Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) (uk.sci.weather) For the discussion of daily weather events, chiefly affecting the UK and adjacent parts of Europe, both past and predicted. The discussion is open to all, but contributions on a practical scientific level are encouraged. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 22, 10:57 pm, Rodney Blackall
wrote: Piers Corbyn was not there which was a pity! Not a touch of hypocrisy there? One day we are going to be sorry he was treated so badly. If there are things he knows that you lot don't and things you know he might use, don't you think you all should be working a little harder to tear each other down? It seems there are quite big effects down to 100 km agl and sometimes down to 30 km. What's an agl? Shouldn't that be above sea surface level? This was a British "Royal Meteorological Society" event was it? The major impact is at high latitudes (aurora zone) usually causing extra heating which sends gravity waves equatorward. "(Gravitational waves are sometimes called gravity waves, but this term is generally reserved for a completely different kind of wave encountered in hydrodynamics.)" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_waves These are Rossby waves? OOF!: "In fluid dynamics, gravity waves are waves generated in a fluid medium or at the interface between two mediums (e.g. the atmosphere or ocean) which has the restoring force of gravity or buoyancy. When a fluid parcel is displaced on an interface or internally to a region with a different density, gravity restores the parcel toward equilibrium resulting in an oscillation about the equilibrium state. Gravity waves on an air-sea interface are called surface gravity waves or surface waves while internal gravity waves are called internal waves. Ocean waves and tsunamis are examples of gravity waves. These waves are generated by wind in the oceans over areas known as the fetch. Gravity waves generally have a period of between 1 and 30 seconds (0.033 to 1 Hz). Alternatively, intragravity waves generally have a period between 30 seconds to 5 minutes (0.05 to 0.005 Hz). Infragravity waves can be felt rather than seen as they have a much greater wave energy." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_wave Never mind about all that cobblers. Do they take place at (for whatever reason) periods of intense stratification? The transit time, sun to Earth may be as long as five days. The ripples did not seem to be localised. What phenomenon or part of the phenomenon are we discussing now? Not the gravity waves may I take it but the discharge time for the particles to arrive? But is this in fact the case? How do we know that there isn't a package of particles that are already here, just waiting for the activity to send it splattering? Local effects ARE observed - these are caused by ultra-high energy particles and cosmic rays. The sources are not obvious, the timing cannot be foretold and at the velocities concerned a tiny error moves the particle shower a very long way. It "cannot" at present be "foretold". This may be because there is an arrogant quorum leading hostilities against anyone who might have some idea. Or you may be right. I might be just another kook. One thing's for certain, no one is going to solve it by saying it can't bew done. We are huiman beings. We know more about the workings of the universe than any other know mortal creatures in the universe. What except us, is to stop us finding out? Somewhat disjointed -or I lack the ability to understand what this is all about: Eruptions on the far side of the Sun are currently invisible until the Sun has rotated enough, so predictions from new areas of activity are questionable to say the least. The main variations in solar output are at the extreme ends of the spectrum (i.e. carry only a tiny fraction of the whole energy) and make most impact in the exosphere, magnetosphere etc., which don't contribute much bulk to the atmosphere as a whole! It seemed that no one has come up with a way of showing a coupling between the atmosphere at 100 km DOWN to the troposphere.A coupling UPWARDS via planetary waves can be demonstrated. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 28 Nov, 22:34, Weatherlawyer wrote:
One day we are going to be sorry he was treated so badly. If there are things he knows that you lot don't and things you know he might use, don't you think you all should be working a little harder to tear each other down? The Met Office have specifically approached him to work with him on the topic. He refused to work with them. Who's got the problem? Richard |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 29, 5:30 pm, Richard Dixon wrote:
On 28 Nov, 22:34, Weatherlawyer wrote: One day we are going to be sorry he was treated so badly. If there are things he knows that you lot don't and things you know he might use, don't you think you all should be working a little harder to tear each other down? The Met Office have specifically approached him to work with him on the topic. He refused to work with them. Who's got the problem? The met officers and others on here are doing a surprisingly good job of defamation on here. I hate to think what they would do to someone who, if he were to reveal all, would lose his business in a flash. ...Oh, ...wait... |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 30, 2:06 pm, Harold Brooks wrote:
Right now, it looks like [this should be either Mr Corbyn, Piers Corbyn or Piers, not the disrespectful surname alone:] Corbyn knows how to forecast events at their climatological frequency (see Martin Rowley's analysis). Unfortunately, as far as I can make out, Martin's analysis relies on his readers being familiar with the victim's words. (At least, this reader has difficulty in differentiating which are the author's words and which are those of the thaumaturge.) If Mr Corbyn's words were in italics as would be the case in a paper copy; or if his words were preceded on Usenet with the appropriate "" signs at the start of every line, then it would be worth my while trying to follow the argument. I have the right to expect that consideration. And so I do. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article 232b038d-59ba-4894-b267-
, says... On Nov 30, 2:06 pm, Harold Brooks wrote: Right now, it looks like [this should be either Mr Corbyn, Piers Corbyn or Piers, not the disrespectful surname alone:] Corbyn knows how to forecast events at their climatological frequency (see Martin Rowley's analysis). Unfortunately, as far as I can make out, Martin's analysis relies on his readers being familiar with the victim's words. (At least, this reader has difficulty in differentiating which are the author's words and which are those of the thaumaturge.) If Mr Corbyn's words were in italics as would be the case in a paper copy; or if his words were preceded on Usenet with the appropriate "" signs at the start of every line, then it would be worth my while trying to follow the argument. I have the right to expect that consideration. And so I do. It's been pointed out to you that the complete press release was posted in this group on 17 October. You can use google groups to find it. Searching for "Weather Action" will find all the threads. The original posting was at http://tinyurl.com/3cwrgr It also seems pretty clear to me that when Martin says, as he did in his discussion of Phase III, 'I have also seen the 'detailed' forecast issued by Weather Action for this period, which is even more alarming thus:.... " Very heavy rain local floods/major storms and thunder. Probably worst in West / Central / South Brit Isles...."' what the forecast in question was. Harold -- Harold Brooks |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() In article 232b038d-59ba-4894-b267- , says... Right now, it looks like [this should be either Mr Corbyn, Piers Corbyn or Piers, not the disrespectful surname alone:] Corbyn knows how to forecast events at their climatological frequency (see Martin Rowley's analysis). Is Mr Corbeen Mr Bean's brother I wonder? :-) Will -- |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Weatherlawyer wrote:
If Mr Corbyn's words were in italics as would be the case in a paper copy; or if his words were preceded on Usenet with the appropriate "" signs at the start of every line, then it would be worth my while trying to follow the argument. That's hilarious, considering that you are one of the worst offenders of not clearing marking what is quoted and what is yours. I refer you to your recent post on the Contrails entry in the FAQ, as one example that springs quickly to mind. -- Steve Loft Sanday, Orkney. 5m ASL. http://sanday.org.uk/weather Free weather station softwa http://sandaysoft.com/ |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steve Loft" wrote in message m... Weatherlawyer wrote: If Mr Corbyn's words were in italics as would be the case in a paper copy; or if his words were preceded on Usenet with the appropriate "" signs at the start of every line, then it would be worth my while trying to follow the argument. That's hilarious, considering that you are one of the worst offenders of not clearing marking what is quoted and what is yours. I refer you to your recent post on the Contrails entry in the FAQ, as one example that springs quickly to mind. How dare you speak to The Special One like that? :-) Will -- |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Will Hand wrote:
How dare you speak to The Special One like that? :-) Sorry, forgot my station for a moment. -- Steve Loft Sanday, Orkney. 5m ASL. http://sanday.org.uk/weather Free weather station softwa http://sandaysoft.com/ |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
NASA: Earth's Atmosphere To Cool And Contract Due To Solar Influence | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Joint USAF/NOAA Report of Solar and Geophysical Activity 13 May 2009Joint USAF/NOAA Report of Solar and Geophysical Activity 13 May 2009 | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Solar activity and Earth's atmosphere | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Solar activity and Earth's atmosphere | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Solar activity and Earth's atmosphere | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) |