Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) (sci.geo.meteorology) For the discussion of meteorology and related topics. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 20, 2:56*pm, " wrote:
On Jan 20, 11:16*am, Russell wrote: On Jan 20, 7:04*am, uri wrote: Is atmospheric dynamics related to atmospheric physics or to meteorology? I largely agree with Harry's reply. *Meteorology can have an operational forecasting component that atmospheric physics generally lacks, but the fundamental subject matter overlaps significantly. *I did my second graduate degree as a student in a meteorology department but my research was done with a professor of physics whose group was called the atmospheric physics ghoup. *I disagree slightly about "brain fry", but affinities for different topics depends on the person. *BTW I also have degrees in physics. Cheers, Russell Russell, I'm not quite sure that I grasp what you mean by stating that "Meteorolgy can have a operational forcasting component that atmospheric physics generally lacks". Simply that someone working in atmospheric physics, and especially training in atmospheric physics in a physics department, does not emphasize doing or preparing students to do operational forecasting to the extent that tends to occur in meteorology. Of course, there are always variations and exceptions. However, having trained and worked in both environments I've observed the difference between them. Perhaps any difference that today exists between Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics today did not exist when I earned my degrees in physics back in the 1960s, and my specialities were electromagnetic fields and nuclear, so since that time definitions may have changed. Certainly the technology of weather forecasting has changed, largely as a result of doppler radar and global meteorlogical networking. Yes, perhaps an example of how specialties have proliferated and dispersed over that time in general. My wife can predict the coming week's weather by simply using these tools, and she is a teacher of remedial English, not a Meteorologist. TV weathermen seem to use the identical technique, but that doesn't make most of them meteorlogists either. And yes, true meteorology is indeed a "Brain Fry", at least in my opinion, and trust me that I moved away from that subject as quickly as I could while still a physics student. Basic meteorolgy to me seemed quite simple. You simply send up an instumented weather balloon, and plot its measurements on a pseudoadiabatic chart. This will indicate when a clear sky can suddenly create a thunder storm. That part is simple. So simply that every degreed meteologist is generally required to do so as one of his/her lab exercises. Where the "brain fry" enters the scene is when you try to computer model the atmospheric dynamics to make long term predictions. Here, first, second, and third degree differential equations, plus chaos theory enter the picture, and this leads to the "brain fry" that I mentioned. The largest and most complex computers in the world are programmed to address these atmosphere dynamics problems, but thus far, at least as far as I am aware, not one computer model has arrived at a total solution. It is clear that if you understand all of the many variables, none will ever be able to do so. Yes, that is complex, as is working with turbulence in meteorology, but I found turbulence, although complex, much less of a brain fry than applications of group theory to elementary particle physics, even though my physics graduate degree was in particle physics. Like I said, it depends on the person. AFAIK the existence of solutions to the Navier-Stokes equtions still has not beem proven, although I seem to recall some recent progress on that front. In practice, the trick is to focus on the key features and accept some degree of error and uncertainty while recognizing the potential value of what can be forecast with some certainty most of the time. This problem has an analog, which is modeling the US economy. The essential problem is trying to model so many dynamically changing variables, plus the chaos factor. *Pure Brain Fry. Nonlinear systems are challanging. Here where I live near the Northeast US coast, an ocean current called the Gulf Stream plays a major role in our weather. Because the Gulf Stream wanders, it is difficult to take in to consideration for its affect on local atmospheric dynamic, but it plays a significant role. So, go flush last week's atmospheric computer models down the drain. The second order differential equation in the model has changed, and will contine to change on a daily basis. Guys that study these issues are called Meteoroligists, and all are physicists. Unfortunatly, with the state of the art of today, your next year's weather prediction from the "Farmer's Almanac" is about as good as it gets. :-) Russell, for some reason I knew that I would be flamed on my original post, I certainly hope you don't regard my statements as flames, especially since I hardly disagree with you and certainly not in nasty terms. simply because some people who claim to be Meteorologists are not that, but simply posers who read the govenment's weather forcasts, take a quick look at their local doppler weather radar, and then proclaim their forecast for the next day and week's weather on their local TV outlet. Heck, my wife or even my children could do just that! *:-) There is an interesting book, _Authors of the Storm_, which is a sociologist's study of operational forecasters (mostly with the NWS). It looks at, among other things, the tension between government forecasters and the media. The forecasters need the media to transmit their forecasts to the public and the media needs the Weather Service to provide authoritative information. Harry C.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Cheers, Russell |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 20, 4:29 pm, Russell wrote:
On Jan 20, 2:56 pm, " wrote: On Jan 20, 11:16 am, Russell wrote: On Jan 20, 7:04 am, uri wrote: Is atmospheric dynamics related to atmospheric physics or to meteorology? I largely agree with Harry's reply. Meteorology can have an operational forecasting component that atmospheric physics generally lacks, but the fundamental subject matter overlaps significantly. I did my second graduate degree as a student in a meteorology department but my research was done with a professor of physics whose group was called the atmospheric physics ghoup. I disagree slightly about "brain fry", but affinities for different topics depends on the person. BTW I also have degrees in physics. Cheers, Russell Russell, I'm not quite sure that I grasp what you mean by stating that "Meteorolgy can have a operational forcasting component that atmospheric physics generally lacks". Simply that someone working in atmospheric physics, and especially training in atmospheric physics in a physics department, does not emphasize doing or preparing students to do operational forecasting to the extent that tends to occur in meteorology. Of course, there are always variations and exceptions. However, having trained and worked in both environments I've observed the difference between them. Perhaps any difference that today exists between Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics today did not exist when I earned my degrees in physics back in the 1960s, and my specialities were electromagnetic fields and nuclear, so since that time definitions may have changed. Certainly the technology of weather forecasting has changed, largely as a result of doppler radar and global meteorlogical networking. Yes, perhaps an example of how specialties have proliferated and dispersed over that time in general. My wife can predict the coming week's weather by simply using these tools, and she is a teacher of remedial English, not a Meteorologist. TV weathermen seem to use the identical technique, but that doesn't make most of them meteorlogists either. And yes, true meteorology is indeed a "Brain Fry", at least in my opinion, and trust me that I moved away from that subject as quickly as I could while still a physics student. Basic meteorolgy to me seemed quite simple. You simply send up an instumented weather balloon, and plot its measurements on a pseudoadiabatic chart. This will indicate when a clear sky can suddenly create a thunder storm. That part is simple. So simply that every degreed meteologist is generally required to do so as one of his/her lab exercises. Where the "brain fry" enters the scene is when you try to computer model the atmospheric dynamics to make long term predictions. Here, first, second, and third degree differential equations, plus chaos theory enter the picture, and this leads to the "brain fry" that I mentioned. The largest and most complex computers in the world are programmed to address these atmosphere dynamics problems, but thus far, at least as far as I am aware, not one computer model has arrived at a total solution. It is clear that if you understand all of the many variables, none will ever be able to do so. Yes, that is complex, as is working with turbulence in meteorology, but I found turbulence, although complex, much less of a brain fry than applications of group theory to elementary particle physics, even though my physics graduate degree was in particle physics. Like I said, it depends on the person. AFAIK the existence of solutions to the Navier-Stokes equtions still has not beem proven, although I seem to recall some recent progress on that front. In practice, the trick is to focus on the key features and accept some degree of error and uncertainty while recognizing the potential value of what can be forecast with some certainty most of the time. This problem has an analog, which is modeling the US economy. The essential problem is trying to model so many dynamically changing variables, plus the chaos factor. Pure Brain Fry. Nonlinear systems are challanging. Here where I live near the Northeast US coast, an ocean current called the Gulf Stream plays a major role in our weather. Because the Gulf Stream wanders, it is difficult to take in to consideration for its affect on local atmospheric dynamic, but it plays a significant role. So, go flush last week's atmospheric computer models down the drain. The second order differential equation in the model has changed, and will contine to change on a daily basis. Guys that study these issues are called Meteoroligists, and all are physicists. Unfortunatly, with the state of the art of today, your next year's weather prediction from the "Farmer's Almanac" is about as good as it gets. :-) Russell, for some reason I knew that I would be flamed on my original post, I certainly hope you don't regard my statements as flames, especially since I hardly disagree with you and certainly not in nasty terms. simply because some people who claim to be Meteorologists are not that, but simply posers who read the govenment's weather forcasts, take a quick look at their local doppler weather radar, and then proclaim their forecast for the next day and week's weather on their local TV outlet. Heck, my wife or even my children could do just that! :-) There is an interesting book, _Authors of the Storm_, which is a sociologist's study of operational forecasters (mostly with the NWS). It looks at, among other things, the tension between government forecasters and the media. The forecasters need the media to transmit their forecasts to the public and the media needs the Weather Service to provide authoritative information. Cheers, Russell In Muskoka Ontario, tourism is a BIG deal, and a forecast for bad weather on a week-end is costly, and what's worse is when it turned out great. Well as you can imagine the business owners who rely on about 10 weekends a summer are mad at the weatherman. Subsequently, presuming by commercial pressure, (tourist advertising is a BIG deal for the media), every week-end forecast was rosey after that. If a hurricane was barreling in they might forecast sunny with cloudy periods, it became a local joke. Regards Ken S. Tucker |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 21, 5:04*am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On Jan 20, 4:29 pm, Russell wrote: snip There is an interesting book, _Authors of the Storm_, which is a sociologist's study of operational forecasters (mostly with the NWS). *It looks at, among other things, the tension between government forecasters and the media. *The forecasters need the media to transmit their forecasts to the public and the media needs the Weather Service to provide authoritative information. Cheers, Russell In Muskoka Ontario, tourism is a BIG deal, and a forecast for bad weather on a week-end is costly, and what's worse is when it turned out great. Well as you can imagine the business owners who rely on about 10 weekends a summer are mad at the weatherman. Subsequently, presuming by commercial pressure, (tourist advertising is a BIG deal for the media), every week-end forecast was rosey after that. If a hurricane was barreling in they might forecast sunny with cloudy periods, it became a local joke. Regards Ken S. Tucker Weather Service forecasters are familiar with "Chamber of Commerce" forecasts from the media. They are even aware of such pressure on themselves. The topic is also mentioned in _Authors of the Storm_. We used to see such things in Washington, DC, although the different media outlets suffered to varying degrees. Of course, there is often room for interpretation. Those of us at NCEP would occasionally demur with what the local forecast office said. Cheers, Russell |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 21, 6:19 am, Russell wrote:
On Jan 21, 5:04 am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote: On Jan 20, 4:29 pm, Russell wrote: snip There is an interesting book, _Authors of the Storm_, which is a sociologist's study of operational forecasters (mostly with the NWS). It looks at, among other things, the tension between government forecasters and the media. The forecasters need the media to transmit their forecasts to the public and the media needs the Weather Service to provide authoritative information. Cheers, Russell In Muskoka Ontario, tourism is a BIG deal, and a forecast for bad weather on a week-end is costly, and what's worse is when it turned out great. Well as you can imagine the business owners who rely on about 10 weekends a summer are mad at the weatherman. Subsequently, presuming by commercial pressure, (tourist advertising is a BIG deal for the media), every week-end forecast was rosey after that. If a hurricane was barreling in they might forecast sunny with cloudy periods, it became a local joke. Regards Ken S. Tucker Weather Service forecasters are familiar with "Chamber of Commerce" forecasts from the media. They are even aware of such pressure on themselves. The topic is also mentioned in _Authors of the Storm_. We used to see such things in Washington, DC, although the different media outlets suffered to varying degrees. Of course, there is often room for interpretation. Those of us at NCEP would occasionally demur with what the local forecast office said. Cheers, Russell LOL, there's even a name "Chamber of Commerce weather forecast". Regards Ken |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Dynamics of decadal climate variability and implications for itsprediction | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Dynamics of decadal climate variability and implications for itsprediction | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
dynamics problem | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Atmospheric Science Letters V5 | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Atmospheric 'river' and flooding | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) |