Jump to content
Science Forums

Atmospheric Incidents


Recommended Posts

:Exclamati

EarlyRisa, you need to use terms other people use and understand, or if you invent terms, define them in such terms. None of your post makes more than vague sense to people with reasonably good, or even specialized, science and math backgrounds.

 

Also, if you are making some sort of claim (which you don't appear to be doing in this thread, but have in other), you should, in order to follow our site rules

 

"Word salad"-style posts like this vex and offend our readers and members in an unproductive and unhelpful way. Challenging people to understand science and math is good. Challenging them to make sense of your use of language is not.

 

Here's a pointer: when using a word or phrase, first search for it using an internet search engine such as Google. If you find no hits, or find hits only to internet forums or other lightly controlled sites, the phrase is not likely to be understandable to others. If there are hits, go to and read some of them. If they are referring to something other than what you intend, you are likely misusing the phrase.

:Exclamati

 

 

Would it be possible to calculate (if seeded with sence-abiltiy) Incident vectors in the atmosphere that RUN the cause and effect?

I’ll make a SWAG at what your asking here, and give some answers:

Your appear to be asking if one can use physics to calculate the behavior of the atmosphere in such a way that the vectors for some precisely defined particle or collection of particles can be determined to be the cause of the vector of the same or some other particle or precisely defined particle or collection of particles at a later time.

 

This question, and its answer, are famous. With conceivable near-future computer resources, such simulation can be done for only short durations, ie: perhaps a few seconds, or less than a day. Beyond this, it can’t, making such an approach useless for such things as absolutely reliable, detailed predictions weather days, weeks, or years in the future.

 

In 1950, the legendary polymath and computer pioneer John von Neumann speculated that this could be done, greatly improving the human condition by such things as predicting, and better, allowing engineering projects to prevent, droughts, floods and dangerous storms (for links to more, see this Wikipedia section)

 

In the 1960s, one of the first computer-using theoretical meteorologists, Edward Lorentz, began work on computer simulations toward von Neumann’s dream. He discovered that systems such as the atmosphere exhibit “sensitive dependence on initial conditions”, in which very small differences in the models’ initial state (eg: the measurement of the atmosphere “now” used to calculate its state in the future) rather than “dampening out” to produce only very small difference in its future states, produce large differences. The resulting new scientific and mathematical subject area came to be called Chaos, and was and remains hotly studied. This sensitive dependence on initial conditions that characterizes chaotic systems is sometimes called “the Lorentz effect”, but is best know as “the butterfly effect” after a conference talk Lorentz gave In a 1972 titled “Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...