This site has threaded comments for a reason. Randomly breaking off forks to start new ones is inappropriate. Not only does it spread out discussions unnecessarily, disrupting the normal flow of the page, it also makes it far more difficult for people to follow the discussion. This is especially true if the person starting the new fork doesn't even bother to include a link to that which he responds.
I won't encourage that. I've left my <a href="http://judithcurry.com/2014/12/07/super-pollutants-act-of-2014/#comment-653585" rel="nofollow">response</a> in the original fork.
Comment on Super Pollutants Act of 2014 by Brandon Shollenberger
↧
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by Pierre-Normand
…Coming to think of it, indeed, in three dimensions the Maxwell speed distribution peaks at some finite speed, but in one dimension, the distribution is Gaussian around zero. So, the mode is zero. This rather short circuits the formulation of your paradox. I should have thought of that first.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/kinetic/maxdev.html#c5
↧
Comment on Super Pollutants Act of 2014 by RiHo08
Dick Hertz
“http://www.mdlinx.com/pulmonology/news-article.cfm/5767348/?utm_source=in-house-msg&utm_medium=message&utm_campaign=top-read-clicks-dec14″
If you are a mechanic working on diesel engines, it is the diesel emissions. If you are a recreational marijuana smoker, say in Colorado, then it is the Hooka house.
“http://www.mdlinx.com/pulmonology/news-article.cfm/5767348/?utm_source=in-house-msg&utm_medium=message&utm_campaign=top-read-clicks-dec14″
↧
Comment on Super Pollutants Act of 2014 by Bob Koss
Tom,
You must have made a cost/benefit analysis before taking that job in China. It appears having a job is more important to you than breathing clean air.
Most government regulations increase the cost of doing business as this bill likely will. Resulting in probably to less employment or slower expansion in addition to the consumer ultimately paying the freight yet again.They constantly try one size fits all solutions to things which are more reasonably left at the local level to decide whether there is problem or not. There may be small pockets of pollution, but those should be handled locally.
I live in Connecticut and breath air that has moved across the entire country before reaching me. The air is so clean I wouldn’t even notice the difference if someone said they had made it cleaner. I was around in the 1950s so I’ve breathed years of polluted air and know what is it like. This is simply throwing money at a non-problem so some politicians can say they authored a bill and get some lobbyist money while doing it.
↧
Comment on Open thread by Ragnaar
Peter Lang:
I did go to the link and few others on the Dam. I didn’t spending enough time reading and missed on that one. Looks like the rock was going to slide with the question being how fast? Looks like with hydrological pressure they were going to control that. Say they tested it by filling and lowering the reservoir a number of times. They were perturbing it, and watching its reaction. If lowering it had less effect than before that would indicate the control was becoming irrelevant. I can’t see that the system slowed. I think it sped up.
↧
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by willb
Pierre-Normand,
“You are saying that constancy of speed distribution at all height together with a density gradient yields a paradox.”
Ans) Yes, that is correct.
“That’s because, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that molecules at the peak of the speed distribution (where the probability density is largest) that reach a higher level H1 (where they will be slower) will be more numerous than those that have this very same initial speed at that level, and this contradicts the assumption that the speed distribution is the same.”
Ans) Yes, that is correct. All of the molecules that leave H0 with a vertical speed component v1 will arrive at H1 at precisely the same time with a vertical speed component v2. The only thing I might change in your wording is to remove the word “initial” to clarify my meaning, since the distribution is constant over time.
“But you didn’t correctly account for the ratio of the number of molecules with those two speeds at the two levels (that is, the molecules that have speeds [v1, v1+dv], and [v2, v2+dv]) at levels H0 and H1. Here, I am using v1 for your maximum value ‘|V|_mv’ at H0, the level at the bottom of the box, and v2 is v1 – gt.”
Ans) I didn’t calculate the ratio explicitly. I showed that, at height H1 and at time T, the number of molecules with vertical speed component v2 is greater than the number of molecules with vertical speed component v1. This follows from my statement a) and violates my statement b). This is the paradox.
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by willb
The velocity mode is 0, not the mode of the speed, which is the magnitude of the velocity.
↧
Comment on Super Pollutants Act of 2014 by angech
Super pollutants, super storms, super droughts, sounds like a job for …..
Green Lantern. Showing the way in an eco friendly style with world peace and Sandra round the corner.
But what the heck, a little bit of regulation won’t hurt will it? Then we can get a bit more and a bit more…..
Anyway if China wins, Australia wins and I have Australian shares.
Perhaps Superman could emigrate to Australia. A win, win situation. No villains to beat up on and all the beer he could wish to drink.
There is always some good in reigning in big polluters Judith, but the feel good messages in this proposal just set too many alarm bells ringing.
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by Pierre-Normand
“The velocity mode is 0, not the mode of the speed, which is the magnitude of the velocity.”
There is a rather unfortunate tendency in kinetic theory to speak of “speed” to designate velocity (vector) rather than speed (magnitude). This use, however, matches the common usage in French (vitesse; vecteur, et vélocité; module). But here, it’s inconsequential, I think. When the distribution of the one-dimensional velocity (vector) along z is Gaussian, then the mode of speed (magnitude of velocity) also will be zero!
↧
↧
Comment on Open thread by Max_OK, Citizen Scientist
Tony asked me ” What would people over there think if Obama was to raise energy and fuel costs to the levels we have over her.”
Well, I don’t think he can do that, but I would be delighted if he did. The higher the prices of oil and natural gas, the more money I make. I’m sure others wouldn’t like the higher prices, but capitalism can’t please everyone.
Tony do you know If there were times in the past when heating fuel in the UK was more affordable, and whether winter mortality rates lower during those times?
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by willb
If the speed mode were 0 then no molecules would be moving at all.
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by Pierre-Normand
“This use, however, matches the common usage in French (vitesse; vecteur, et vélocité; module).”
I just checked, and it seems that I am wrong about the French usage!
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by Pierre-Normand
“If the speed mode were 0 then no molecules would be moving at all.”
Why? It’s just the peak of the probability distribution. For the molecules to be moving at v, where dv > v > 0 is more probable than them moving at any other speed +- dv/2.
↧
↧
Comment on Super Pollutants Act of 2014 by Dick Hertz
You are correct Ri,
People are exposed to dangerous stuff all the time. Sometimes it is from frivolous things like skiing and smoking dope, sometimes it is from everyday things like cooking food, sometimes it happens while doing important things like growing food or manufacturing products people need.
Some people get all bent out of shape over low levels of pollutants that sound really dangerous and they demand that action be taken, usually by someone other than themselves, with no regard for cost or benefit. At the same time they ignore life choices they make that are much more dangerous.
If you are cooking with hot oil, you are inhaling toxic chemicals and carcinogens, if you eat food with black char marks on it you are consuming toxic chemicals and carcinogens, If you are sitting around a campfire, same thing. I’m not saying you shouldn’t do these things, you should. But people should consider that many of our high level exposures are natural background things that overwhelm some of the pollutants that people freak out about.
My 4 grandparents all lived past 80 and two are still going past 90. They lived at a time with very little pollution control, working with diesel equipment and in agriculture, fought in WW2, exposure to pesticides and herbicides, little or no use of personal protective equipment etc. Bottom line, life is dangerous and no one gets out alive.
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by willb
I am assuming the speed follows a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution.
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by Pierre-Normand
Also, the reason why the Maxwell speed distribution has a mode larger than 0 for particles that are free to move in three dimensions in spite of the fact that the mode of each one-dimensional component of the velocity distribution being 0 is because of the properties of the volume integral, as explained in the hyperphysics item referenced earlier. Though it is most likely for the speed projection along any one direction to be around zero, it’s much less likely for it to be around zero along three orthogonal directions all at once.
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by Jim D
Pierre-Normand, the stratospheric temperature profile is determined a lot by the solar heating and ozone distribution. Any resemblance to an isothermal profile is coincidental. Radiative heating makes it far from an ideal gas to study for long-term diffusion effects.
↧
↧
Comment on The legacy of Climategate: 5 years later by Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #159 * The New World
↧
Comment on Gravito-thermal discussion thread by Pierre-Normand
Yes, that’s correct. The two expression are used interchangeably. “In physics, particularly statistical mechanics, the Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution or Maxwell speed distribution describes particle speeds in idealized gases where the particles move freely inside a stationary container” — Wikipedia
Still, in one single dimension, the projection of the isotropic velocity vector distribution that satisfies this scalar speed distribution is a Gaussian distribution rather confusingly called the one dimensional Maxwell ‘speed’ distribution.
↧
Comment on Super Pollutants Act of 2014 by ferdberple
The police in New York City killed a black man for selling cigarettes
===========
the surgeon general of the united states was fired for trying to correct this. he said that if we made cigarettes illegal the way we do with drugs, people would be killing each other in the streets over them. his prediction has proven more reliable than hundreds of billions of dollars worth of climate models.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
