You know I never give up. The full explanation on the process o production of hematite stained grains is described in this book:

I. P. Martini (Editor), W. Chesworth. Weathering, Soils & Paleosols (Developments in Earth Surface Processes). Chapter 12, page 283-299.

Any advanced book on paleopedology (paleoedafology) describes the process, equivalences and algorithms.

Well, at least the correlation exists. More hematite stained quartz = higher insolation. I’ll stay looking for that Japanese paper.

You should look for :-)

Nasif Nahle (22:18:22) :
The process is well explained here:
Sam Boggs Jr. Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy (4th Edition).

On which page does it say how many Watt/m2 produces such and such ISG?

Dear Leif,

The author describes the process on page 125, but not how many Watts/m2 produces such and such ISG. I think we should look for the information you’re looking for in Geology or Paleoclimatology works.

On which page does it say how many Watt/m2 produces such and such ISG?

to deduce a solar variation we have to do this to an accuracy of better that 0.1% in the inversion of the proxy and THAT is what I would like to see how is done.

The process is well explained here:

Sam Boggs Jr. Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy (4th Edition).

Enthusiasts would say that there is considerable power at 100 years ….

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9826/tsifft.jpg

Bill

to deduce a solar variation we have to do this to an accuracy of better that 0.1% in the inversion of the proxy and THAT is what I would like to see how is done.

Nasif Nahle (09:25:04) :
There are lots of references to the process of ISG formation.
Sure. What I need to see is how many W/m2 an ‘ISG’-whatever corresponds to.

Dear Leif,

Interesting question… I think experts have made the same comparisons as for other proxies; however, we know for sure that the Iron Stained Grains are produced by the solar radiation and that by means of measuring the volume of the Iron Stained Grains we can deduce the intensity of the incident solar radiation on soils, and the relative humidity and the temperature of the atmosphere.

Duh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side note to George Smith from a previous thread: Yes, the 2nd Law was initially formulated dealing with cyclic engines, but the more modern formulation deals with the net increase in entropy by counting accessible microstates. I totally agree a single photon re-radiated from a CO2 molecule can approach the sun and be absorbed, thereby giving the appearance of violating the 2nd Law. However, a more appropriate model is that of two blackbodies at two different temperatures separated from each in the vacuum. They will each radiate and absorb photons from each other. However, the higher temperature BB will have a greater proportion of higher energy photons in its emission spectrum. The number of accessible microstates for the higher energy photons is greater when they are absorbed by the lower temperature BB. Eventually both will reach the same equilibrium temperature as required by the 2nd Law.

Well I’m not in disagreement with any of that; and I wasn’t talking about a single photon going to the sun. But what I did say was that no single photon out of a stream can identify the temperature of the source which emitted it.

And you might be interested to know that the two black bodies at different temperatures is not any modern interpretation.

In fact it was also Clausius, who used that concept in first proving one of the fundamental precepts of Optics; namely that no optical system can form an image who’se irradiance is greater than the radiance of the object being imaged. This i s today embodied in concepts such as the Lagrange invariant, and the Optical sine theorem, and that French term “etendue”.

These ideas are often ascribed incorrectly to Optical workers, whereas they were all derived from the second law, by Clausius, a thermodynamicist.

My point was that it is plain silly to deny the process we call (perhaps incorrectly) the “greenhouse effect” is possible by calling on the second law of thermodynamics. The second law does not prohibit long wave radiation fromt the atmosphere from returning to the ground (which is hotter) and slowing down the rate of cooling.

I looked at some of those references cited; but didn’t get past the assumption they made that the earth was a blacl body and its emissivity is unity.

That’s not a good way to start off a paper trying to convince someone there isn’t any “greenhouse” effect, even if it is misnamed.

Likewise trying to argue that the Stefan- Boltzmann law is not applicable to gases, doesn’t fly; unless you try to use that to argue that the sun therefore is not a black body radiator.
Well nothing is a black body radiator, and nothing has unity emissivity.

But they are still useful concepts to approxijate real sources such as the sun, and the earth and its atmosphere. The BB radiation and spectrum does bound the possible thermal radiation from any real body, including gases.

Nasif Nahle (07:27:03) :
The correlation SI-ISG-T has been tested experimentally.
Reference please.

Dear Leif,

There are lots of references to the process of ISG formation. Here, few references:

http://www.archive.org/stream/annualreport26survgoog/annualreport26survgoog_djvu.txt

K. Naha and S. K. Ray. Structural evolution of the Simla klippe in the lower Himalayas. International Journal of Earth Sciences. Volume 61, Number 3 / November, 1972.

Stanley V. Margolis and David H. Krinsley. Submicroscopic Frosting on Eolian and Subaqueous Quartz Sand Grains. GSA Bulletin; December 1971; v. 82; no. 12; p. 3395-3406.

As soon as I find the reference to the Japanese experiment simulating the SI, I’ll send it to you.