The waves move generally toward the west in the lower tropospheric
tradewind flow across the Atlantic Ocean. They are first seen usually
in April or May and continue until October or November. The waves have
a period of about 3 or 4 days and a wavelength of 2000 to 2500 km
[1200 to 1500 mi], typically (Burpee 1974). One should keep in mind
that the "waves" can be more correctly thought of as the convectively
active troughs along an extended wave train. On average, about 60
waves are generated over North Africa each year, but it appears that
the number that is formed has no relationship to how much tropical
cyclone activity there is over the Atlantic each year.

I wonder how many times I have never looked at this page until I was
ready to look at the cause.

Now let us perceive if we may; a 3 or 4 day interval with an uptake of
some 12 to 16 perhaps consequent to their being harmonics of a shared
algorithm.

We know that one part of the sum is the time of the phase and that it
must follow a suitable synergy. (That last part may have to fall by
the wayside in light of recent developments.) So what astronomical
phenomena are there that might give us a 3 or 4 day pattern?

Possibly something to do with Libration and mascons...

Mmmm... ...I wonder..

On Oct 20, 9:55 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

The waves move generally toward the west in the lower tropospheric
tradewind flow across the Atlantic Ocean. They are first seen usually
in April or May and continue until October or November. The waves have
a period of about 3 or 4 days and a wavelength of 2000 to 2500 km
[1200 to 1500 mi], typically (Burpee 1974).

Now let us perceive if we may; a 3 or 4 day interval with an uptake of
some 12 to 16 perhaps consequent to their being harmonics of a shared
algorithm.

We know that one part of the sum is the time of the phase and that it
must follow a suitable synergy. (That last part may have to fall by
the wayside in light of recent developments.) So what astronomical
phenomena are there that might give us a 3 or 4 day pattern?

Possibly something to do with Libration and mascons...

The seasonality of hurricanes tells us one series of lunar librations:

Just as the rotation axis of the Earth is inclined by (90°-23.5°) to
the Earth-Sun direction (drawing above, from section #3 "Seasons of
the year"), so the rotation axis of the Moon is inclined by about (90°-
6.5°) to the mean Moon-Earth line. As noted, that line is also the
direction of the Moon's elongation, on the average always pointed
towards Earth.

In the discussion of the seasons of the year, it was shown how the
23.5° tilt of the Earth axis lets the Sun shine onto the polar caps,
onto circular areas around the poles, giving them 24-hour sunlight.
The drawing demonstrates how in June the Sun illuminates the northern
polar cap and in December (when shade and light are interchanged) the
southern one.

http://www.phy6.org/stargaze/Smoon4.htm

In other words, as the moon presents significantly more effect on
Caribbean storms between April to October, perhaps something in its
make-up is central to the plot. (Or maybe something just a little
north by north west? What did Shakespeare know?)

On Oct 21, 7:32 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Oct 20, 9:55 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Perhaps I aught to have pointed out that this is redacted stuff but of
course that point was obvious so .... then I figured there is a
braneded fool stalking me.

So just for emphasis, the copy is edited.

The waves move generally toward the west in the lower tropospheric
tradewind flow across the Atlantic Ocean. They are first seen usually
in April or May and continue until October or November. The waves have
a period of about 3 or 4 days and a wavelength of 2000 to 2500 km
[1200 to 1500 mi], typically (Burpee 1974).

Now let us perceive if we may; a 3 or 4 day interval with an uptake of
some 12 to 16 perhaps consequent to their being harmonics of a shared
algorithm.

We know that one part of the sum is the time of the phase and that it
must follow a suitable synergy. (That last part may have to fall by
the wayside in light of recent developments.) So what astronomical
phenomena are there that might give us a 3 or 4 day pattern?

Possibly something to do with Libration and mascons...

The seasonality of hurricanes tells us one series of lunar librations:

Just as the rotation axis of the Earth is inclined by (90°-23.5°) to
the Earth-Sun direction (drawing above, from section #3 "Seasons of
the year"), so the rotation axis of the Moon is inclined by about (90°-
6.5°) to the mean Moon-Earth line. As noted, that line is also the
direction of the Moon's elongation, on the average always pointed
towards Earth.

In the discussion of the seasons of the year, it was shown how the
23.5° tilt of the Earth axis lets the Sun shine onto the polar caps,
onto circular areas around the poles, giving them 24-hour sunlight.
The drawing demonstrates how in June the Sun illuminates the northern
polar cap and in December (when shade and light are interchanged) the
southern one.

http://www.phy6.org/stargaze/Smoon4.htm

In other words, as the moon presents significantly more effect on
Caribbean storms between April to October, perhaps something in its
make-up is central to the plot. (Or maybe something just a little
north by north west? What did Shakespeare know?)

From the same page:

"A third "libration" arises because during the 12 hours or so when the
Moon is visible on any day, the rotation of the Earth can displace an
observer by up to one diameter of the Earth (for observers on the
equator), shifting the line of view and slightly increasing the
observable area.

Since this effect allows astronomers to "peek past the edge," it too
is counted as a sort of libration. At a lunar distance of 60 RE (Earth
radii), a displacement of 1 RE shifts the viewing angle by about 1°."

Not a cumulative one though. But none the less one that could
conceivably fit into the periodicity.

Here is the skinny:

The moon rotates in some 27.3 days. And orbits the earth in some 29.5.

"The rotation of the Moon-Earth line around the Earth.

The rotation of the Moon around its axis is steady and lags behind the
rotation across Earth. In the drawing on the web page, the elliptical
shape of the Moon is exaggerated.

If the Moon orbited the Earth at the same rate as its body rotated
around its axis, the Earth-Moon line and the long axis of the Moon
would match.

However in the rapid part of the process.. the long axis would make a
small angle with the Earth-Moon line, allowing astronomers to peek
past the western edge of the visible Moon.

When the motion of the Moon is extra-slow, an extra little sliver near
the eastern edge becomes visible. This type of libration increases
coverage at the east and west edges, by about 7.7 degrees (out of
360)."

I have the feeling this 4 to 8 degrees (just under) is the key in the
same way that the moon hitting the angle 60 degrees to us (in the UK)
as it does when the declination puts it about 7 degrees south of the
equator causes storms or nice weather to peak.

That harmonic is also when the moon raising north enters the
Equatorial region and ceases to produce hurricanes. (But why only in
that direction?)

Or not, as the case may be. What a load of cacca. And just to foist
another one, the page goes on to state that Venus is in captured
rotation to the earth (and moon) so now it's a four body problem.

My brain is closing down for the duration. Good job it's Sun day. ISTR
that Venus has no -or very little magnetism. Ooofff...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten...1/5382/1476/F1
The front and back versions look remarkably similar.

"Several processes have been proposed to explain the formation and
support mechanism of lunar mascons"

But why the hell there is a rush to explain and thus coat with ****
any further research on the reasons for their existence is beyond me.
Is it a sop to the likes of (for example -no particular merit in them
justifies the ad hominem attack) George and Skywise (mere palls of a
nebula who would I am sure, otherwise find this stuff interesting and
might get involved, if only it could be put to good use.)

The article I read leading to the above, notes that:

"Although mascons also exist on Mars, none have been found on Venus or
Earth; those two larger planets, however, have had an active tectonic
(geological) past that has drawn their crusts down into their
interiors several times in the past few billion years, homogenizing
the distribution of mass."

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...v_loworbit.htm

Cobblers written before Grace and Iris got off the ground perhaps? The
paper was written some 10 years ago.

The mascon that stretches from Britain and Norway to just off the
coast of Florida might not have such a large field in comparison to
the anomalies on the moon but they do serve their purpose.

Coupled with the negative vibes given off by the east Canadian shield
(one wonders if the magnetic poles are involved) their effect on the
planet's weather is very much in evidence to this thaumaturge.

On Oct 24, 3:51 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten...1/5382/1476/F1
The front and back versions look remarkably similar.

"Several processes have been proposed to explain the formation and
support mechanism of lunar mascons"

But why the hell there is a rush to explain and thus coat with ****
any further research on the reasons for their existence is beyond me.
Is it a sop to the likes of (for example -no particular merit in them
justifies the ad hominem attack) George and Skywise (mere palls of a
nebula who would I am sure, otherwise find this stuff interesting and
might get involved, if only it could be put to good use.)

The article I read leading to the above, notes that:

"Although mascons also exist on Mars, none have been found on Venus or
Earth; those two larger planets, however, have had an active tectonic
(geological) past that has drawn their crusts down into their
interiors several times in the past few billion years, homogenizing
the distribution of mass."

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...v_loworbit.htm

Cobblers written before Grace and Iris got off the ground perhaps? The
paper was written some 10 years ago.

The mascon that stretches from Britain and Norway to just off the
coast of Florida might not have such a large field in comparison to
the anomalies on the moon but they do serve their purpose.

Coupled with the negative vibes given off by the east Canadian shield
(one wonders if the magnetic poles are involved) their effect on the
planet's weather is very much in evidence to this thaumaturge.

On Oct 24, 3:51 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten...1/5382/1476/F1
The front and back versions look remarkably similar.

"Several processes have been proposed to explain the formation and
support mechanism of lunar mascons"

But why the hell there is a rush to explain and thus coat with ****
any further research on the reasons for their existence is beyond me.
Is it a sop to the likes of (for example -no particular merit in them
justifies the ad hominem attack) George and Skywise (mere palls of a
nebula who would I am sure, otherwise find this stuff interesting and
might get involved, if only it could be put to good use.)

The article I read leading to the above, notes that:

"Although mascons also exist on Mars, none have been found on Venus or
Earth; those two larger planets, however, have had an active tectonic
(geological) past that has drawn their crusts down into their
interiors several times in the past few billion years, homogenizing
the distribution of mass."

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...v_loworbit.htm

Cobblers written before Grace and Iris got off the ground perhaps? The
paper was written some 10 years ago.

The mascon that stretches from Britain and Norway to just off the
coast of Florida might not have such a large field in comparison to
the anomalies on the moon but they do serve their purpose.

Coupled with the negative vibes given off by the east Canadian shield
(one wonders if the magnetic poles are involved) their effect on the
planet's weather is very much in evidence to this thaumaturge.

And then there is this:

"Corbyn's conviction that the sun's behavior is the driving force
behind earthly weather patterns is linked to another deeply held
belief: The sun and radiation from outer space play a far more
important role than the burning of fossil fuels in any global warming
that might be taking place. The purveyors of the principal theory of
global warming, he says, have sold the world a bill of goods.

"If you **** in a lake, the level will go up," says Corbyn. "But it
wouldn't be an important factor. [Human contribution to carbon dioxide
levels] is not as minuscule as that, but it's not important."

Eventually, Corbyn hopes that his work will lead to the rise of a new
meteorology, combining old-fashioned supercomputing with newfangled
solar factors.

He believes his techniques for forecasting will prove as influential
in the 21st century as Lewis Fry Richardson's numerical methods have
proved in the 20th.

Consider that Richardson devised his theories using pencil and paper
in a freezing barn on the battlefields of France and that they now
form the basis of a multibillion-dollar industry. Suddenly the idea of
another revolutionary weather-forecasting technique emerging from
Piers Corbyn's shambolic south London office doesn't seem so
ridiculous after all."

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.02/weather_pr.html

I liked the comparison of Richardson's method with The world's fifth
most powerful computer at Bracknell, England, a Silicon Graphics/Cray
T3E900, with 880 DEC Alpha microprocessors, running at 450 MHz:

"But after World War II, nearly a quarter century after Richardson
outlined the wild scheme in his 1922 volume Weather Prediction by
Numerical Process, something curious happened. Computing pioneer John
von Neumann saw that the first digital computers, built to simulate
the physics of nuclear weapons, could also be used to model the
weather.

By the time Richardson died in 1953, just short of his 72nd birthday,
the University of Pennsylvania's ENIAC had run his equations - and
they worked.

Today, weather forecasts are produced using pretty much the method
Richardson described. The world's fifth most powerful forecasting
computer, a Silicon Graphics/Cray T3E900, resides in Bracknell,
England, in a meteorological office building named for Richardson.

Its 880 DEC Alpha microprocessors, running at 450 MHz, work together
much the same way Richardson imagined his 64,000 human weather
computers would. Richardson might have blown his first forecast, but
his long-range outlook on the future of the science was dead on."