The Value That Descibes Cold

"Cold" is the absence of heat. Heat is well defined. What's the problem?

I can buy loads of cold (generally stacked in matter) and logic dictates a convention should exist. As a human with a living organism system I regularly buy cold sold in liquids for input to the internal areas of my system; also I pay for cold on the external organ!

Cold is basically a matter state which has to occur for me to survive in a heat saturated environment but it's just that the invasive properties of heat energy are more useful for scientific study.

How could I purchase something if it is lacking existence, I am able to purchase a state deficient of another state not the deficiency of existence. Why pull the punches in describing what occurs by convention? Isn't engineering a place to value conventional operation?

You are buying 'energy', when you buy a hot drink the energy has been expended in warming it up...
When you buy a cold drink...heck, you can finish this post yourself...
Del

Whaaa?
Cold intake is exactly the same as heat intake...it's just the temperature difference happens to be negative.
So cold intake is a negative heat intake.
Do you want to measure debt in a unit other than your local currency?
Maybe 1$ of debt could be called a trivia?
Or maybe $1,000,000 could be called a millibank.
In UK £1000,000 could be a milliRBS
Del

Heat energy has quantities and forms all particular to it's capabilities and I would ask a question about the ability of cold to exist in its own forms perhaps best described by it's own quantities because it may behave differently within matter. (eg. superconductors)

However, a cold measurement unit is already invented! I'm not kidding:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frigorie

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frigoria

My conjecture is that it was developed by some marketing genius in order to get rid of the negative connotations arising from the word "calorie": In most countries the thermal unit is the calorie (rarely the Joule), not the BTU. Since in Romance languages like French, Spanish or Italian the word "calorie" or "caloria" is easily associated with heat, vendors usually rate their AC equipment in frigories, a cooler word from Latin "frigus" (cold).

Anyway, I'd like to contribute to the confusion by proposing the Xul (a darkness unit) and the decileb (dL, a silence unit).

I've loaded the bull container with your frig ore on my little frigate next to the Xul container so that it wont leak into the decileb compartment! Darkness does exist but I can't buy a quantity of it for purposeful input, other people do need it in volume though. We do however seek enormous amounts of space invasion as unitary items, solutions, aeration, explosion, dilution, bouyancy etc. but most people confuse it with the occupation of area (its opposite).

I've never heard of frigories normally I've heard kW! I'm not going to ask the less than stellar sales agent "how many frigories" with any great expectation. But it does seem to be legitimate.

Brett,

firstly let me assume that you're not a computer trying to trick me, pursuing to pass the Turing test. If it weren't the case, just a question: How many units of lack of money do you earn when buying a unit of cold?

As a human let me start by saying "your reply is begging for a double entry analysis of your terminology" but due to not being a computional human labelled accountant I'm inferior to the task. But I have a card that buys plenty of debt however intolerably (and it gives me small token of a chill)!

I'm with you fernandotasso, on the Xul and the decleb. These are important units for the measurement of dark matter environments, zeroing in upon the dark matter state itself.

Also like the frigorie, they are measures of positive and marketable commodities: shielding efficacy of course; or, in some future banality of our supersaturated world, descriptors of vacation retreats for the light and sound weary....

Actually one can make a good case for an engineering unit of cold. If we begin by thinking of cold as being the absence of heat, and we then recall that heat is the dynamic flow of energy from a body of higher temperature to a body of lower temperature, it becomes trivial to think of cold as a measure of energy flow not happening. So, it we were to see, for example, a perfectly insulated system, we would then find it useful to characterize the system boundary as cold.

The difficulty would, of course, arise when we try to fashion a measurement tool since all known devices cause something to happen, i.e., current flows, energy flows, metal expands, etc. But, in the case of cold, since it is a measure of nothing happening, we must assure ourselves that we have a measuring device which causes nothing to happen, else we find ourselves facing a sort of Hyzenburg (named after Bobby Hyzenburg, my former roommate at Ossining) Uncertainity limit where we find that, if we know precisely that something is doing nothing, we cannot determine precisely what it is not doing.

Assuming we can overcome all that, I propose the unit of measurement to be the BennyHillum, with NIST to maintain a dead parrot as a primary standard. Most of us should find the BH to be too large for ordinary engineering purposes and we might better resort to an everyday unit of nanoBH.

I used to regularly buy the cold front on my TV application back in the eighties but I didn't realize it was made from the same bennyhilium as my grandfathers favorite time period TV application.

I have heard of this phenomena refereed to as 'Cool-th', or the ability to draw heat from a source. It can be an intellectual and scientific mind bender for anyone trying to devise an effective experiment to prove or disprove the idea that cool-th plays an active role in heat transfer. Precedent to the idea of cool-th are notes found in esoteric teachings, the Tao, shamanism, and lately quantum physics support for ideas that were previously thought immeasurable, or just too 'far out' to be taken seriously. Toss in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the first postulate of Hermes T., strong/weak forces, etc., and stir gently with yin/yang....... Well, you see what I mean. Hard to prove a negative.

I don't have any answer from a scientific standpoint. Try me in a hundred years.

Not many people want to work in the frozen section! I never noticed perspiration in below temps before, was it the gear you were wearing, I suppose I would have assumed it was the clothes but the further lag on perspiration might be something I've never heard about.

Do you think cold has value as an engineering value in modern schemes that include greater dimensional analysis.

No

Even just scientifically;

When matter slows and cannot contain its structure against energy inputs it is therefore not the same state of matter.

If matter is at a colder stage where it is unstable structured within the range of normal dynamic inputs then how could it be considered the same state of structuring that matter?

It must be that at some point of freezing all matter becomes another state!

Therefore saturation of cold is a state that can encompass matter. It has a capability to be input, moved, transferred, dissipated, output, locked in; attempting to continually ignore it is more meaningless.

For example; the North and South poles are our cold points and the equatorial region our hot zone in between is just weather. We could start the dimensional analysis of what affect those cold locks have on the warmer surrounding Earth as dimensional analysis of cold input! Where does the cold come from? It's anywhere heat is dissipating but not returning so basically the space front is our cold input.

It's not like I'm analyzing putting plasma guns in satellite orbital firing range of the equatorial upper atmosphere for more blue shield, just asking is it worth noting value of the input as a convention to avoid long winded physical phenomena descriptions. Convention is good for engineering; do you disagree?

i thought it was called temperature with a minus in front of it.

Cold is a subjective term, we find 0 degrees Celsius cold while the sun would find certain temperatures to cool to keep its fusion going that would burn us to a crisp.

And the Inuit would call 0 degrees Celsius probably summer time

"Or is this is an unnecessary attempt at revising standards!"

I suppose you meant this to be a question. my answer is Yes.

just as light's intensity can be measured, but darkness is simply the absence of light, so also is cold. it is simply the absence of heat. all matter has latent heat (from molecular activity), but it gets cold because heat is drawn away or extracted from it (resulting to lower molecular activity).

It was an option so I didn't question it, else people would believe this is a questioning not discussion. (I also don't have a great respect for every convention of grammatical form but that is more about the originators of my education leaning somewhere.)

Darkness will not remain where light is but cold will remain where heat is, that's called 'hysterisis' and ignoring it seems like an attempt to ignore physics to me.

This is a great concept to turn over to Owl Gore (check the etymology on that) and see if he can't make some kind of trading platform out of it like he did for "Global Warming"

Now there's an idea. If we can create some sort of cap and trade for cold, i.e., you only get to use as much cold this year as you did last year, else you pay a tax...

I could then buy up cold credits from various sources, combine them into common instruments and remarket them to investment banks who are overflowing with capital ...what, you say they've already done WHAT?? Oh, drat.

Presence or absence of cold. Hmm....

Come to North Dakota around mid January through February. WE have every well defined term for 'cold' you could ever need! Some of them cant even be printed here in polite terms!

WE know that despite thermal movement from higher to lower levels is caused by thermionic energy radiation, Cold can radiate too! Come here and see for your self!

That's sooo cool-th!