the increase in warming beginning around 1970 and to have stopped this increase in warming by 1998. Warming throughout Earth history, on the other hand, appears to have been caused by large, effusive, basaltic, volcanic eruptions covering hundreds to millions of square kilometers of land, emitting megatons of chlorine and bromine (See WhyClimateChanges.com).
Ozone depletion, which is greatest during winter in polar regions, explains why the greatest warming observed was on the Antarctic Peninsula, just inside the Antarctic ozone hole, why warming primarily affects minimum monthly temperatures when ozone is most depleted, and why warming has been greatest at latitudes above forty degrees. Furthermore, the northern hemisphere contains 90% of world population and most industry, suggesting ground-level ozone formed by pollution may be dissociated by the increased ultraviolet-B radiation causing greater observed air temperatures in the most populated areas as observed.
Greenhouse-warming theory assumes that mean global surface temperatures rise when greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere absorb infrared radiation from Earth. This rise in temperature is thought to be a few degrees Celsius when the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is doubled.
But no body of matter can be warmed in any way by absorbing its own radiation. This is not physically possible. If that were possible, bodies of matter could spontaneously heat up. Something we all know does not happen.
Imagine two bodies of matter next to each other. Each at the same temperature. Each potentially absorbing radiation from the other. Neither can get hotter. Neither will get hotter, no matter how long you wait. Both bodies can lose heat to cooler surroundings, but neither can absorb heat from the other body as long as both bodies are at the same temperature. Heat is what a body of matter must absorb to get hotter. Heat is well-observed to flow by radiation or by conduction only from a body at a higher temperature to a body at a lower temperature. The smaller the temperature difference, the slower the flow of heat—the smaller the flux. Zero difference in temperature means zero flow of heat, which means zero increase in temperature of the absorbing body. Earth cannot physically be warmed by its own radiation.
This single observation is completely sufficient to show that greenhouse-warming theory is not physically possible, but there are many other reasons based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what heat physically is and how heat physically flows.
Some scientists propose that greenhouse gases act like a blanket surrounding Earth, keeping Earth approximately 33oC warmer than expected for a planet at Earth’s distance from Sun. Blankets are well-known to slow the loss of thermal energy from a body of matter, but a blanket cannot be the source of new thermal energy required to increase the temperature of the body under the blanket, unless it is an electric blanket that adds thermal energy from somewhere else. Earth’s blanket is observed to be the stratosphere, which does act like an electric blanket heated by solar radiation.
The stratosphere is the only part of the atmosphere below the thermosphere where temperatures increase with increasing altitude from approximately -51oC at the base of the stratosphere to ‑15oC at the top of the stratosphere. This temperature increase is caused by high-energy solar ultraviolet radiation causing dissociation of the bonds that hold together gas molecules such as oxygen and ozone. Upon dissociation, when the bond is broken, the pieces of a gas molecule fly apart at high velocity. Temperature of a gas is well-known to be proportional to the average kinetic energy of all gas molecules, which for a single molecule is equal to the mass times the velocity squared. Thus, when a molecular bond is dissociated, all of the energy holding the atoms together is converted instantaneously and completely into increased air temperature. Greenhouse gases, on the other hand, absorbing terrestrial infrared radiation that is not energetic enough to cause dissociation, have never been shown by experiment to cause significant increase in air temperature as explained at JustProveCO2.com.
Other scientists argue that slowing the cooling of Earth, which is heated by Sun, would cause a net increase in thermal flux absorbed by Earth, which would cause an increase in Earth’s surface temperature. This widespread assumption, emphasized by Joseph Fourier in 1822, turns out to be mistaken. To understand why, we need to understand the observed physical relationships between thermal energy, heat, and temperature.
Thermal energy in matter is well observed to be the oscillation, at trillions of cycles per second, of all the bonds holding matter together. The higher the thermal energy, the higher the amplitudes and frequencies of oscillation, and the higher the temperature of the body of matter.
In 1900, Max Planck derived an equation by trial and error that has become known as Planck’s Law. Planck’s Law calculates the observed intensity or amplitude of oscillation at each frequency of oscillation for radiation emitted by a body of matter at a specific temperature as shown in the next figure. Thermal radiation from Earth, at a temperature of 288 Kelvin, consists of the narrow spectrum of frequencies of oscillation shown in green. Thermal radiation from the tungsten filament of an incandescent light bulb at 3300K consists of a broader spectrum of frequencies shown in yellow and green. Thermal radiation from Sun at 5770K consists of a much broader spectrum of frequencies shown in red, yellow and green.
Note in these plots of Planck’s empirical law that the higher the temperature, the broader the spectrum of frequencies, the higher the amplitude of oscillation at each and every frequency, and the higher the frequencies of oscillation that are oscillating with the largest amplitudes of
oscillation. Radiation from Sun (red) clearly contains much higher frequencies and amplitudes of oscillation than radiation from Earth (green).
These frequencies and amplitudes of oscillation contained within thermal radiation must also be the frequencies and amplitudes of oscillation on the surface of the emitting body, which is transmitting them. They must exist on the surface of the radiating body for that body to be at the temperature shown.
Heat, that which must be absorbed by matter to increase its temperature, is similarly a broad spectrum or continuum of frequencies and corresponding amplitudes. For example, the broad continuum of heat that Earth, with a temperature of 288K, must absorb to reach a temperature of 3300K is shown by all the values within the yellow-shaded area in the figure. The physical properties of heat and the thermal effects of this heat are determined both by the temperature of the emitting body and by the temperature of the absorbing body.
To develop his law, Planck postulated that thermal energy (E) at the molecular level, equals the Planck constant (h) times the frequency of oscillation (ν, the Greek letter nu). This simple equation, E=hν, says that thermal energy of oscillation (E) of a single, frictionless, molecular-bond-scale oscillator is merely the frequency of oscillation of that particular oscillator times a scaling constant. Thus, thermal energy is physically the same thing as frequency of oscillation, and the Planck constant (h) is the number of electronvolts or joules of energy contained in one cycle per second of frequency of oscillation. E=hν is plotted as an alternative x-axis at the top of the figure. E=hν is now known as the Planck-Einstein relation and is widely accepted as physically accurate.
E=hν also applies at the macroscopic level to the total thermal energy contained within radiation. In this case, frequency of oscillation (ν), plotted on the lower x-axis, is a broad spectrum or a continuum of values that all coexist. Similarly, energy (E), plotted on the upper x-axis, is a broad spectrum or continuum of values that all coexist. Note from Planck’s Law that energy is a function of frequency, not intensity, amplitude, or amount. There is a different energy at each frequency. The total energy of radiation, therefore, is the result of the simultaneous oscillation of all the bonds holding matter together—the co-existence of all frequencies of oscillation. Thermal radiation is the result of a very, very large number of molecular-scale oscillators, all oscillating simultaneously on the surface of the radiating body.
Again, Planck’s law was derived by trial and error to describe accurately the observed physical properties of thermal radiation. These figures show clearly that what we perceive as temperature of matter is the result of a very broad spectrum of frequencies of oscillation of all the bonds holding matter together. Similarly, increased temperature is the result of increased amplitudes of oscillation at each and every frequency of oscillation. For the temperature of a body of matter to increase by absorbing radiation, that radiation must come from a hotter body that is emitting radiation containing higher amplitudes of oscillation at each and every frequency. This is why a body of matter cannot be heated by its own radiation. Its own radiation does not contain the higher amplitudes of oscillation required to raise the temperature.
For centuries, heat was thought of as an element, a substance, a subtle fluid, where the greater the amount of heat a body contained, the hotter the body must become. Beginning in 1798, this concept began to evolve to current widespread thinking that heat is not a thing, but simply a flux of an unspecified thing that we call thermal energy. This thermal energy is assumed to be quantified by the number or amount of watts, which is energy per second, passing through a surface area of one square meter—the greater the amount of flux in minus flux out, the higher the resulting temperature is assumed to become.
In 1896, Svante Arrhenius quantified greenhouse-warming theory by simply assuming that temperature was a function of the amount of solar flux absorbed by Earth minus the amount of flux radiated back into space. This is the primary assumption underlying greenhouse-warming theory today. This is the way scientists think today when they argue that greenhouse gases slow the cooling of Earth, decreasing the flux of heat away from Earth, so that Earth must, therefore, get hotter. But this is not the way heat is observed to flow.
Throughout the late 19th century, physicists were measuring the physical properties of visible light and infrared radiation carefully in the laboratory and in the field. There was general confusion, however, that still exists today. They thought of light as traveling as waves, plotting wavelength on the x-axis, where wavelength is thought to equal the velocity of light divided by wave frequency. But waves travel by deforming matter and there is no matter in space, no luminiferous aether, through which waves can travel, and frequency is frequency of oscillation of molecular bonds, not wave frequency.
Physicists thought they were measuring intensity in watts per square meter because their sensors produced watts of electricity. They then integrated energy on the y-axis as a function of wavelength on the x-axis to get total energy. Even Planck, after postulating that E=hν, did not stop to think that energy should, therefore, be plotted on an alternate x-axis rather than on the y-axis. And no one realized that it makes no physical sense to integrate as a function of wavelength or frequency. Integration assumes that frequencies of oscillation are additive. They are not. When you shine many frequencies of light on the same location in air and space, they all simply coexist. There is no physical way for frequencies of oscillation to interact, to be added together, or even to be seen until they interact with matter. I do not show numbers on the y-axis because amplitude of oscillation needs to be calibrated in the laboratory. Amplitude of oscillation is clearly what makes a given frequency of oscillation appear brighter—more intense.
This flux approach to heat has worked reasonably well even to this day when temperatures are within a narrow range. In the case of global warming, however, Sun is 20 times hotter than Earth and the flux approach breaks down catastrophically. This mistaken assumption that radiant energy can be described accurately by a single amount of flux, a single number of watts per square meter, is the primary reason why greenhouse-warming theory grossly overestimates the thermal effects of infrared radiation.
Thermal energy, heat, and temperature in matter are all observed to be the result of the simultaneous oscillation of all the bonds holding matter together—a broad spectrum or continuum of frequencies of oscillation that coexist. Each degree of freedom of each bond oscillates at a frequency of oscillation that we perceive as a color for visible light and an amplitude of oscillation that we perceive as intensity or brightness of that color.
In 1900, Knut Ångström, a radiation physicist, showed by two experiments that carbon dioxide absorbs less than 16% of the infrared frequencies of oscillation radiated by Earth (the black vertical lines shown in the Planck’s Law figure above) and that this absorption did not seem to have any noticeable effect on air temperature. Planck’s Law shows us that heat consists of a broad spectrum or continuum of frequencies of oscillation. Absorbing 16% of these frequencies, therefore, does not constitute absorbing heat just as 16% of a person does not constitute a person. Greenhouse gases do not absorb heat. If only these absorbed frequencies were re-emitted and then absorbed by some piece of matter, they would not warm that matter even to the temperature of Earth. They do not contain the broad spectrum or continuum of frequencies that we now know makes up heat.
Ångström’s paper convinced most physicists in 1900 that greenhouse gases could not explain global warming. The fundamental breakdown in the scientific method regarding greenhouse gases occurred in 1938 when Guy Callendar, a British steam engineer, resuscitated greenhouse-warming theory from the trash heap of history, summarily dismissing Ångström’s paper in a few words contained in boxes of detailed notes. Ångström was the last physicist to think carefully about the physics of greenhouse-warming theory until 2010 when, tracking down several enigmas in global warming, I began to question the physics involved.
If you take two bodies of matter that are identical in every way except for temperature and connect them together so that heat can flow by radiation or conduction, the resulting temperature at thermal equilibrium will be the average of the two temperatures, not the sum of the two temperatures.
If you shine a light on a small black object, the rate of warming, the rate that heat flows, similarly decreases with decreasing difference in temperature forming an asymptotic curve shown by the black line in the next figure. The red line shows the temperature calculated by multiplying 4.6% times the average of the existing temperature and the ending temperature at each 10-second interval. The 4.6% has to do with the conductivity per second of heat into the black object. Similar asymptotic curves are observed for both warming and cooling of matter by conduction or by absorbing or emitting radiation. The flux of heat is determined by the temperature difference, not by the amount of flux as currently assumed by greenhouse-warming theory and by most physicists. This is a very important observation.
The next question is: How does a broad spectrum of frequencies of oscillation flow through air and space? The simplest example is a single frequency transmitted by a radio station. The radio program modulates a center frequency assigned by the government to prevent interference with other nearby stations. The radio transmitter causes oscillations of this modulated center frequency on the surface of the radio antenna. You tune your radio receiver to resonate at that specific center frequency. Resonance, also known as sympathetic vibration, is the way two oscillators oscillating at the same frequency can, under the best of conditions, average their amplitudes of oscillation, effectively transferring amplitude from the transmitter to the receiver. In this way, your radio receiver differentiates the center frequency of the radio station from all the other frequencies out there. It is the oscillatory nature of electromagnetic radiation that makes it possible for radiation, for heat, to be transmitted across air and space.
Resonance is observed to transfer amplitude of oscillation only from higher amplitude to lower amplitude, which Planck’s Law shows clearly is from higher temperature to lower temperature. Resonance occurs between a discrete molecular oscillator on the surface of the emitting body and a discrete molecular oscillator on the surface of the absorbing body. Radiant heat travels through air and space when resonance occurs simultaneously between different pairs of oscillators at each and every frequency of oscillation of all the molecular oscillators on the surface of matter.
Resonance is all around us. You experience resonance most clearly when you push a child on a swing. If you push at exactly the same frequency as the swing is swinging, the amplitude of the swing will increase. You tune radio and television receivers to resonate at whatever frequency your preferred station is transmitting. Your cellphone is tuned to resonate with the different frequencies of transmission and reception used at a local cell tower. Individual hair cells, called cilia, in the cochlea of your ears, resonate with sounds in air, sending signals to your brain, allowing you to hear. Visible colors, which are frequencies of oscillation between 400 and 789 trillion cycles per second, resonate with cells in the cones of your eyes that send signals to your brain, allowing you to see ten million different colors.
For centuries, scientists have argued whether light, in the form of electromagnetic radiation, travels through space as waves or as particles. Waves and particles, however, describe how the energies of motion of physical pieces of matter are visualized as traveling. But light is not physical matter and light cannot be observed until it interacts with physical matter. Light appears to travel by resonance.
Heat is simply a broad spectrum of frequencies of oscillation where each discrete molecular oscillator on the surface of the emitting matter resonates with a discrete molecular oscillator on the surface of the absorbing matter, radiating amplitude of oscillation for each frequency of oscillation simultaneously by resonance.
Conduction is resonance enabled by physical contact of molecules of matter. Radiation is resonance enabled by the interaction of what we think of as electric and magnetic fields via line of sight where what we think of as the velocity of light is proportional to the very short time required for resonance to occur. Frequency of oscillation is observed not to change with distance, even over galactic distances, except for Doppler effects where the source and receiver are moving relative to each other. Similarly, amplitude of oscillation is not observed to change with distance. Thus, the Planck temperature of radiation from Sun is the same close to Sun as it is close to Earth. But the thermal effect of solar radiation is observed to decrease with the square of the distance. What appears to be happening is that the density of molecular bonds on the surface of matter that resonate decreases with distance so that the amplitude increase due to resonance must be shared with increasing numbers of bonds.
A 20-page scientific paper A Most Inconvenient Reality — Greenhouse Gases Cannot Physically Explain Observed Global Warming submitted to the Journal of Geophysical Research on May 28, 2018, that describes these issues in more detail. This file includes the editor’s email rejecting the paper without review.