Saturday 27th of November 2021

and now to the weather...

 idiotidiot

Edward Norton Lorenz, (born May 23, 1917, West HartfordConnecticut, U.S.—died April 16, 2008, Cambridge, Massachusetts), American meteorologist and discoverer of the underlying mechanism of deterministic chaos, one of the principles of complexity.

In the early 1960s Lorenz discovered that the weather exhibits a nonlinear phenomenon known as sensitive dependence on initial conditions (see chaos theory). He constructed a weather model showing that almost any two nearby starting points, indicating the current weather, will quickly diverge trajectories and will quite frequently end up in different “lobes,” which correspond to calm or stormy weather.

 

He explained this phenomenon, which makes long-range weather forecasting impossible, to the public as the “butterfly effect”: in China a butterfly flaps its wings, leading to unpredictable changes in U.S. weather a few days later.  https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edward-Lorenz

 

A few days ago, on the ABC, the question “Can we trust the weather forecast?” was asked….

 

Can you trust the weather forecast? ABC weather presenter Nate Byrne busts myths about the skills of your favourite meteorologists.

 

Dear weather nerds; if there's one common refrain I hear, it's that "forecasters never bloody get it right".

 

I say it's time we stand together. When people say, "I've been carrying my umbrella around all day, and it's been blue skies!" we can helpfully suggest that maybe it was THEM that got the forecast wrong.

 

Meteorology mates, forecast-followers and radar-ravers, it's time to unite!

 

Let's take a closer look at what might be going on.

 

——————————

 

On the YD site we have exposed the important difference between forecasting the weather and predicting “global warming". We have explored how weather forecasting cannot be accurately predicted beyond two weeks, even when using the most powerful computers available. This was Lorenz's problem. Meanwhile the more computing power we use, the more we can predict global warming with greater accuracy. And should we accept the premise that global warming is mostly generated by the warming gases in the atmosphere, we can calculate the degree of warming with a simple calculus… Cunning, but true. Then the major trick is to know when, due to mitigating factors retarding the process: this is when we need the computers.

 

In a cartoon that I can't locate, I explored this difference including the notion of knowing where the bubbles and currents are in a boiling saucepan, while we know that the more heat we add, the more bubbles we’re creating. We get certainty of effect but not of exactitude of the state of the system.

 

This gives us a window into a world that most of us have never heard of, or do not comprehend. let’s meet a fictitious bloke: 

 

Nicolas Bourbaki (French pronunciation:  [nikɔla buʁbaki]) is the collective pseudonym of a group of mathematicians, predominantly French alumni of the École normale supérieure (ENS). Founded in 1934–1935, the Bourbaki group originally intended to prepare a new textbook in analysis. Over time the project became much more ambitious, growing into a large series of textbooks published under the Bourbaki name, meant to treat modern pure mathematics. The series is known collectively as the Éléments de mathématique (Elements of Mathematics), the group's central work. Topics treated in the series include set theoryabstract algebratopology, analysis, Lie groups and Lie algebras.

Bourbaki was founded in response to the effects of the First World War which caused the death of a generation of French mathematicians; as a result, young university instructors were forced to use dated texts. While teaching at the University of StrasbourgHenri Cartan complained to his colleague André Weil of the inadequacy of available course material, which prompted Weil to propose a meeting with others in Paris to collectively write a modern analysis textbook. The group's core founders were Cartan, Claude ChevalleyJean DelsarteJean Dieudonné and Weil; others participated briefly during the group's early years, and membership has changed gradually over time. Although former members openly discuss their past involvement with the group, Bourbaki has a custom of keeping its current membership secret.

The group's namesake derives from the 19th century French general Charles-Denis Bourbaki, who had a career of successful military campaigns before suffering a dramatic loss in the Franco-Prussian War.[3] The name was therefore familiar to early 20th-century French students. Weil remembered an ENS student prank in which an upperclassman posed as a professor and presented a "theorem of Bourbaki"; the name was later adopted.

 

For a while Mandelbrot was a member of the Bourbaki group, but decided to leave the pure mathematics in favour of his "intuitive geometry”. He left the group and France to find refuge working in the USA, eventually for IBM in the 1960s

 

Mandelbrot was born in a Lithuanian Jewish family, in Warsaw during the Second Polish Republic.[14] His father made his living trading clothing; his mother was a dental surgeon. During his first two school years, he was tutored privately by an uncle who despised rote learning: "Most of my time was spent playing chess, reading maps and learning how to open my eyes to everything around me."[15] In 1936, when he was 11, the family emigrated from Poland to France. The move, the war, and the influence of his father's brother, the mathematician Szolem Mandelbrojt (who had moved to Paris around 1920), further prevented a standard education. "The fact that my parents, as economic and political refugees, joined Szolem in France saved our lives," he writes.

 

...

 

As a visiting professor at Harvard University, Mandelbrot began to study fractals called Julia sets that were invariant under certain transformations of the complex plane. Building on previous work by Gaston Julia and Pierre Fatou, Mandelbrot used a computer to plot images of the Julia sets. While investigating the topology of these Julia sets, he studied the Mandelbrot set which was introduced by him in 1979. In 1982, Mandelbrot expanded and updated his ideas in The Fractal Geometry of Nature.[27] This influential work brought fractals into the mainstream of professional and popular mathematics, as well as silencing critics, who had dismissed fractals as "program artifacts".

 

In 1975, Mandelbrot coined the term fractal to describe these structures and first published his ideas, and later translated, Fractals: Form, Chance and Dimension.[28] According to computer scientist and physicist Stephen Wolfram, the book was a "breakthrough" for Mandelbrot, who until then would typically "apply fairly straightforward mathematics ... to areas that had barely seen the light of serious mathematics before".[10] Wolfram adds that as a result of this new research, he was no longer a "wandering scientist", and later called him "the father of fractals":

 

For Gus, Fractals are as important as imaginary numbers though they do not reflect reality… Wolfram said:

 

Mandelbrot ended up doing a great piece of science and identifying a much stronger and more fundamental idea—put simply, that there are some geometric shapes, which he called "fractals", that are equally "rough" at all scales. No matter how close you look, they never get simpler, much as the section of a rocky coastline you can see at your feet looks just as jagged as the stretch you can see from space.[10]

Wolfram briefly describes fractals as a form of geometric repetition, "in which smaller and smaller copies of a pattern are successively nested inside each other, so that the same intricate shapes appear no matter how much you zoom in to the whole. Fern leaves and Romanesque broccoli are two examples from nature."[10] He points out an unexpected conclusion:

One might have thought that such a simple and fundamental form of regularity would have been studied for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. But it was not. In fact, it rose to prominence only over the past 30 or so years—almost entirely through the efforts of one man, the mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot.[10]

 

What has this to do with the weather and nature? 

 

Not much, except we’re dealing with predictions. Some are predictable, some like the weather are not because some unaccounted minute factor can change our interpretation of the system, even with the best computing models. But we can calculate trends with much greater precision.

 

There is point at which the Romanesque Broccoli does not go beyond infinity, like the Mandelbrot set. And this change of calculus is heavily supported by Quantum mechanics theory, in which the smaller bits do not behave like the bigger bits, but influence everything, including the bigger bits, from simple chemistry to the entire universe. 

 

At this level, though we know the influence of sunlight on the atmosphere of the planet, we’re still trying to capture neutrinos, which could have an influence on our weather changes at the smallest level, far smaller than the butterfly effect. 

 

As our weather computers cannot cope with the influence of the butterfly effect, we have no chance of understanding if neutrinos can change the weather imperceptibly. And there are far more neutrinos than butterflies…

 

Of all particles with mass, neutrinos are the most abundant in nature. They’re also some of the least interactive. Roughly a thousand trillion of them pass harmlessly through your body every second.

 

A Neutrino one of the so-called fundamental particles, which means it isn’t made of any smaller pieces, at least that we know of. Neutrinos are members of the same group as the most famous fundamental particle, the electron (which is powering the device you’re reading this on right now). But while electrons have a negative charge, neutrinos have no charge at all.

Neutrinos are also incredibly small and light. They have some mass, but not much. They are the lightest of all the subatomic particles that have mass. They’re also extremely common — in fact, they’re the most abundant massive particle in the universe. Neutrinos come from all kinds of different sources and are often the product of heavy particles turning into lighter ones, a process called “decay.”

https://neutrinos.fnal.gov/whats-a-neutrino/

 

———————————

 

Some of the biggest “machine” designed to “detect” neutrinos, only manage 5 or 6 a day… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_detector

 

And yes, we can trust the weather forecasts.  To a point, often depending on the stability and instability of the larger system’s influence on the local conditions, which themselves have their own butterfly effect.

 

Can we trust global warming predictions? We can trust these predictions within the bracketed results of the trends which suggest “we’re in trouble” to “we’re in deep shit”… The middle road isn’t flavoursome either.

 

We’re facing sudden changes in weather patterns due to our release of EXTRA warming gases — CO2, methane and NOXs — and increase in damages to nature and our civilisations due to heat, cold, storms, drought and floods… The future has changed. 

 

Gus Leonisky

Not a Scotty fan…

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!

 

prayers for a liar...

A few weeks ago one federal MP, a veteran of countless leadership wars, surveyed the wreckage surrounding the Prime Minister then concluded that if it wasn’t for the pandemic, Scott Morrison would no longer be in the job.

It is not an isolated view. After five conservative Coalition senators voted against the government while others threatened to withdraw their vote, several agreed, saying yes, the observation was “accurate”.

 

Before anyone gets too excited, barring a runaway bus, Morrison will lead the Coalition to the election. However, the dismay over his performance and judgment has intensified and assessments about the government’s election prospects have become more pessimistic.

It prompted one rumour in government ranks that Peter Dutton was “sitting on the numbers”. It is true Dutton has never denied his leadership ambitions and he has been paying more attention lately to party moderates beyond his encouragement months ago for them to push for net zero.

 

Again people should not get too excited. No doubt there is a lot of praying going on, maybe a little plotting, certainly a lot of paranoia.

More realistically, given the changes Morrison rammed through in 2018 requiring a two-thirds majority vote of the party room to change leaders between elections – transforming the leader into an emperor, according to one MP – it is more about post-election positioning. Even so, it never hurts to be prepared.

Summing up, one senior government frontbencher said, “if we win, and that’s a big if” it will be Morrison and Josh Frydenberg. If not, it will be Frydenberg versus Dutton.

Morrison has been weakened from without by Labor’s daily assaults on his character and from within by backbenchers split between those who believe he should forget about fighting the premiers to concentrate on fighting Anthony Albanese, those who fear he has ceded too much power to the states and needs to rein them in, and those who regard the religious freedom bill as a risky solution to a problem which doesn’t exist, ramped up years ago to scuttle same-sex marriage.

 

Read more:

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/prayers-plots-and-paranoia-as-pm-fights-to-rescue-credibility-20211124-p59bkp.html

 

What about a Federal ICAC instead of this ill-CONceived religious bill?

 

See also: https://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/36637

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!

la aussie niña...

In Australia, La Niña increases the chance of cooler daytime temperatures - reducing the risk of heatwaves and bushfires.

But it tends to create wetter than normal conditions and can increase the frequency of tropical cyclones. 

Queensland has been warned of heavy rainfall and possible flash flooding this week. Last week, floods prompted evacuation warnings in Forbes, New South Wales.

Recent torrential rain in South Australia also led to the stranding of a young family in the outback.

 

During the last La Niña, thousands of Australians were displaced amid flooding which caused over A$1bn (£540,000m; $720,000m) in damage.

La Niña can increase the risk of storms in Canada and the northern US, often leading to snowy conditions. 

In the UK and Northern Europe, a very strong La Niña event may also lead to a very wet winter.

 

Read more:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-59383008

 

MEANWHILE:

 

Much of southern and central Queensland is under flood watch as thunderstorms and heavy rain continue to lash the state, with the wet weather forecast to stretch into next week.

Brisbane’s heavy burst of showers late on Tuesday and into Wednesday left many parts of the city awash, with Eagle Farm recording 142 millimetres of rain and Brisbane City 121 millimetres since 9am Tuesday.

The Bureau of Meteorology said it expected widespread minor to moderate flooding around the Darling Downs, Granite Belt and central and southern Queensland.

 

It said a trough would move slowly eastwards over Wednesday, bringing heavy rainfall over a wide area.

“The heaviest rainfall expected in the Central West, and Central Highlands and Coal Fields, “ a bureau warning stated.

“Very intense rainfall rates are possible for some areas particularly in association with thunderstorms are possible in the watch area, which is likely to cause localised flooding.

 

Read more: 

https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/state/qld/2021/11/24/queensland-rainfall-floods/

 

Read from top. 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!