The long history of diagonal comparisons

Bayard in the comments linked to Eunice Newton Foote, the Forgotten Pioneer of the Greenhouse Effect:

In her brief study [in 1856], entitled Circumstances affecting the Heat of the Sun’s Rays, the amateur scientist described an experiment in which she exposed glass cylinders equipped with thermometers to the Sun and attached to a pump to draw air from one and compress it in the other.

Eunice compared the heating and cooling in the two cylinders. She observed, first, that the cylinder with the compressed air heated up more than the other in which the vacuum had been drawn. Second, that the heating was greater with moist air than with dry air.

Thirdly, and this was her great and almost fortuitous discovery—since she also experimented with hydrogen and oxygen—that the greatest degree of heating occurred when one of the cylinders was filled with carbonic acid gas: CO2.

OK, this experiment suggests that some gases warm up more than others when in bright sunlight. This illustrates quite a few interesting things about the properties of glass and various gases - mainly density and specific heat capacity of gases, which is why you get the same result with pure argon as with pure CO2 - but it does not in the slightest illustrate what they claim it illustrates. For clarity, Earth's atmosphere is approx. 1% argon and 0.04% CO2.

Here's an article which - inadvertently - makes the contradiction clear:

How can I see for myself that CO2 absorbs heat?

As an experiment that can be done in the home or the classroom, Smerdon recommends filling one soda bottle with CO2 (perhaps from a soda machine) and filling a second bottle with ambient air. “If you expose them both to a heat lamp, the CO2 bottle will warm up much more than the bottle with just ambient air,” he says.

Fine, it does just that. Now, what's the theory again?

Why does carbon dioxide let heat in, but not out?

Energy enters our atmosphere as visible light, whereas it tries to leave as infrared energy. In other words, “energy coming into our planet from the Sun arrives as one currency, and it leaves in another,” said Smerdon.

True.

CO2 molecules don’t really interact with sunlight’s wavelengths. Only after the Earth absorbs sunlight and reemits the energy as infrared waves can the CO2 and other greenhouse gases absorb the energy.

Woah! Just woah! The experiment shows that CO2 is warmed by SW radiation from the Sun (or heat lamp); then they say that CO2 isn't affected by SW radiation, it is only warmed up by LW radiation from the warmed surface ('traps heat')!

If they wanted to illustrate how CO2 is warmed by LW radiation from the surface (i.e. warmed more than N2, O2 or Ar), they should put their bottles - including one filled with argon as a control - in the shade, so that they are only affected by LW radiation from the surface. If the CO2 bottle reaches a higher temperature than the others, it would be persuasive. Only they know that this wouldn't happen and so would not support the theory... which is why they don't do it.

Scientific Approach

This just about sums up Alarmism, which is somewhat ironic, as the author of this particular strip is a True Believer.

Thou shalt neither mock nor question the Holy Scriptures.

From the BBC:

HSBC has reportedly suspended a senior executive who accused central bankers and other officials of exaggerating the financial risks of climate change... During the 15-minute address at the FT Moral Money Summit, Mr Kirk said "Climate change is not a financial risk that we need to worry about."

"Unsubstantiated, shrill, partisan, self-serving, apocalyptic warnings are ALWAYS wrong," a slide shown as part of the presentation said... Later in the presentation, he said: "Who cares if Miami is six metres underwater in 100 years? Amsterdam has been six metres underwater for ages and that's a really nice place."

In cases of transgression, thine employer shalt say Three Hail Mary's and beg for forgiveness:

... a spokesperson shared a statement by HSBC Asset Management chief executive Nicolas Moreau referring to climate change as "one of the most serious emergencies facing the planet... HSBC Asset Management is committed to driving the transition to a sustainable global economy and has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure its clients' monies are managed for positive long-term environmental and social outcomes."

Amen.

Price cap bollocks

The "energy price cap" is forecast to rise by almost half as much again in the autumn. This article explains why.

A little investigation reveals this about the price cap:

Ofgem bases the price cap on how much it would cost a typical energy supplier to provide energy for an average home. It uses a raft of factors which impact upon energy bills in its calculations, as well as considering usage levels and market data across a given period. Wholesale gas and electricity costs for suppliers and the network costs they have to pay, such as infrastructure, are key factors. Ofgem also considers the operating costs and profit margin of suppliers.

However, the price of oil and gas bears no relation to the cost of their production, as their prices fluctuate even when there is no change in the input costs. Thus oil and gas are priced entirely according to what the market will bear. From this we can deduce that the that the bases on which Ofgem sets the price cap are entirely specious, except the last one.

As a thought experiment, what would happen if everyone stopped using oil and gas? We don't have to think too hard, we can just look back to 2020 and see that the price went through the floor. So if everyone decided that the energy companies were charging too much and refused to buy oil or gas, it would become considerably cheaper.

Basically, the price cap is adjusted so that the energy suppliers, who buy on the spot market, where the price is set by speculators, can continue in business. The alternative, that the price is controlled so that the profits of the cartel are contained, is never considered. Hell, the cartel would rather have a windfall tax on their profits than that, which should tell you something.

Could go either way - make up your own mind.

From Euronews:

What role does climate change play in Germany's severe flooding?

How is climate change affecting flooding?

The likelihood of flooding is significantly increased due to the extreme weather patterns caused by global climate change. Changes in the geography of the land also have a part to play in increasing flooding. With certain vegetation and other land barriers being broken down as a result of changing temperatures and freak weather patterns, many of the natural preventative measures against flooding are no longer there.

Higher temperatures mean higher rainfall

America is experiencing its hottest June on record and as a result of this heatwave, we’re experiencing higher air and water temperatures, increasing evaporation. With increased evaporation comes increased rainfall, with longer durations as well as higher intensity and frequency too.

That article contained a link to another article on Euronews:

The longest river in Italy is drying up. What does this mean for those who rely on it for food?

This is a sign of climate change

These record-low water levels, which the AIPO would normally only measure in August, are partly a result of the lack of rainfall that northern Italy has been suffering. “Normally it should rain once every one or two weeks,” says Mantovani, “but now it hasn’t rained for three months.”

The problems start, however, in the mountains, where snowfall has been at its lowest for 20 years measuring 50 per cent less than the seasonal average. The glaciers of the Alps, which act as reservoirs to feed the river, are also shrinking each year. On Monte Viso, a mountain close to the French border where the Po River originates, the permafrost is melting and causing chunks of rock to crumble away.

The situation has set alarm bells ringing about the effects climate change could have on an area so heavily dependent upon the river’s waters. This season has already been a stark warning that the warming planet may turn Italy's fertile farmlands and nutrient-rich Delta into a salty wasteland, while putting hundreds of thousands of livelihoods at risk.

'Impossible' GSCE Maths question?

See e.g. The Daily Express.

1. Here's the basic question. Let's assume side length is 10, for sake of argument. 2. Draw the overlapping bits (dotted outlines) and an isosceles triangle (red outlined), 3. Work out area of the sector (pink). If you can't guess that this is one-third of the area of a circle (which seems a bit obvious, with the benefit of hindsight), you need to work out the angle of the right-hand corner of the triangle (which touches the circle in the centre).
From 3. below, it is 120 deg, which is a third of a full circle 360 deg, so the pink sector has area = pi x r^2 ÷ 3 = 100/3 pi (about 105, in old money). 4. Focus on the triangle (from 2. above).
Sides are all the same length r = 10, so it is an isosceles triangle and angles = 60 deg.
Angle of the triangle on the right where it touches the centre of the circle = 120 deg. (needed for 3. above).
Fold it in half (middle triangle) and the bottom side is half r = 5.
The vertical side is the square root of r^2 - 1/2 r^2 = square root of 3/4 r^2 = square root of 75.
The area of the triangle on the right (or on the left, for that matter) = base x height x 1/2
= 5 x square root of 75 = about 43 in old money.
5. Subtract this from the area of the sector. The pink segment left over thus has area = (100/3 pi) - (5 x square root of 75)
= about 62 in old money. 6. Then subtract four of these segments from the area of a full circle = 100 pi - 4 x ((100/3 pi) - (5 x square root of 75))
= 100 pi - 400/3 pi + 20 x square root of 75
= - 100/3 x pi + 20 x square root of 75
which simplifies slightly to:
= - 100/3 x pi + 10 x square root of 300. = which is about 68.5 in old money.
Looks about right, that's a bit more than one-fifth of the area of the circle (which is about 314).

If you want to boil it down to an equation for the blue area, I think it is:
= -(pi x r^2)/3 + (r x sq root of (3 x r^2)),

UPDATE - Bayard in the comments and Nigel S. via email point out that this can be expressed more elegantly as:
r^2 x (-pi/3 + sqrt(3))

Skateboard upgrade (3)

I decided that I didn't like the old deck. Having designed the perfect deck on paper, I was researching what materials I would need to make my own custom deck when I stumbled across one that matched my design 'to a T' for a modest £45. That was the price for the whole thing complete with weird trucks and wheels (but still a good price for the deck alone, bearing in mind the faff of trying to make my own).

I messed up removing the trucks - bloody Allen key! Are they mental? Since time immemorial, trucks are held on with Philips-head bolts, and the nuts are easily accessible with yer bog standard skateboard all-in-one tool (which these weren't). TBH stepped in to drill out the shredded bolts for me. Trucks went in the metal recycling and I'll keep the wheels (they seem pretty good, the bearings are questionable but nothing a set of Bones REDS won't fix).

The new deck (top of pic below) is 2" shorter, has an elegant and useable shape (your feet don't get lost on half an acre of grip tape. If I put my front foot on, push off and jump on with my back foot, it lands just where I want it); it has a 2 1/2" longer wheelbase so more stable and no front overhang; and a more subtle kicktail (enough is enough). The perfect 'cruiser' for rolling down the pavement*. No good for doing tricks or going fast downhill.
* In case you're wondering, the trucks are the ones that came with the original cheapo skateboard, 7.5" axle and pretty good once I had upgraded the bushings. New trucks and it will be Trigger's skateboard.

Classic head and shoulders formation

In technical analysis, which means recognising patterns in price charts of quoted shares or commodities, one of the most powerful signals is the head and shoulders pattern.

These can form over several months to two years. Basically, the longer the pattern takes to form, the more reliable it is.

Here's Bitcoin over the last five years, from msn:

Purists might argue this looks slightly different to the classic pattern, i.e. the left shoulder is higher than the right shoulder. Or whether we should be using a logarithmic scale. If you zoom in to the last six months, it could be a double top with a consolidation flag on the way down. Be that as it may, a head and shoulders over a one-and-a-half year time frame outweighs such minor niggles, and it looks like the tulip crypto bubble is finally bursting, as any sane person has expected all along.
---------------------------------------
HMRC had an outbreak of common sense and updated their guidance on crypto-currencies. They decided that despite the name, crypto-currencies are not money or a currency, for the simple reason they are not backed by anything. I can't find the quote right now, it was something had to read up on at work. OK, apparently some issuers pretend they are a bank (how is that even legal?) and say that if you can't find a taker for your tokens, you can hand them back to the issuer for a fixed price. In real life, that's not asset-backed* as the issuer will have frittered away your money on something else, that's a Ponzi scheme (and how is that legal?).

* Despite what people say, a fiat currency is backed by something - demand for that country's currency:
- You can only use a country's currency to pay your taxes in that country.
- People will always have to pay taxes, so there will always be demand for your country's currency.
- Everybody in Country X could decide that their country's currency is a load of rubbish and decide to only use USD for savings and payments if they wished.
- Doesn't change anything, Country X tax office works out your tax bill in X-dollars and send you a demand in X-dollars which you have to pay in X-dollars.
- You then have to change the USD you have in your bank account for X-dollars and hand it over to Bank of X.
- So Bank of X will always be able to issue (print) more X-dollars, knowing that sooner or later, people will have to 'buy' them (i.e. hand over hard currency USD).

Skateboard upgrade (2)

Continued from here.

Ebay told me that my new truck bushings wouldn't be here for a fortnight, so I went back to the shop and bought some Independent medium soft in orangey-yellow (£6 for the set). This improved the steering no end. The problem was then that I got 'wheel bite', so I tightened the trucks a bit. Too much, as it turned out. On the test run I fell off and bruised my thumb as it it would only go in a straight line.

So today I loosened the trucks again (back to easily steerable), fashioned some risers out of an old plank and while I was at it, shifted the front trucks an inch forwards and took a power saw to the front to get that 'cruiser' look*. Not quite symmetrical but never mind. The thing now runs silky smooth, I just need to find a place where I can 'practice' (i.e. fall off without people watching): * I have immersed myself in skate culture by watching a few videos on YouTube. They are very elitist.

Only the small skateboards with a kicktail at each end are actually referred to as 'skateboards'. These are for doing tricks, which cause concussion, fractures and bruising.

The really long ones without kicktails are called 'longboards'. These are for whizzing downhill at dangerous speeds.

The middle category, are medium length and have a definite front and back. The rear overhang is longer with a kicktail; the front overhang is shorter, flat and pointy. These are for people who just want to roll down the pavement (and who don't have a death wish). These 'boards are derided as 'cruisers' and don't seem to count.

Skateboard upgrade

Her Indoors bought The Lad a £30 all-in-one skateboard on holiday a couple of years ago. The deck was fine - they are all the same nowadays; nice 7.5" trucks - when I was a kid they went to 6.5"

But the wheels were tiny hard things and the bearings were useless. It wouldn't even accelerate going down a modestly steep road on the caravan site. Give yourself a good push and it ground forward a few feet and then stopped again. We tried going off the ramp at the site skate park; I managed to stay upright, he fell off. The 'board was duly relegated to the shed.

I have finally got round to upgrading:
- OJ Super Juice 60mm 78A wheels - the largest and softest they had in the shop (I'm sure these used to be in orange only - they had any colour except orange. The shop doesn't stock the Kryponics Reds, which would have been my first choice), so I chose yellow. £41 a set.
- Bones REDS bearings. Bones are the industry standard at just under £20 a set, so I went one better and got the REDS. £27 a set.
- plus some 'speed washers' they had kicking around in the workshop and a three-way skateboard tool. £5.
- the bloke in the shop said there's no need to bother with spacers, and he didn't have them in stock anyway.
- to be honest, I think the trucks could do with new rubbers as well. You can only adjust between 'straight ahead' and 'wobbly' - you are supposed to be able to adjust how much they respond when you lean into a curve. I have ordered a new set from eBay for £4.

I am pleased to report that it is now disconcertingly fast, even down my garden path that drops about 2" over a 20 yard distance, and hits the house wall with a reassuring clack after you've jumped off in a panic. I'm sure all this stuff costs about the same in £s as it did in the late 1970s. Back then, this lot would have costs year's pocket money. In real terms, it's now basically free.