Thread 16775760

Is there a speed limit to how fast heat can transfer like c?

>>16775760 (OP)
I would assume that limit is c, or at least approaches c. Since heat is just kinetic energy transfer.
I don't know shit but like, what actually happens on a subatomic scale when one particle transfers kinetic energy to another, any physicsboys know?

>>16775760 (OP)
What is infrared light, Ken?

>>16775760 (OP)
does the doggo get to lick her puss puss?

>>16775782
Not super relevant but it always annoys me when people make that "infrared = heat" conflation.
Warm things glow in the infrared for the exact same reason really hot things glow in the visible range. There is absolutely nothing intrinsically linking IR, specifically, to heat.

>>16775760 (OP)
>you just know

>>16775760 (OP)
The speed limit of heat is the speed limit of whatever medium it transfers through. If it's infrared, it moves at c. If it's in a solid material, it moves at the speed of sound. If it's convection, it moves at the speed of the fluid's flow

>>16775760 (OP)
What’s her name cuh? Finna goon

>>16775977
Yup me too

>>16775931
They most definitely do not transfer heat through a vacuum. Never. The hot sun is a myth and it really bothers me that people conflate this with heat.

>>16775931
We have receptors that perceive infra red light as heat. Most heat trasnfer in nature is via infra red light. So it's absolutely normal to see it as a heat. Not technically correct, but you have to be retarded not to understand why most people perceive infra red light as a heat.

>>16775760 (OP)
"Heat transfer" is the transfer of energy between excitable particles, so I would imagine there's a relationship between the speed of the particles themselves and how excitable those lower-energy particles are. Idfk I only have a BS in Physics

>>16776208
Speed depends on the mechanism, I suppose. Conduction, convection, radiation. The fastest possible mechanism is radiative transfer which is bound by the speed of light. In solids, it’s usually on the order of the speed of sound because that’s how fast vibrational energy propagates.

>>16776136
Reading comprehension, nigger.
>>16776198
>We have receptors that perceive infra red light as heat
No we absolutely do not. Infrared light can heat things up for the same reason any other light can.
>>16776198
>Most heat trasnfer in nature is via infra red light
Also false.
On earth most heat transfer is conduction and convection. Black body radiation is horribly ineffective in comparison.
In space, most emissions fall outside of the IR range so still wrong.

>>16776198
>Not technically correct, but you have to be retarded not to understand why most people perceive infra red light as a heat
I understand why. And it's literally because people hear about "infrared cameras" and immediately associate that with heat detection. And they aren't entirely wrong for doing so.
My issue is that people think IR = heat even though literally any frequency of EM radiation can be called "heat" for exactly the same reason.

>>16776239
>Reading comprehension, nigger.
Same to you, Raj. Heat transfer through a vaccum. Explain it or stfu.

>>16776247
>Heat transfer through a vaccum. Explain it or stfu.
Black body radiation. Yes, it's light. But not specifically IR.
The entire point I'm making is right fucking here:
>>16775931
>Warm things glow in the infrared for the exact same reason really hot things glow in the visible range

>>16776251
>But not specifically IR.
Nor is IR specifically excluded.
Dishonest and disingenuous. You really did find home on /sci/, retard.

>>16776278
>Nor is IR specifically excluded.
Where did I say it should be?
Reading comprehension, nigger.

>>16776288
Grandparent post right there.
>>16775931
>Not super relevant but it always annoys me when people make that "infrared = heat" conflation.
Reading comprehension, angry young man.

>>16775782
Electromagnetic radiation. Not heat.

>>16776452
>IR does neither cook, warm, nor heat, motherfuckers.
Breakfast omlette needs more than thought and prayer for burning bush, sensei. Even if get flaming bush in dream, birds' nest long gone to ashes.
Wake up.

>>16776239
We do have those receptors. When you are in the sun and feel ot's heat, it's your receptors detecting infra red. You still didnXt get enough of energy to have any noticeable changes in your skin temperature. Same with a fire. It's not a hot air, it' infra red that you feel. Same way infra red lamps are used on farms as a heating for chicks and piglets.
So it's absolutely normal that for the most of people infra red=heat.

>>16776337
Read, nigger, read. Infrared != heat.
It's one particular emission pathway.
Many hot things do not produce IR and many IR sources are not hot.

>>16776458
Point a TV remote at your arm and hold the button down. If it feels warm to you I guarantee it's because you're smoking crack.

>>16776456
>be me
>read OP
>throw out radiation because loss
>but MUH OVEN
Ovens function via multiple modes. Even the broiler isn't strictly infrared. I don't even know why you're talking about omelettes. You cook directly on the flame/coils/induction pad?

>>16776469
>huh, IR = heat after all.
I literally accept your apology.

>>16776473
>silly me, ice doesn't burn
No shit.

>>16776479
It literally doesn't. You have lost the argument and switched to "pretending to be trolling" mode like 3 posts ago.
Just admit you're retarded.

You just know.

>>16776529
>ir photons literally do not transfer heat
Pakistani LLMs are smarter than this.

>>16776570
>it thinks IR photons are the optimal wavelength for rate of heat transfer
Pakistani LLMs are smarter than this, too.

OP post the fucking name already

>>16775919
Yes. But it is not degenerate to the female brain. Evolution has designed them to be sexual objects. It is only to the male mind that such things are degenerate, and therefore why they hide it.

>>16775760 (OP)
It's needs a temperature gradient so the limit would be absolute zero on the cold side and the melting temperature of the material on the high side.

>>16775931
>Nothing intrinsically linking IR to heat
>Except that IR can transfer heat
https://www.tempco.com/Infrared-Heaters.htm

>>16776136
>The sun isn't hot

>>16776740
Duh, it's night.

>>16776572
>it thinks IR photons are the optimal wavelength for rate of heat transfer
Someone is making things up.

>>16776573
Exactly.

THE NAME! GIVE ME THE WRETCHED NAME!

>>16775760 (OP)
In vaccum there is no heat, heat is when energy/particles collide. So speed of the heat is inverse of temperature itself. The more temp there is, the slower the heat is spreading because its all clumped up

>>16776970
Most thermal radiation from everyday objects (like your body, a radiator, or coffee cup) is in the infrared range. Feeling warmth from the Sun or a campfire; that’s radiant heat traveling through space as photons. Sometimes that space is a vacuum.

>>16776469
What's your point?
How a tiny hair. Can you feel the weights?
Can you read in a moon light? Can't you see light?
Do you even understand how dumb you are?

>>16776739
Heat is an energy. And ir transfers taht energy. Ir doesn't transfer the heat itself.

>>16776970
But in the essense it's the energy ot atoms and molecules bein spread. If it's spread through infra red, it's still that energy being transfered.

>>16775760 (OP)
>Is there a speed limit to how fast heat can transfer like c?
Conductive, convective, or radiant?

>>16776996
Heat is a transfer of energy due to differences in temperature. That's it, nothing more. Three methods: conduction, convention, and radiation. Radiation uses photon exchange, even through a vacuum. Most of those photons emitted by the radiant objects are in the infrared range.
All three of these methods are limited by c, because everything is limited by c.
All information about the transfer of energy between objects of different temperature are limited by c.

Okay, it's time for some Physicsposting.

Heat is a form of energy. It can be measured with any of the normal energy units, like Joules, Calories, Ergs etc.

Heat is transferred, in our macroscopic experience, either radiatively, convectively or through direct contact. Radiative heat transfer is done primarily through electromagnetic radiation, the most commonly known of which is infra-red photons. Convection, on the other hand, transfers heat through physical contact of a working fluid with the source of heat. The fluid becomes hotter, and then leaves the vicinity of the heat source, coming into contact with whatever the heat is being transferred to. And lastly physical contact, where the object is in direct physical contact with the heat source.

On a fundamental microscopic level, there is only really one way of transferring energy; radiative. The overwhelming majority of physical interactions we observe in our macroscopic lives are mediated by electromagnetic force, and this includes the interactions between atoms that we call "physical contact", which is really just the electrons of the atoms repelling each other, and is required for both convective and contact heat transfer.

In order for two charged particles to exchange energy with each other, they must have a vehicle to deliver it between one another. This comes in the form of a photon, which physically carries the energy of one particle to the other. The other forces can also transfer energy, but they do not affect most of what we would commonly consider heat transfer.

Now, whilst photons can only be exchanged at a maximum speed of c, the energy they can carry per photon is, in theory, unlimited. In practice, there are interesting phenomena that come into effect when high energy photons get near other particles, one of which is pair production.

So ultimately, as far as I understand fundamental physics, there is no limit to the rate at which heat can be transferred.

>>16777032
Everything wrong you said is just wrong.
Everything right you said has already been said.

>>16777035
>Everything wrong you said is just wrong.

Well yes, that's an empty logical statement. All that is red is red. I find it interesting that you would avoid stating what you actually thought I got wrong. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I would really appreciate it if you would tell me. I understand though, it's a lot of time investment for an anonymous cambodian motor-refurbishing forum.

>Everything right you said has already been said.

I didn't care to check. I saw people being wrong, coming out with such backwards takes as "infra-red photons don't carry heat" and, whilst there were some notable responses pushing back, the more voices say something, the more sway it has over the consensus. Condensing the rest of my explanation and conclusion for the OP was merely for the benefit of efficiency.

>>16776995
IR remotes glow brighter in the infrared than a bliling hot skillet.
You can even see the flash on your phone's camera if it doesn't have an IR filter (most don't, try it. Point the tv remote at your phone with the camera on.)

yeah, c

>>16777044
>you are correct. saar
Thank you. I appreciate your openness and honesty.
>Now, whilst photons can only be exchanged at a maximum speed of c, the energy they can carry per photon is, in theory, unlimited.
Yeah, naw.
While photons do travel at speed c, the energy per photon is not unlimited; it’s capped by E = hf, where h is Planck’s constant and f is frequency.
Higher energy = higher frequency, but frequency (and thus energy) cannot be infinite in any physically realizable system. Even theoretically, infinite-energy photons would collapse into black holes (via general relativity).

>>16777059
>You can even see the flash on your phone's camera if it doesn't have an IR filter (most don't, try it. Point the tv remote at your phone with the camera on.)
This very same website also said that I could quick charge my new iPhone in the microwave.

>>16777059
Infrared photons are the messengers of heat transfer by radiation for objects near room temperature. They are emitted due to thermal motion and absorbed by other objects, increasing their thermal energy.
Your tv remote is near-infrared (~850-950nm): too dim to see, too weak to feel.

>>16775931
>Not super relevant but it always annoys me when people make that "infrared = heat" conflation.
Super relevant.
Technically, any photon can transfer energy, and if absorbed, that energy usually ends up as heat (thermal motion).
The efficiency of the recieving material to absorb those photons matters. Infrared photons are most efficiently absorbed by many materials (including your skin) and directly converted to heat. Visible or UV photons can also heat things up (e.g., sunlight warming your skin), and they may also trigger chemical reactions (like sunburn or photosynthesis). Microwave photons (used in ovens) are tuned to vibrate water molecules; also producing heat.
>>16777059
>What's six orders of magnitude between friends?
Kek

>>16776807
I wanna goon to her so bad

>>16777124
>technically
No, don't even give them that. *Literally* every photon carries energy that can turn into heat.

>>16776996
>IR just transfers heat energy but it doesn't transfer heat energy
>>16777027
>Heat is the transfer of energy
Correct
>Due to differences in temperature
really now?
>Radiation
So IR.

>>16777259
>really now?
Though a closed system in thermodynamic equilibrium may have a temperature, it does no heating.
Put two blocks of the same temperature next to each other and point to the heat.

>>16777253
>turned into heat
By what?

>>16777253
>every photon carries energy that can turn into heat
I am so glad that Dr. Prof. Anon, PhD, MD, DDS,esq. warned us of the X and gamma ray dangers of a night time cookout and marshmallow roast.

>>16777253
>muh shortwave laser
Kek

>>16777266
>Puts Germanium near IR source
>It heats up
MUST BE MAGIC!

>>16777059
Do you understand that infra red is a very wide spectrum. From a near infra red, that some people can see (the one you see is just a red light), to a very long waves.
So you don't know anything about light, and yet dare to argue?

>>16777287
>puts block of germanium
>that's the joke
>nothing else
>it remains
>unchanged
>forever
>i am so fucking confused

+----------------+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| Spectrum Class | Distribution within sunlight (photon %) | Distribution of warming (energy %) | Relative warming/quantity (energy % / photon %) |
+----------------+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| UV | 5.4% | 8.7% | 1.61 |
| Visible | 37.7% | 44.6% | 1.18 |
| IR | 56.9% | 46.7% | 0.82 |
| Other | <0.1% | <0.1% | ~1.0 (negligible) |
+----------------+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
Source: Standard AM1.5 solar spectrum data (NREL). Photon distribution calculated from spectral irradiance integrated over wavelength bands. Energy distribution reflects solar irradiance at Earth's surface. Relative warming/quantity indicates average photon energy in each band.

>>16777311
It's amazing how many IR heaters I can buy on amazon considering IR doesn't heat anything.
SNAKE OIL

>>16777354
>Light from the sun doesn't transfer heat
>All life on earth dies
we so fucked m8

>>16777419
>>16777421
Do you clowns even know who you are talking to anymore? This (>>16775782) guy was pretty clear that infrared photons hot things up nicely, even through space.

>>16777086
Shit, how the fuck did I forget about general relativity?

I guess that means the limit of heat transfer is really a limit on heat flux through an area, such that the energy density remains lower than the Swarzchild limit.

But thanks for taking the time to explain what was actually wrong. What's your background, if you don't mind my asking?

>>16777444
NEET Frogposter, De-Infinitizer.
Classically trained.

>>16777436
I was talking to the guy saying thermodynamics forbids heat exchange via IR while blathering on about thermodynamic equilibrium... because it's funny to me.

>>16777474
That guy lives in your head.

>>16775760 (OP)
Yes, heat can only transfer at or below our server's tick rate. Never any faster.
Humans might consider this to be the speed of light but nobody can truly know for sure.

>>16777504
Are you implying that makes it less fun for me?

>>16777474
Ah, yes, the infrared boiler. Truly, the most applicable design in applied thermodynamics.
One could even translate it as "I can't fucking read."
Additionally, you have failed to note OP's failure to bound his question. It simultaneously means "speed of heat propagation"(this has multiple modes, and thus multiple answers) and time to reach equilibrium(the content of the parenthesis is the same).
Oh, and we're not even on to thermodynamic efficiency yet! Fun times ahead, noob. Infrared is fucking waste heat.

>>16777543
Why are you so mad?
I don't blame OP for you thinking IR doesn't transfer heat.
Just for clarification, you seem to obligate that, picrel does boil water.

>>16777552
I am giving people shit for conflating IR with heat at a 1:1 ratio.
Heat is molecular vibration.
Also, nice electrical appliance. Be a shame if you were to notice the source.

>>16775931
>annoys me when people make that "infrared = heat" conflation
People being right annoys you? Heat is properly defined as the transfer of thermal energy (most don't realize "heat transfer" is redundant). IR is a type of thermal energy transfer so it's heat
>There is absolutely nothing intrinsically linking IR, specifically, to heat
Every single "heat transfer" textbook covers IR in significant depth
It's a fundamental concept in thermal energy transfer ie "heat" and just about every heat analysis would be wrong if IR is neglected.

IR is a type of heat bro

>>16777555
>Heat is properly defined as
Excuse me, but definitions are available via internet access.
We are talking about the noun, not the verb. How the fuck are you stuck at this step?
>A form of energy associated with the motion of atoms or molecules and capable of being transmitted through solid and fluid media by conduction, through fluid media by convection, and through empty space by radiation.

>>16777555
Oh, and look at that...retards on wikipedia.

>restore traditional thermodynamic definition

>For over a decade of consensus, the Wikipedia article on heat used the thermodynamic definition. That definition was perhaps popularised by G.H. Bryan's 1907 book. It has the logical advantage that it sets up the first law's definition of internal energy without relying on the notion of temperature, which is best treated in the context of the second law. It has also the advantage that it observes the facts that obsoleted the caloric theory of heat, that friction generates heat. Heat transfer engineers are happy to think of heat transfer only in terms of thermal conduction and radiation, but that doesn't allow friction to generate heat. It is desirable to make the definition refer to the traditional thermodynamic concept of 'system and surroundings', because what happens in the surroundings is not always easy to specify in narrow thermodynamic terms. Chjoaygame (talk) 02:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

>>16777558
>>16777559

>>16777560
>literally called "heat transfer"
I don't know, man. Something fucking happened since I learned the damn subject.
I'm thinking retards.
>"heat" and "heat transfer" are apparently synonyms now

>>16777563
I can count on one hand the number of people in my life that know the difference between heat and temperature.

>>16777567
Average vs specific.
>specific heat
GOD FUCKING DAMN IT WIKIPEDIA.

>>16777249
I wanna be the dog and i would also suck on her big toe. Thoroughly

>>16775977
>>16776028
>>16776573
>>16776807
>>16777249
>>16777606
magui_ansuz

>>16777759
My man praise to you

>>16777540
>fun
I'm more concerned with your inability to understand heat, honestly.

>>16777553
>I am giving people shit for conflating IR with heat at a 1:1 ratio.
Which exact post made that bullshit statement? I think you imagined that.

Temperature is
To heat, as speed is to, uh,
Velocity, man.
Heat moves from an, uh,
An origin to a, like,
Destination, man.

>>16777787
>Says the guy who claims IR isn't a form of heat transfer.
Pottery

No matter how you describe it or what scale you use, all heat or heating comes down to the radiant transfer of a photon from one particle to another. That particle is often an electron, and mankind has done amazing things with this one neat trick.
>>16775760 (OP)
c, OP.

>>16777858
Dude, that guy in your head is not me.

as you can see looking at different materials the heat can transfer more slower or more faster depending on he materials i have a slower question
why does the heat travel UP ? is it gravity?
does the heat travel UP in solid materials like metal?

>>16777876
It is more efficient to send electricity through the metal coil to cause it to heat the air and walls of the oven than it is to heat the walls and air in the oven in order to make the coils glow and move electrons.

>>16777856
Temp’s like speed, man
Heat’s the flow, not the motion.
Hot to cold. That’s plan.
Waves don’t ride the board
Heat’s the curl, temp’s the swell.
Drop in where it’s hot.

>>16777869
>You don't understand heat
Heat is IR
>yes but you don't understand heat
LOL, yes, you're living rent free in MY head lamo

>>16777927
>Heat is IR
Yes.

>>16777558
>definitions are available via internet access
University level textbooks outrank the internet little chuddy, and they all say heat is a type of energy transfer, not energy itself
>We are talking about the noun, not the verb
If you admit there's "two" types of heat then it's not wrong to say "infrared = heat" and it's correct to say IR is intrinsically linked to heat...saying it's not is like claiming there's nothing intrinsically linking a battery to energy because you're a brainlet and forget there's both potential and kinetic energy

>>16777559
What kind of absolute retard digs up the dweeb arguments behind a wiki page?
They don't even train AI on that because half the comments are too brindead

>>16778117
>why are you getting frustrated by
In an attempt to explain myself, I went to get material to better explain myself.
It was not there.
In fact, there was drivel about "heat" meaning "energy in transit," when the usage they were discussing was a verb.
The internet is a fucking mess and used to contain adequate information.

>>16778263
>i checked the facts
>they were wrong, everywhere, wrong
>someone changed them all

>>16778426
>I haven't noticed the slow degradation of information provided by the internet, or am actively involved in it and trying to gaslight you
Heat is a noun and a verb. Wikipedia is co-opted garbage.

>>16778498
>Heat is a noun and a verb
>>>/lit/

>>16778498
You and Pluto should date.

>>16778557
>>16778569
I am surrounded by laymen.

>>16778603
No, you are surrounded by scientists who are willing to change and adapt to new information.
>but muh old way
>i don't like the new way
>i can't learn any more
Kek.

>>16778498
Heat is not a thing. Hot and cold don't refer to an objective "hot" or "cold". They measure the energy level of a system. Like when you forge steel for example. You heat the metal right? But you aren't "adding heat". Like you don't have a bag of heat to pour in. What you do is make the atoms in the metal high energy. Their energy level continues to grow and eventually it will emit light and glow as it sheds off said excess energy. Just like when it gets colder you aren't adding in any cold to it. You just bring the energy level back down once you have excited the atoms enough to configure them in the arrangement you want. So you're measuring an energy state in a given system. That's heat.