There you go again with facts. I was hoping LR would explain how the heat would travel through a meter or two of ice and not melt it but then melt the ice at the top of the ice.

Actually, the ice at the top melts mainly because of the sun. The bad news is that the more open water there is, the more the sun's heat will be stored in the water. The ice reflected the heat to a great extent, but the water absorbs it.


(Nice to see you again, Methos.)

quote:

Originally posted by methos:
"Temperatures at the North Pole never get above freezing (32° Fahrenheit or 0° Celsius)... The ice never melts completely, but some of the top does, forming puddles."
...
Assuming this information is correct, we are talking about an area with 24 hour a day sunshine that never gets above freezing, yet water puddle are to be found on the surface."


No volcanoes necessary. Take a glass of ice, let it start to melt, and measure the temperature of the water. As long as the ice stays, the water will be 32 F. Same thing at the north pole. As long as the ice stays, the water around it will be the same temperature as the ice.

But if the ice is melting, what happens to the temperature of the water, when the ice is gone? Whatever caused the ice to melt - won't the transition from solid to liquid continue? If not, why not?

I think that, eventually, the water will reach the ambient temperature. Basically, it should be just like a glass of ice water in your house. Leave it out long enough, and it will be about the same temperature as the air around it. Of course, having the sun shine on it will raise its temperature o an extent.

It seems to me that if water freezes at 32 degrees F, and ice melts at 32 degrees F, we can't have it both ways. We probably also can't measure the temperature outdoors at the North Pole with that precision for any extended period of time. If we did control it that closely, I would expect it to remain exactly in its condition at the start of that controlled temperature. The ice would remain ice and the water would continue to be water, a very unrealistic expectation. IMHO. Until convinced otherwise, I believe the arctic ice is melting, the polar bears are threatened, and the climatologists are right - with few exceptions.
BUt I would like to hear methos' opinion on the water fueled automobile - hoax ?

The temperature and pressure at which solid, liquid, and gaseous water coexist in equilibrium is called the triple point of water. This point is used to define the units of temperature (the kelvin, the SI unit of thermodynamic temperature and, indirectly, the degree Celsius and even the degree Fahrenheit). As a consequence, water's triple point temperature is a prescribed value rather than a measured quantity. The triple point is at a temperature of 273.16 K (0.01 °C) by convention, and at a pressure of 611.73 Pa. This pressure is quite low, about 1/166 of the normal sea level barometric pressure of 101,325 Pa. - Wikipedia

We've all seen ice on a sidewalk with some water on top. At that point, water vapor is quite possibly present, even if we can't see it. As stated above, the atmospheric pressure has to be at a certain level as well. Since the high temps at the North Pole are about 0°C (32°F), it wouldn't surprise me that the Triple Point is reached there on many sunny days in the summer.

But I agree with you (and all the scientists) that it is very obvious that the Arctic ice cap is disappearing, although it will be a few years (decades) until it is gone forever. But polar bears will have ceased to exist in the wild by that point. In fact, somewhere in AP, there exist a post of mine from a few years back in which I said "I'm going to miss polar bears."

I do find it funny that the same people that, until very recently, denied that Global Warming existed are now trying to use science to explain how it is a natural phenomenon even resorting to reasoning that is tortured at best and often laughable.

A "Discussion" on Global Warming on AP from 2004. Note the facts and figures from those saying it obviously is happening and showing quotes from actual scientists who say that it is fueled by human activity. Note the lack of facts and figures from those denying it. (They didn't even use the petition with the dentist and Ginger Spice as their "scientists.)

Both water and ice can exist at the "freezing point". As long as they are in contact, they'll be about the same temperature. If you had a really big glass, the water far from the ice would be warmer (just like the water in the rest of the ocean is warmer) but the water near the ice would be the same temp as the ice.

The key is that "heat" and "temperature" are two different things. If you add heat to ice and monitor the temperature, you'll see the temperature rise, until the melting point. As you add more and more heat, the temperature will change little, if at all, until the ice melts. Then, the temperature will start rising again as you add still more heat.

As the arctic ice melts, the water near it stays at the freezing point, but the water a ways away from it is warmer. And, of course, once the ice is gone from an area, the water warms.


------


As far as the water-fueled car... The most recent claim for power from water that I have heard of is from Genepax.
They basically claim to:
(1) use a special mystery material to break water down into hydrogen and oxygen.
(2) combine the hydrogen and oxygen together to get energy (and produce water).

Nothing wrong with step 2. It's the basis behind hydrogen-fueled cars. The problem is step 1. Breaking up water requires energy. If done perfectly, it would require the exact amount of energy you'd get by putting it back together, so you wouldn't gain any energy from the process.

So what do I think is going on? Two choices:
(1) It's a total hoax. The technology's secret. They could have hidden batteries for all we know.
(2) The special mystery material is actually getting used up. If that's so, the material's the real source of the energy. It would be misleading to call that water-fueled, though. It would actually be special mystery material fueled and water catalyzed. (A catalyst is a material that starts and ends the same, but speeds up the reaction)