A new paradigm explains how oceans store energy not just as heat but also as quantum energy, contributing to accelerating temperature rises. Current climate models need adjustments to include this factor, but reducing greenhouse gas emissions remains essential to address the underlying issue.
An Australian scientist has attributed the accelerating rates of ocean heat uptake, which deviate from current climate models, to quantum physics.
In a recent paper published in the Journal of Physics Communications, Emeritus Professor in Applied Physics at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) Geoff Smith puts forward a new “quantum thermal physics paradigm” to better understand the impact of global warming on oceans and thus on climate and weather.
Rising Ocean Temperatures: A Warning Sign
Professor Smith said accumulated data over 70 years showed an accelerating rise in ocean temperatures and the total energy stored in oceans, with the world earlier this year passing what was described as a “foreboding milestone” – a record global average sea surface temperature of 21.1°C.
“Current scientific models in the presence of ongoing rises in atmospheric greenhouse gasses do not predict this threatening acceleration,” Professor Smith said.
“The solution to this conundrum is that the energy being stored in oceans is a combination of heat with energy which is nature’s source of information on material properties.
“When ocean water is heated by radiation from the sun and the sky it stores energy not only as heat, but as hybrid pairs of photons coupled to oscillating water molecules.
“These pairs are a natural form of quantum information, different from the information researchers are pursuing in the development of quantum computing. This extra store of energy has always been present and aided ocean thermal stability prior to 1960.
“But now the average heat dissipated overnight from each day’s heating is no longer stable as extra heat input from Earth’s atmosphere raises both forms of stored energy.”
Professor Smith said the apparent role of non-thermal energy in accelerating ocean temperatures now needs to be factored into climate models.
“Our current models for the thermal responses of built and natural outdoor systems may also need refining for improved comfort, less use of supplied energy, and better human, plant, and animal health in a warming climate,” Professor Smith said.
“In the end though the only way to slow, then stop an alarming temperature acceleration is to stop the rise in atmospheric greenhouse gases.”
Reference: “A many-body quantum model is proposed as the mechanism responsible for accelerating rates of heat uptake by oceans as anthropogenic heat inputs rise” by and G B Smith, 13 November 2024, Journal of Physics Communications.
DOI: 10.1088/2399-6528/ad8f11
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
7 Comments
“A new paradigm explains how oceans store energy not just as heat but also as quantum energy, contributing to accelerating temperature rises.”
Indeed, and oceans also store energy as kinetic energy in the form of visible surface waves and non-visible ‘internal waves.’ This kinetic energy is capable of doing work in the form of coastal erosion. When the kinetic energy is degraded, it results in the conversion to heat, the ultimate reservoir of all energy.
The message is that the dynamic Earth system is much more complicated than is usually described and raises questions about whether our Global Circulation Models are able to adequately handle everything to provide usable predictions.
From the abstract of the journal article:
“A recent many-body quantum approach to thermal radiation … reveals that the energy capacitance of heated water is about TWICE its heat capacitance, due to energy stored as local hybrid pairs of photons coupled resonantly to local matter excitations, …”
A question that isn’t addressed, let alone answered, is, “How is the total energy of the oceans partitioned between this newly-proposed quantum energy, conventional thermal energy, AND the kinetic energy of waves and currents?” Also, because water temperature is primarily a concern because of melting glaciers terminating in the ocean, and thermosteric expansion of ocean water in the mixed zone, how is the “quantum energy” converted to thermal energy, and what is the magnitude of this transformation?
“This extra store of energy has always been present and aided ocean thermal stability prior to 1960.”
What is so special about 1960?
From the published journal article:
“Remotely collected FTIR spectral intensities from water bodies on Earth and Mars have been reported …”
To the best of my knowledge (and the AI LLM, Copilot, concurs) no standing water has been observed on Mars. While geomorphological evidence strongly suggests that water probably once existed on the surface of Mars, there are currently no existing surface water bodies from which to record FTIR spectra of Martian water.
From the published journal article:
“Internal spectral intensity I(f,T) is the SAME in all internal directions in optically isotropic matter …”
There is no mention in the article of Fresnel’s Equation for transmittance/reflectance across boundaries of differing Complex Refractive Index. It provides an alternative method for calculating the Critical Angle of total internal reflection. Basically, the back reflectance of upward moving photons experience increasing reflectance until 100% is reached at the Critical Angle. The spectral composition of the internally reflected light approaches that of the source as a limit as the reflectance approaches 100%. It is for that reason that I question the quoted statement above.
I should have said “… photons experience increasing reflectance, with increasing angle of incidence, …”
I’m left with the impression that Professor Smith is unfamiliar with Fresnel’s Equation and has developed a hypothesis based on the unstated assumption that a static situation of constants derived from normal (perpendicular) angles of incidence are sufficient to explain the real world where the Earth is constantly rotating and the angle of incidence of incoming solar radiation changes 90 degrees in a nominal 6 hours, with reflection at the surface changing from 100% at the terminator, to about 10% at 60 degrees, and about 2% at 0 deg (solar noon).
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/12/why-albedo-is-the-wrong-measure-of-reflectivity-for-modeling-climate/