View Single Post
nealjking
nealjking is offline
#10
Jul16-08, 07:18 PM
P: 7
I have also been studying Miskolczi's paper, and have gotten through about to page 10 before being stopped by a series of problems and apparent non sequitors, some of which have been mentioned by others..

I have written this up and sent my comments to Dr. Miskolczi, who said he would be traveling until August and might be able to respond at that time. The main points can be summarized as follows:

- The validity of the “classical” statement of the Virial Theorem (specifically, the ratio [total KE]/[total PE] = ˝) seems very doubtful in this application. (There is a lot of calculation behind this simple statement.)

- The relationships between the bulk quantities and the fluxes ([total KE] and EU, and [total PE] and the radiation flux) are not clear. What are the equations relating them?

- It is not clear how to interpret Eq. (7) in terms of the total energy flux into a specific system. It seems to me that any argument based on conservation of energy must have such an interpretation.

- It is not clear how the factor of (3/2) between SU and OLR jumps discontinuously to (1) as the strength of the radiation-molecule interaction vanishes.

- I do not understand the derivation of Eq. (9) from Eq. (8).

I hope he gets back to me.

If anyone wants to see the gory details, I can provide them.